Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Fencers]

And how they analyze all that shit?

Someone asked a similar question above that I answered.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post54034767

Because people engagement online was shit after it aired, no one talked about the show

I didn't look at engagement tracking after a few weeks personally. Do you have access to ProData or Quickstats?

how it was a success? I guess, is, what is considered a success? if they made the money back of season 1 is considered a success?

It was one of the top streaming shows of the year and one of only two non-Netflix programs that managed to even chart. That is a win for Amazon. Disney, Universal, Apple, HBO, and a bunch of others threw a lot at Netflix's market viability. Only Amazon got through - twice.

Distros don't "make back their money" by airing a show on a streaming platform. That's a silly notion. Viewers are not charged per episode. No show or film, no matter the quality, is going "make back their money" on new subscriptions to a service. That's not even sensible- nothing works like that in the real world.

Amazon (and all distros) want market and platform viability. Success is having engagement so that you can leverage the value of your platform content (acquired or original) in merchandising, advertising, client packaging, licensing, etc.

Apple's Academy Award-winning film CODA, grossed less than $200k theatrically and was barely viewed on ancillary. The entire reason that the film campaigned was to establish Apple TV as a place for viable films. They spent millions on distribution, acquisition, advertising, and campaigning.

Now when you package at Apple, Apple has the power to say "We can reach X engagement and provide campaigning at Y or Z level". That's the value.

Series are the same way. Having a top show (they only care about engagement), means it can be packaged as part of Amazon's properties. 7-11 or The Four Seasons might be more willing to license Rings of Power than The Peripheral (I worked on this, but didn't do #s as expected).

ROP is also in their portfolio forever now. It's adding a pool to your house even if you don't swim. You raised the value.

- - - Updated - - -

I was expecting more when you said "the top 15", but they are just the 15th place, that was a bit sad. And that is like, almost all the shows that aired, of course they would make to it somehow lol

There are hundreds of shows produced and distributed every year. Hundreds. If you load them in Quickstats, it takes like 10 minutes to even load them all in the display grid.

I am doubting the degree to which you know about this stuff. TBF.

[bledgor]

I was expecting more when you said "the top 15", but they are just the 15th place, that was a bit sad. And that is like, almost all the shows that aired, of course they would make to it somehow lol

You are being too harsh, they only lost to such titans like Great British baking show, can't expect a little IP like Lord of the Rings to overcome such a massive foe!

[Syegfryed]

Someone asked a similar question above that I answered.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post54034767

I didn't look at engagement tracking after a few weeks personally. Do you have access to ProData or Quickstats?

The only data i see i guess is mob data, facebook, twitter, instagram and alike. Even youtube is data to me, and Rings of power was the lower end, waaay behind other shows that aired during that time, who received a lot of engagement likes house of the dragon, stranger things and others..

Hell, even the reddit to rings of power was dead, hashtags for rings of power was minimal. The only engagement RoP got was Hate watchers, which is indeed a lot of engagement on itself, but hardly a success to me, especially when amazon said it needed to be a big hit, and 15th place is hardly a big hit in my eyes.

It was one of the top streaming shows of the year and one of only two non-Netflix programs that managed to even chart. That is a win for Amazon. Disney, Universal, Apple, HBO, and a bunch of others threw a lot at Netflix's market viability. Only Amazon got through - twice.

Right, but they are the 15th in the top 15th, its not like they got top 10 on the 15th, this is the lower end, and they got behind worse shows or old shows. no one is going to sign for amazon because a bad show got into 15th place.

And as the image you show, show they had 9 millions min viewed in eight episodes... i could be wrong, but isn't the 1 and 2 episode 8 millions alone? how are they doing the data here? it means the rest of the episodes got only 1.4m?

There are hundreds of shows produced and distributed every year. Hundreds. If you load them in Quickstats, it takes like 10 minutes to even load them all in the display grid.

I am doubting the degree to which you know about this stuff. TBF.

Yeah, how many of those had the power of tolkien to back then up and the controversy among fans to heat up the audience and still only got to the 15th place?

And yeah, i don't know shit about other than what i see myself, thats why i ask, not trying to be the authority in the subject.

[rogoth]

God I love this thread.

Some one who apparently works directly in this line of work “numbers across multiple unbiased sources says it did well and was with there investment”

People who whine about how it did poorly “I don’t like it so your wrong and it failed!”

here's the problem: ALL the fucking dumbass numbers you're using to justify this being 'good' are US exclusive, they don't factor international viewing AT ALL, in almost all territories outside the US this show bombed, pretty spectacularly, but everyone has their panties in such a bunch over the 'Nielsen' ratings or other US based metrics companies they can't see the macro perspective, and the fact that barely half the people who have an amazon prime account bothered to watch it DESPITE IT BEING ESSENTIALLY FREE speaks fucking volumes on its own, but i guess you don't care about that either?

- - - Updated - - -

More people using the "woke" word without knowing at all what it means or how to define it. Some people don't even try to hide it anymore.

oh, i know what the word means, just in case you don't, which i would suggest is a highly likely possibility since you're trying to sound pseudo intelligent by doing the whole 'hur dur i know but do you' trope:

it is a term that was invented in the 1970's derived exclusively from yet another dumbass derivation of the English language by Americans to denote a particular and almost zealous attitude towards social and racial standards in society.

in the case of modern day it's used to describe the utterly moronic pandering to minorities while simultaneously dismissing the majority and actively ridiculing said majority to curry favour with said minorities in an attempt to gain social credibility with the aforementioned minorities.

as a result of the failed 'woke' movement, the term 'get woke go broke' was coined as a way to describe this failed ideology and mentality which thanks to other more pressing societal issues has been shown to be the absolute mess that it is and as a result people have stopped following media produced with this mentality as the central focus and are actively turning against creators with this flawed and failed mindset, as seen with dozens of productions in the past 3-5 years.

if you want anymore free education i could go on, but i'm hoping this is enough illumination for you to get the point and shut the fuck up.

[Syegfryed]

here's the problem: ALL the fucking dumbass numbers you're using to justify this being 'good' are US exclusive, they don't factor international viewing AT ALL, in almost all territories outside the US this show bombed, pretty spectacularly, but everyone has their panties in such a bunch over the 'Nielsen' ratings or other US based metrics companies they can't see the macro perspective, and the fact that barely half the people who have an amazon prime account bothered to watch it DESPITE IT BEING ESSENTIALLY FREE speaks fucking volumes on its own, but i guess you don't care about that either?

I also find funny when now they want go for the appeal of authority, but in other areas/threads they quickly disregard something other professionals said.

On the show, around my country it bombed as well. Tbf most of people i interact with are rly into rpg/dnd stuff, sure is not nielsen numbers and its all empirical, but you would find some people who should enjoy fantasy stuff around this sphere.

You are being too harsh, they only lost to such titans like Great British baking show, can't expect a little IP like Lord of the Rings to overcome such a massive foe!

Lmao, i didn't even catch that one, guess British cuisine is something else

[Shadowferal]

Lmao, i didn't even catch that one, guess British cuisine is something else

And this was broadcast in the US?
My my...

[Fencers]

The only data i see i guess is mob data, facebook, twitter, instagram and alike. Even youtube is data to me, and Rings of power was the lower end, waaay behind other shows that aired during that time, who received a lot of engagement likes house of the dragon, stranger things and others..

So you don't have data on engagement. It's your personal perception. Okay.

a success to me... in my eyes.

Irrelevent to me. I don't care about this show and have zero investment or care for the franchise. Your're personal opinion on the quality of the show or subjective assessment of the media performance is not of any concerned to me. Have that conversation with someone that watched this show- that ain't me.

I was only commenting on the performance of the show as a piece of media for the platform. Which is objectively impressive for a non-Netflix show. No other distro managed to chart and they all spent millions of dollars on high-profile and high-visibility properties; Star Wars, Marvel, DC, The Office, Star Trek, Real Housewives, and Kardashians.

You might not like those shows, but they are some of the most valuable media properties, and none manged to get "15th" either.

Right, but they are the 15th in the top 15th, its not like they got top 10 on the 15th, this is the lower end, and they got behind worse shows or old shows. no one is going to sign for amazon because a bad show got into 15th place.

Nobody cares about the quality of a show in that regard. That's for you to argue over on forums or whatever.

A client isn't going to look at a package and ask, "But are the elves accurate?" or whatever people were upset over. I do not watch this show.

And as the image you show, show they had 9 millions min viewed in eight episodes... i could be wrong, but isn't the 1 and 2 episode 8 millions alone?

I don't know. That's not really relevant.

how are they doing the data here? it means the rest of the episodes got only 1.4m?

That doesn't matter. It's total of minutes. That is the measure.

Amazon doesn't care if it is 100 million minutes for the first episode and the rest were 1 minute each. It's still treated as 10+ million minutes for their series. That is the measure the industry uses- your personal view of how data is determined doesn't matter. Frito-Lay and Amazon are not going to do business based on what you think is "good enough".

It is what the industry decides as the measure that matters and that is what they do business based on.

Yeah, how many of those had the power of tolkien to back then up and the controversy among fans to heat up the audience and still only got to the 15th place?

No other distro managed to chart and they all spent millions of dollars on high-profile and high-visibility properties; Star Wars, Marvel, DC, The Office, Star Trek, Real Housewives, and Kardashians.

And yeah, i don't know shit about other than what i see myself, thats why i ask, not trying to be the authority in the subject.

That is fine. I am aware the show is controversial. I have no opinion on the creative of the show. Strictly speaking on the analytics side; this was impressive for Amazon.

I think they greenlit Season 2 with new packaging recently and with a renewed production suite. That's money. They wouldn't do that if it was a poor-performing product.

- - - Updated - - -

here's the problem: ALL the fucking dumbass numbers you're using to justify this being 'good' are US exclusive.

Every relevant market receives US programming and media. The US doesn't receive programming from every international market.

Non-news media only accounts for and largely cares about US markets. "International" is used as a catch-all for the entire world for a reason. The combined market power of entire continents doesn't equal the market power of like, the US East Coast or just California.

[Syegfryed]

So you don't have data on engagement. It's your personal perception. Okay.

Not just mine, but social media overall, i don't think is right to disregard how little engagement it had in the most populous social medias out there.

Your're personal opinion on the quality of the show or subjective assessment of the media performance is not of any concerned to me.

Right, but that is not personal or subjective, the show is objectively bad.

I was only commenting on the performance of the show as a piece of media for the platform. Which is objectively impressive for a non-Netflix show. No other distro managed to chart and they all spent millions of dollars on high-profile and high-visibility properties; Star Wars, Marvel, DC, The Office, Star Trek, Real Housewives, and Kardashians.

Right, what im saying is, taking account the IP, the money they put, and the controversy around it, is not that impressive. With all of that, they should have snatched top 5 easily, if it was somehow decent

That doesn't matter. It's total of minutes. That is the measure.

What i gather here, is nothing else matter, only minutes watched, and to me it sounds like it is an artificial success(let alone how minutes watched is a garbage metric to measure something, unlike, maybe number of views), and only in terms of that chart that can lead to other beneficial to the company, in advertisement.

I guess the problem rly we just have different views on what is a success and what is not. For you, and amazon, is minutes watched, and going into that chart.

I bet if they went 16th or 18th, we would have a top 20 instead, to show how much successful it was

Amazon doesn't care if it is 100 million minutes for the first episode and the rest were 1 minute each. It's still treated as 10+ million minutes for their series.

Yeah i figure that much, but iif people only watched the first, and say fuck it, i hardly call it a success, regardless if the industry want to me different

I think they greenlit Season 2 with new packaging recently and with a renewed production suite. That's money. They wouldn't do that if it was a poor-performing product.

The show was already greenlit for 4/5 seasons, i don't remember the number exactly, but they have to make then, because they already spend 1 billion on it. might as well just roll on it to not lost the money.

[Triceron]

All this argument over 'success' is pointless, because it's all relative.

I see this situation comparable to the Star Wars Sequel Trilogy or Game of Thrones last season. It's a pyrrhic victory. It's a short term win that may have long-term consequences. And if we're simply arguing numbers and technicality, it's still considered a success, right?

[Dhrizzle]

A $500 Rivendell set is set to launch next month, and leaks came out today that look pretty impressive. I don't think they would have revisited the liscense if not for the show.

I'm glad I'm not rich or I wouldn't be able to move for Lego cluttering every surface, but if they tap further into the 1980s giant cartoon robot market I'd probably go bankrupt.

- - - Updated - - -

And how they analyze all that shit?

Because people engagement online was shit, after it aired, no one talked about the show unless it was to shit on it, it didn't won any awards, it was not even nominated from most of then,. they said time and time again that it needed to be a huge hit like game of thrones, and we got this, how it was a success?

I guess, is, what is considered a success? if they made the money back of season 1 is considered a success?

The fact a lot of people decided pre-emptively to hate the show and squawk down all conversations outside of a few "echo-chambers" probably doesn't bother them much if the actual figures work in their favour.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

here's the problem: ALL the fucking dumbass numbers you're using to justify this being 'good'

I don't need numbers to justify a show I like, I personally couldn't care less how a show does number wise along as it gets another season if the story isn't over. I just think it's funny the extents you guys bend over backwards to say the show failed when apparently all reports say it was worth the investment.

I also don't even think the show is good, I enjoyed it but think it's just an ok show slightly better then wheel of time but I wouldn't say it breaks into good territory. Though to be fair Id rank all LOTR live action movies in just ok though likely at different ends of that category.

are US exclusive, they don't factor international viewing AT ALL, in almost all territories outside the US this show bombed, pretty spectacularly, but everyone has their panties in such a bunch over the 'Nielsen' ratings or other US based metrics companies they can't see the macro perspective, and the fact

Who cares if it's US exclusive if that's the norm for ratting success for the industry it's not like every independent tracking source is making up a new metric just for ROP.

that barely half the people who have an amazon prime account bothered to watch it DESPITE IT BEING ESSENTIALLY FREE speaks fucking volumes on its own, but I guess you don't care about that either?

I mean no I don't care if half of prime didn't watch it with out some reference point of what % of prime watches any show.

50% could be amazing it could be awful without further context there's no way to know so why would any one care.

[Shadowferal]

I find myself curious about British cuisine.

[rhorle]

You are being too harsh, they only lost to such titans like Great British baking show, can't expect a little IP like Lord of the Rings to overcome such a massive foe!

Most shows lose to Cocomelon as it is usually in the weekly top 10 from Nielsen. Does that mean all other shows suck because it can't beat them?

[rhorle]

But my sense is that no one really cares about this thing, and it’ll get “why not, it’s free” casual viewers and that’s it.

And yet Boundingtocomics is still creating hate articles about the show. Plenty of you here and on other forum/discussion sites are still talking about the show. Don't confuse you not liking it with everyone in the world. Lmao.

Do you have a source for 250 million in marketing? 8 episodes is not a "Short season" when it is a standard amount used for streaming shows. Why invent silly things when there are so many good flaws to complain about with the show.

[rogoth]

I don't need numbers to justify a show I like, I personally couldn't care less how a show does number wise along as it gets another season if the story isn't over. I just think it's funny the extents you guys bend over backwards to say the show failed when apparently all reports say it was worth the investment.

I also don't even think the show is good, I enjoyed it but think it's just an ok show slightly better then wheel of time but I wouldn't say it breaks into good territory. Though to be fair Id rank all LOTR live action movies in just ok though likely at different ends of that category.

Who cares if it's US exclusive if that's the norm for ratting success for the industry it's not like every independent tracking source is making up a new metric just for ROP.

I mean no I don't care if half of prime didn't watch it with out some reference point of what % of prime watches any show.

50% could be amazing it could be awful without further context there's no way to know so why would any one care.

1) you have persistently and continuously conflated what you personally think of this excuse for a production, and what the general audience en masse thinks of this show as a whole, and regularly you have stated that you are defending this shite based on the 'numbers' so yes, you obviously do care, very much in fact.

2) last time i checked there was 7.6-7.7 BILLION people that lived outside of the US, now i'm not maths expert here but i find measuring a population of ~340 MILLION and using that as your only metric for measuring engagement metrics FLAWED IN THE EXTREME, but that might just be me, as stated by others, where i live this show flopped so badly they replaced the advertising boards before the final episode had aired, and based on GLOBAL interaction it's been a massive flop almost globally, the only market it did 'well' in and i use that word extremely loosely because based on all metrics comparing it to the competition it sucked ass, was the US market.

3) at the time of the show airing, less than 40% of people with an amazon prime account watched the first episode, that number rose to approximately half of all people with an amazon prime account by the time the show was due to end, that means despite the fact it was 'free' to watch, people were so put off by the sheer state of the show, they didn't bother to watch it, they valued their time more doing other things than watching this clusterfuck of a show, compare that to the likes of 'Reacher' which launched earlier in the year which saw almost 85% of all people with a prime account watch it either as it released or shortly thereafter, or other movies which see a majority %age of those with an account watching, so yes, it's embarrassing for Amazon to not even have half the people already subscribed to their service watch the program.

i genuinely don't care if you liked it or not, that's a subjective thing, and something i have always said in this thread and others around the internet, the issue i have is people trying to claim that it's a good show when the reality of it is that this show is one of the worst shows ever made based on the IP, it's not only badly made from a technical point of view as stated by many professionals in the industry tearing it apart for the amateurish way the actors conduct themselves in scenes, to the clown like outfits to the frankly last century levels of CGI copy/paste showing absolute laziness and desperation, it had some of the worst writing for a big budget production this decade, and frankly the casting was atrocious, these points have all been made by professionals in the industry alongside reporters showcasing them in media, you had the usual paid for media trying to defend this dross but as soon as the money stopped coming they soon stopped reporting, and even those who were paid to give glowing reviews later came out and did a complete 180, which shows that once the back handers have stopped coming in, nobody really cared about this show, the 'influencers' they paid to watch a preview and did a whole 'superfan' video series for haven't even watched the show, that's damning in and of itself nevermind the paid for media, Amazon actively paid these people to give positive and repeated takes all under direction off screen and not a single one of them has watched or given any feedback towards the show, is that not suspicious to you?

- - - Updated - - -

And yet Boundingtocomics is still creating hate articles about the show. Plenty of you here and on other forum/discussion sites are still talking about the show. Don't confuse you not liking it with everyone in the world. Lmao.

Do you have a source for 250 million in marketing? 8 episodes is not a "Short season" when it is a standard amount used for streaming shows. Why invent silly things when there are so many good flaws to complain about with the show.

3 things wrong with this comment:

1) you're using 'boundingintocomics' as a source unironically, the clowns running that website are known to simp for a product when they are being paid for it then do the whole 'hate clicks' schtick when they stop being paid, it's normal for them, so trying to say they are a reputable source of anything is laughable at best, and downright dishonest generally.

2) the vast majority of people outside the US disliked this show, enough to not even bother engaging with it either by watching it, or engaging on social media about it, you do know that there are hundreds of countries outside of the US right?, you're not the only people on planet earth?, i have to ask because sadly as shown in multiple videos it seems that a vast majority of your populace don't know where fucking Canada is let alone the rest of the world.

3) the show was funded by the purchase of the copyright and publishing rights to the lord of the rings trilogy, the hobbit, and the appendices of said books, that cost ~$250M, the show marketing budget was said to be roughly a quarter of the total budget which is widely reported to be $1Bn meaning that as an estimate the advertising budget for the show was the same as the rights portion of the budget with the general production costing the remaining $500M, and just as an aside, as a general rule for TV shows a 'season' has always been 12 episodes minimum, sometimes 13 but in the main most shows have a dozen episodes per season, depending on the show it could be more, it's only until recent times with Netflix because of how they fund and release shows that they have cut this number down purely down to lack of funding to do more, and only expanding seasonal episode length if a show does well enough to make a surplus that they can afford to do those extra episodes without eating into the budget.

[Syegfryed]

The fact a lot of people decided pre-emptively to hate the show and squawk down all conversations outside of a few "echo-chambers" probably doesn't bother them much if the actual figures work in their favour.

I mean yeah? i know bad press and controversy is a bump into a viewship, but hardly hold up if its not good. A lot of people went to hate watch Rop too, but as the numbers showed, people didn't follow for the rest of the season.

Just a hint - when someone says “top x” that usually means that they are in position x lol.

Not usually, when yous ay someone is at the top 5 or top 10 could mean they are in 3th or 7th position by example.

Actually, no one says top 15 or top 20, is either 10, 5 or 3

Season 2 will most likely tell the tale. You can manufacture “success” out of a beloved IP, 250 mill in marketing, and a short season. But my sense is that no one really cares about this thing, and it’ll get “why not, it’s free” casual viewers and that’s it.

The success in rings of power, is, like, if your mother give you money to buy lemon, so you make lemonade, and your father buys everything cause no one did.

You can say you were successful because you sold it all.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

1) you have persistently and continuously conflated what you personally think of this excuse for a production, and what the general audience en masse thinks of this show as a whole, and regularly you have stated that you are defending this shite based on the 'numbers' so yes, you obviously do care, very much in fact.

I try to never attribute my own view's to any one else or what the general audience thinks, can you link me any of my post where I am doing so? Like I know I've said abunch of time's that I don't personally care for the Jackson movies all that much But in general they are well liked adaptations even if they aren't for me.

As well can could you link me any post where I have ever said any thing about defending the show based on numbers? The only post I can think of that are about numbers at all are around things like how amazon isn't lying about them or how there numbers say it was a worthwhile investment I don't believe I have ever tied the quality of any thing to numbers.

But mabye I just don't remember some of my post in here there have been quite a few so they could have slipped my memory.

2) last time i checked there was 7.6-7.7 BILLION people that lived outside of the US, now i'm not maths expert here but i find measuring a population of ~340 MILLION and using that as your only metric for measuring engagement metrics FLAWED IN THE EXTREME, but that might just be me, as stated by others, where i live this show flopped so badly they replaced the advertising boards before the final episode had aired, and based on GLOBAL interaction it's been a massive flop almost globally, the only market it did 'well' in and i use that word extremely loosely because based on all metrics comparing it to the competition it sucked ass, was the US market.

The amount of people out side the Us really doesn't matter if the standard is to base success off of the Us market, mabye the standard should be adjusted to be global but until it is measuring a show by a standard no other show adheres to doesn't make any sense.

3) at the time of the show airing, less than 40% of people with an amazon prime account watched the first episode, that number rose to approximately half of all people with an amazon prime account by the time the show was due to end, that means despite the fact it was 'free' to watch, people were so put off by the sheer state of the show, they didn't bother to watch it, they valued their time more doing other things than watching this clusterfuck of a show, compare that to the likes of 'Reacher' which launched earlier in the year which saw almost 85% of all people with a prime account watch it either as it released or shortly thereafter, or other movies which see a majority %age of those with an account watching, so yes, it's embarrassing for Amazon to not even have half the people already subscribed to their service watch the program.

If you have data about amazon show's and what % of people with prime accounts watch them please share it other wise it's just a kinda useless data point.

Reacher for example is a show I have never once heard of until this thread I wasn't part of the suppose 15% who didn't watch it because of the state of the show I just don't check prime for months on end and when I do I tend to go straight to the Horror section and ignore every thing else Nor have I ever seen an add for any show on prime for any thing other then ROP or The Boys.

It could be that 50% is an awful number and most show's are around the 85 mark you said Reacher got it could be that most shows get say 5-10% and 50% is really good with things like Reacher being an anomaly, I don't know either way and without a actual reference beyond one show I've never heard of I can't care one way or the other so again if you have a link to how the shows normally do % wise please share it.

I have is people trying to claim that it's a good show when the reality of it is that this show is one of the worst shows ever made based on the IP,

Isn't this the only show ever based on the IP? have there been other LOTR based shows I've missed?

the 'influencers' they paid to watch a preview and did a whole 'superfan' video series for haven't even watched the show, that's damning in and of itself nevermind the paid for media, Amazon actively paid these people to give positive and repeated takes all under direction off screen and not a single one of them has watched or given any feedback towards the show, is that not suspicious to you?

I do not follow marketing/promo's around any show's or movies, Once every few months Ill look up horror movie trailers on youtube and mark down any that look interesting to me, Beyond that and reading threads here before a show airs I don't follow or check on any Media before something comes out with I think the only exception I have ever made being for the The recent Mortal combat movie.

So in short, I have no idea if its suspicious I don't know what the norm in the industry is.

[rhorle]

1) you're using 'boundingintocomics' as a source unironically, the clowns running that website are known to simp for a product when they are being paid for it then do the whole 'hate clicks' schtick when they stop being paid, it's normal for them, so trying to say they are a reputable source of anything is laughable at best, and downright dishonest generally.

I never said it was reputable. Still producing hate for clicks indicates they still think people are interested, right? Non-US not liking the show is irrelevant. The show still got views and was a success for Amazon. Will season 2 be the same now that majority of the world hates the show? Maybe maybe not. Though you are known to lie and exaggerate so I doubt you have any statistics to back up your claim of how many dislike the show.

3) the show was funded by the purchase of the copyright and publishing rights to the lord of the rings trilogy, the hobbit, and the appendices of said books, that cost ~$250M, the show marketing budget was said to be roughly a quarter of the total budget which is widely reported to be $1Bn meaning that as an estimate the advertising budget for the show was the same as the rights portion of the budget with the general production costing the remaining $500M

The rights purchase is not part of the budget though. The budget for the show is reported to be $450 million. So if marketing is a quarter of that it would only be $126 million. That is about half of the figure you are using and would put their total expenditure short of $1 billion so far. Seasons for streaming shows have not always been 12 or 13 episodes. It has also been a varying amount based on network and show type.

- - - Updated - - -

Reacher for example is a show I have never once heard of until this thread I wasn't part of the suppose 15% who didn't watch it because of the state of the show I just don't check prime for months on end and when I do I tend to go straight to the Horror section and ignore every thing else Nor have I ever seen an add for any show on prime for any thing other then ROP or The Boys.

It's first week of full availability saw 1,589m minutes and the priemer week ( two days I believe) had 1,800 something minutes. So it had a bigger debut then RoP but it didn't get a higher total streamed as only two shows appeared on the 2022 top 15. The Boys and Rings of Power. So if 85% watched Reacher then 85% or more watched Rings of Power making the show a success. If that figure doesn't make RoP a success then no Amazon show can ever be successful.

[Fencers]

Not just mine, but social media overall, i don't think is right to disregard how little engagement it had in the most populous social medias out there.

I don't think you know what the industry means by engagement. Engagement is simply how many instances of interaction and visibility exists for your product.

Engagement has nothing to do with what people are saying, minutes viewed, overall viewership. It has nothing to do with the platform. The platforms can not and do not even track engagement.

Engagment is a broad method of interactions that are tracked by social media analysts and only measures the instances of interactions. Visitation, amplification, advocacy, contribution, content permission, informational distribution among a given set of category and non-category user interaction.

You are confusing different things within the industry. They are not the same and involve a whole different set of specialists and executives.

Right, but that is not personal or subjective, the show is objectively bad.

There is no such thing. Even if there were, it wouldn't mean anything to the business criteria for a streaming platform.

Try to make an argument about something being "objectively bad" in an actual business meeting. Total nonsense. Subjective opinion is not a measure anyone will track or base their business plans on.

Right, what im saying is, taking account the IP, the money they put, and the controversy around it, is not that impressive.

That's entirely your subjective opinion on whether it is impressive. The people that will be packaging the show would disagree. I already answered a number of different aspects that you are not speaking on with any discernable knowledge of process or practice.

With all of that, they should have snatched top 5 easily, if it was somehow decent

Also, entirely your personal opinion based on feeling. Both are irrelevant and inaccurate.

If it were easy, other distros that command larger and more valuable brands than Lord of the Rings would have done better than 15th. None did. Except for Amazon.

What i gather here, is nothing else matter, only minutes watched, and to me it sounds like it is an artificial success(let alone how minutes watched is a garbage metric to measure something, unlike, maybe number of views), and only in terms of that chart that can lead to other beneficial to the company, in advertisement

This is all your opinion, again. It doesn't matter, again.

The entertainment industry uses minutes viewed as a measure and will continue to do so regardless of a random guy on the internet thoughts on the matter. This is the measure that is used- period.

You are free to send an email to any executives at Netflix, Amazon, Universal, or to the data analysts themselves to voice your opinion on how people with personal private jets, yachts, and islands ought to measure their business.

I guess the problem rly we just have different views on what is a success and what is not.

That doesn't matter. I am talking about the business of the show. It is based on the standards and common practices for media packaging in the commercial entertainment industry.

Having a "different view" is not useful to anyone. Because it is a view supported by nothing and no one that is actually involved in the business of packaging and leveraging content properties.

I bet if they went 16th or 18th, we would have a top 20 instead, to show how much successful it was

Amazon doesn't make this chart. It is data collected by Nielsen. Nielsen is an independent organization.

i hardly call it a success,

Irrelevant. This is not a conversation to have with me. The quality of this show is not relevant to anything I am talking about nor am I interested in discussing the quality of the show.

The show was already greenlit for 4/5 seasons, i don't remember the number exactly, but they have to make then, because they already spend 1 billion on it. might as well just roll on it to not lost the money.

That isn't how it works, really. "Greenlit" is the wrong terminology here too. If you knew the process you wouldn't make that error. You would know what a production suite being renewed is and means. The long and short of it is, Amazon don't "have to make" anything and they wouldn't if it had no market viability.

Especially as they just hired a new executive to trim the fat from all areas of business within Amazon. An exec that has already raised rates, cut budgets, canceled in production projects and so on.

My brother, do you think these people are billionaires because they don't know what they are doing and really give a fuck about the pointy ears of elves?

There is no "different view" to have. Because how you view it is only relevant to you. Not to the industry.

[rhorle]

Subjective opinion is not a measure anyone will track or base their business plans on.

Considering that pitches to get funding rely on subjective opinions and fan influenced revivals have occurred like with The Expanse, Galaxy Quest, Veronica Mars, Twin Peaks, and Arrested Development. It seems entirely clear that the industry will make a business plan around subjective opinions if they want to.