Deadliest Catch Losing Three Captains?

[ZetaNine]

I seriously doubt they spent anywhere near $3 million total. It's damned near a cheap documentary. The only "production" is the "After the Catch" show.

easily $3M....EASILY.  

you'd crap if I told you how much just ONE episode of SNL is budgeted for...and that's a live show..on a fixed stage.

to shoot and produce a new series..as they were doing..most likely cost Discovery $3M before the first camera ever rolled.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

easily $3M....EASILY.  

you'd crap if I told you how much just ONE episode of SNL is budgeted for...and that's a live show..on a fixed stage.

to shoot and produce a new series..as they were doing..most likely cost Discovery $3M before the first camera ever rolled.

Read the articles. The beef the Discovery Channel has with Johnathan and Andy is NOT about the series itself. The articles state that it was about a special episode, not a series. And evidently Johnathan and Andy wouldn't sit still for the interviews and such. It seems the Discovery Channel has forgotten what it takes to run those boats. Even if they aren't on the boat, and Scotty or Mike is out fishing the off season, the brothers are working the operation. Johnathan fishes the off season in his own small boat, and Andy works a farm with his wife in the off season.

All of those guys are entirely different from your average guy, and even from your average business owner. That's the appeal of the show. They're some of the few remaining wild men, or renegades. You can only have so much of their life for contrived Bravo Sierra, and then they're going to say enough is enough, and go back to their life.

Added this for your benefit: The Hillstrands failed to finish the spin-off one-time special 'Hillstranded', so Discovery is suing the Hillstrands for $3 million. The show was to follow the men and their adventures while not out crabbing, but according to the suit, they did not participate in interviews required to complete the project.

[Dago]

Read the articles. The beef the Discovery Channel has with Johnathan and Andy is NOT about the series itself. The articles state that it was about a special episode, not a series. And evidently Johnathan and Andy wouldn't sit still for the interviews and such. It seems the Discovery Channel has forgotten what it takes to run those boats. Even if they aren't on the boat, and Scotty or Mike is out fishing the off season, the brothers are working the operation. Johnathan fishes the off season in his own small boat, and Andy works a farm with his wife in the off season.

All of those guys are entirely different from your average guy, and even from your average business owner. That's the appeal of the show. They're some of the few remaining wild men, or renegades. You can only have so much of their life for contrived Bravo Sierra, and then they're going to say enough is enough, and go back to their life.

Added this for your benefit: The Hillstrands failed to finish the spin-off one-time special 'Hillstranded', so Discovery is suing the Hillstrands for $3 million. The show was to follow the men and their adventures while not out crabbing, but according to the suit, they did not participate in interviews required to complete the project.

I have to believe the Discovery Channel wouldn't start a project like that without a signed contract with the Hillstrands.  If the Hillstrands failed to complete the project after Discovery Channel had spent a lot of money filming the bulk of the special, I can easily understand why Discovery would sue the.  The Hillstrands might have a unique occupation, but every captain in crabbing will tell you it is a business, and they have to be businessmen.  That is the nature of shooting TV specials and series, they are business ventures. If the Hillstrands failed to complete their obligation, and in doing so would cost the DC a lot of money, then they should be sued.  It will now be up to them to give good and sufficient reason for failing to complete their legal obligation that caused serious financial lose to the DC.

[ZetaNine]

being that I've been in the industry for more years that I care to mention....let me just say this:


when the network owns the show...they don't have to worry about a "spinoff" or (pilot) being "picked-up" (greenlighted for 13 or more episodes)  they can...and do...make that decision ahead of time..and therefore budget, hire, write/script/block, undergo massive pre-production...shoot and edit....shoot/edit/catalog/store B roll, and of course... employ a veritable army of people....so they can then bang-out shows if they feel they have a good product that the public wants.  they go into something like this with the idea of it being a series.  additionally..discovery only hires and employees union production companies and people.  Discovery farms out most of their work..where as NatGeo does not.

so yes...it is in every sense of the word...a series going into it.

Read the articles. The beef the Discovery Channel has with Johnathan and Andy is NOT about the series itself. The articles state that it was about a special episode, not a series. And evidently Johnathan and Andy wouldn't sit still for the interviews and such. It seems the Discovery Channel has forgotten what it takes to run those boats. Even if they aren't on the boat, and Scotty or Mike is out fishing the off season, the brothers are working the operation. Johnathan fishes the off season in his own small boat, and Andy works a farm with his wife in the off season.

All of those guys are entirely different from your average guy, and even from your average business owner. That's the appeal of the show. They're some of the few remaining wild men, or renegades. You can only have so much of their life for contrived Bravo Sierra, and then they're going to say enough is enough, and go back to their life.

Added this for your benefit: The Hillstrands failed to finish the spin-off one-time special 'Hillstranded', so Discovery is suing the Hillstrands for $3 million. The show was to follow the men and their adventures while not out crabbing, but according to the suit, they did not participate in interviews required to complete the project.

[ZetaNine]

.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

A one time special is the same as a spin off series? It's one show, a special, single episode spin off.

If you've been in the industry, for more years than you care to mention, and you don't see the difference between a one episode special, and a series, then there's not much point in continuing to converse with you.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

I have to believe the Discovery Channel wouldn't start a project like that without a signed contract with the Hillstrands.  If the Hillstrands failed to complete the project after Discovery Channel had spent a lot of money filming the bulk of the special, I can easily understand why Discovery would sue the.  The Hillstrands might have a unique occupation, but every captain in crabbing will tell you it is a business, and they have to be businessmen.  That is the nature of shooting TV specials and series, they are business ventures. If the Hillstrands failed to complete their obligation, and in doing so would cost the DC a lot of money, then they should be sued.  It will now be up to them to give good and sufficient reason for failing to complete their legal obligation that caused serious financial lose to the DC.

I'm sure the Discovery Channel spent millions of dollars following Johnathan and Andy around with a camera man in their day to day routine off of the boat. 

Yes, crabbing is a business, which is exactly my point. Evidently, the Discovery Channel special became a detriment to the crabbing business. They, Andy and Johnathan, evidently reached the point where the extra interviews and Bravo Sierra began to prevent them from running their business. They are not stupid, if it started costing them money, and potentially their boat, which is their livelihood, they quit.

It is beginning to look like with the death of Phil Harris, the Discovery Channel saw the beginning of the end, and decided to milk it for all it is worth. Typical greed.

Since Sig and Edgar have decided to back Johnathan and Andy, it's a safe bet that the Discovery Channel has begun to try to treat those guys like they own them, or treat them like your average Hollywood personality. That won't work.

The Discovery Channel may win the suit, and the battle, but they can bet they'll lose the war.

[dev1ant]

A one time special is the same as a spin off series? It's one show, a special, single episode spin off.

If you've been in the industry, for more years than you care to mention, and you don't see the difference between a one episode special, and a series, then there's not much point in continuing to converse with you.

You do realize that Deadliest Catch started with a one show special called "Deadliest Season"  It was such a hit they then made Deadliest Catch.

Just sayin'

I really don't see why you are so defensive of the Hillstrandts..They are by far my favorite boat on the show, and even I will openly admit that if they made a commitment and didn't live up to, Discovery has a right (both legally and ethically) to sue them to recoup whatever losses they may have incurred. 

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Yeah, I'm quite aware of how the series started. And it has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Having been a small business man and dealt with large corporations, I'm sort of a fan of the underdog, as I know how "suits" treat people. They have a tendency to feel you are there to serve them at their convenience, even if it kills you or your business.

[ZetaNine]

A one time special is the same as a spin off series? It's one show, a special, single episode spin off.

If you've been in the industry, for more years than you care to mention, and you don't see the difference between a one episode special, and a series, then there's not much point in continuing to converse with you.

whoosh

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

whoosh

Evidently, right over your head.

[MORAY37]

Evidently, right over your head.

Yeah, I'm quite aware of how the series started. And it has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Having been a small business man and dealt with large corporations, I'm sort of a fan of the underdog, as I know how "suits" treat people. They have a tendency to feel you are there to serve them at their convenience, even if it kills you or your business.

Wow, such blind reverence.  It's called "keeping and open mind, and wait until the facts are known".  The facts of this are not known, as of any article I've read.  Whatever the Hillstrands did, apparently it did not meet with their responsibilities to whatever contract they signed, hence the suit. It will be up to both parties to prove whether or not there was a breach of contract.  Apparently, they didn't "sit" for what they were payed and contracted to do.  If the product they agreed to produce required it, and they couldn't do it, then they should not have signed their names on the dotted lines.  

Bottom line, if you sign a contract, you take whatever payment is offered and agree to be responsible for a product.  If you change your mind, or change your commitment to the project, you will be sued for breach and you will be expected to pick up the cost of whatever the other party can lawfully claim as damages for your breach of contract.

Somehow you expect the rules to be different because you have a personal emotional investment in the parties involved.  I bet it would be a whole lot different if we were discussing a couple of "nice" guys that walked on a contract with you personally, or your "small" business.

[E25280]

I'm sure the Discovery Channel spent millions of dollars following Johnathan and Andy around with a camera man in their day to day routine off of the boat. 

I'm sure the $3M amount has more to do with lost advertising revenue and not so much about how much money Discovery sank into production costs.

[ZetaNine]

I'm sure the $3M amount has more to do with lost advertising revenue and not so much about how much money Discovery sank into production costs.

they can't sue for potential gross revenue...as they can easily fill the time slot with other programing.

however, that said..if the show already ran for a season..and discovery sold future ads to sponsors, based on their ratings from the previous season, they would be entitled to the difference in those revenues...if they were significantly larger than normal revenues for what they typically broadcast.

[Masherbrum]

You do realize that Deadliest Catch started with a one show special called "Deadliest Season"  It was such a hit they then made Deadliest Catch.

Just sayin'

I really don't see why you are so defensive of the Hillstrandts..They are by far my favorite boat on the show, and even I will openly admit that if they made a commitment and didn't live up to, Discovery has a right (both legally and ethically) to sue them to recoup whatever losses they may have incurred. 

I can see why most, including myself are defensive of the Hillstrand's.    They lost a good friend during the Opelio Season and were then expected to have a camera in their face, without the opportunity to attend the CatchCon and the various Festivals throughout the Country, let alone be able to grieve over the loss of Phil?   

Discovery could have EASILY said: "Take all of the time you need and when you're ready to do the ONE-OFF SPECIAL "Hillstranded", we'll resume the project".    But to be driven by the dollar and throw ethics out the window is asinine.   

It's called "class" and Discovery Channel doesn't have it.   I support Sig's "banding together" as it shows solidarity towards "what is right".