On 16/06/2026 13:57, Daniel70 wrote:
On 15/06/2026 10:41 pm, The True Doctor wrote:
<Snip>
Time Lord: If you're thinking of escaping by jumping through that
window I wouldn't try.
Doctor: You wouldn't survive the fall from this height.
THE DOCTOR: I've fallen from far greater heights in my past and
survived.
Yes, SHE has fallen from Outer Space back down to Earth and through
the roof of a Bus!! ;-P
It was a train. It was Rosa Parks who fell through a bus.
On 18/06/2026 13:59, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
Doctor Who has no international audience whatsoever
This is not true, as the 2005 - 2023 era is now streaming on
AMC+ and I have seen plenty of fans discussing some of those
episodes on Doctor Who web forums... AMC only signed their
distribution deal with the BBC a few months ago, so even in
2026 somebody overseas was interested in the show.
Nobody but a handful of people subscribe to AMC+.
don't see too many people discussing those episodes. But he's
there, strutting his stuff, and weeping those tears for our
overseas comrades.
Weeping tears because he knew he'd killed the show off. He
told the entire audience to go and fuck grass and they all
stopped watching.
On 15/06/2026 20:26, Blueshirt wrote:
in a lot of 'spare' cash to throw at "Doctor Who" ... or they'd be
making it!
Unfortunately this is not like licencing Doctor Who to a company like
Big Finish or Virgin Publishing where they pay a fee for the right
to make and distribute Doctor Who audios or novels and take all of
the profits. Doctor Who has no international audience whatsoever and
will not make the licence any money whatsoever after it went woke.
After the BBC turned the Doctor gay no one will touch it or watch
it.
If the BBC insists on keeping the degenerate wokery, Timeless Child
monster, and the fake regenerations after Capaldi any company paying
for the rights will not have the freedom to make any money from it
since wokery destroys profits.
The BBC will have to pay producers to make the show, usually the
lowest bidder,
if their want to impose their disgusting agender based on DEI, discrimination, exclusion, and inequity, and where's the money going
to come from?
I have no problem with a low-budget, minimal effects show if we had
decent stories... after all, it's what I grew up on! But
The BBC are not interested in decent stories. They're only interested
in political messages after they were taken over by a bunch of
far-left activist to going the sex offenders the BBC already
nurtured.
On 18/06/2026 8:57 am, The True Doctor wrote:
if their want to impose their disgusting agender based
on DEI, discrimination, exclusion, and inequity, and
where's the money going to come from?
Yeah, right, Aggy, WE should be ABSOLUTELY disgusted by the
DISCRIMINATION and INEQUITY displayed by the BBC in EXCLUDING
Females from the lead role in 'Doctor Who'
On 18/06/2026 8:15 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 16/06/2026 13:57, Daniel70 wrote:
On 15/06/2026 10:41 pm, The True Doctor wrote:
THE DOCTOR: I've fallen from far greater heights in my
past and survived.
Yes, SHE has fallen from Outer Space back down to Earth
and through the roof of a Bus!! ;-P
It was a train. It was Rosa Parks who fell through a bus.
"Six of one, ...."
How many times do I have to tell you! He told them to "turn off
their TV and go and touch grass". It's not the same thing.
You're doing a Daniel on it now!
However, when the lead actor of TV shows tells the fans of that
show to turn it off and go outside, then he can't really
complain when thousands of people do exactly that. So maybe it
was not the best attitude to take because of a few criticisms.
Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-18 12:49:35 +0000, Blueshirt said:
The hopium smokers in fandom might wish to believe
otherwise, but the financial state of the BBC is a big
player in all of this. The "we're putting it out to tender"
PR stuff is just the BBC treading water... to keep the fans
happy until such time as they are able to make a new
series. It 'could' be years.
Some of the past actors, producers, etc. of the show have
recently said "it's not cancelled" ... realistically, it
actually is, because there won't be anything new on TV for
many years (if ever). The BBC management may as well just
admit the show is over now and move on.
Things can change... if and when a new production team come
on board, the funding is there, and they have scripts for a
new series. My opinion, based on sound reasoning and logic is,
it could be a few years. But until then, it's cancelled.
There was a Christmas special planned, it's cancelled.
So I think it's fair enough to use the term, for now.
Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-18 12:59:06 +0000, Blueshirt said:
The True Doctor wrote:
Doctor Who has no international audience whatsoever
This is not true, as the 2005 - 2023 era is now streaming on
AMC+ and I have seen plenty of fans discussing some of
those episodes on Doctor Who web forums... AMC only signed
their distribution deal with the BBC a few months ago, so
even in 2026 somebody overseas was interested in the show.
The Ncuti Gatwa seasons are still on Disney+ too... although
I don't see too many people discussing those episodes. But
he's there, strutting his stuff, and weeping those tears
for our overseas comrades.
But bother of those streaming options cost money, which most
people simply won't be spending, so the potential audience is
again relatively miniscule.
Miniscule to you, but Disney+ have millions of subscribers
around the world. I don't know much about AMC apart from they
made "The Walking Dead" (and its many spin-offs) and own the
"BBC America" TV channel in the US, so they must be reasonably
big in the USA. So to say "Doctor Who" on these services has no
potential audience is clearly not correct... of course, that
doesn't mean all of the Disney+/AMC+ subscribers want to watch
episodes of "Doctor Who", maybe it is only a small percentage...
but the option is there for them if they want to.
AMC+ have the better deal as there are some really good "Doctor
Who" stories between 2005 and 2017... after 2017, not so much.
The two Ncuti Gatwa seasons on Disney+ might be an acquired
taste, but I'm sure some people, somewhere, like them.
^^^^^Here in New Zealand we used to have old episodes (some really
old, not just the Quitopher onwards stuff) playing on regular
free-to-air channels, as well as Sky TV, which is a much
bigger potential audience than AMC+ and Disney+ combined will
ever have here. Same in other countries that used to broadcast
the show.
The toothpaste isn't going to go back into the tube. Most decent
TV shows are on the big streaming platforms now, free-to-air TV
are only getting the crumbs... and that isn't going to change.
No mater how many people go out and shake their fist at the
clouds.--
On 18/06/2026 8:15 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 16/06/2026 13:57, Daniel70 wrote:"Six of one, ...."
On 15/06/2026 10:41 pm, The True Doctor wrote:
<Snip>
Time Lord: If you're thinking of escaping by jumping through that
window I wouldn't try.
Doctor: You wouldn't survive the fall from this height.
THE DOCTOR: I've fallen from far greater heights in my past and
survived.
Yes, SHE has fallen from Outer Space back down to Earth and through
the roof of a Bus!! ;-P
It was a train. It was Rosa Parks who fell through a bus.
----
Daniel70
The True Doctor wrote:
On 18/06/2026 13:59, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
Doctor Who has no international audience whatsoever
This is not true, as the 2005 - 2023 era is now streaming on
AMC+ and I have seen plenty of fans discussing some of those
episodes on Doctor Who web forums... AMC only signed their
distribution deal with the BBC a few months ago, so even in
2026 somebody overseas was interested in the show.
Nobody but a handful of people subscribe to AMC+.
Only if, "handful" in Agamemnon speak means "millions" in the
real world!
don't see too many people discussing those episodes. But he's
there, strutting his stuff, and weeping those tears for our
overseas comrades.
Weeping tears because he knew he'd killed the show off. He
told the entire audience to go and fuck grass and they all
stopped watching.
How many times do I have to tell you! He told them to "turn off
their TV and go and touch grass". It's not the same thing.
You're doing a Daniel on it now!
However, when the lead actor of TV shows tells the fans of that
show to turn it off and go outside, then he can't really
complain when thousands of people do exactly that. So maybe it
was not the best attitude to take because of a few criticisms.
On 18/06/2026 8:57 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 15/06/2026 20:26, Blueshirt wrote:
<Snip>
in a lot of 'spare' cash to throw at "Doctor Who" ... or they'd be
making it!
Unfortunately this is not like licencing Doctor Who to a company like
Big Finish or Virgin Publishing where they pay a fee for the right
to make and distribute Doctor Who audios or novels and take all of
the profits. Doctor Who has no international audience whatsoever and
will not make the licence any money whatsoever after it went woke.
After the BBC turned the Doctor gay no one will touch it or watch
it.
If the BBC insists on keeping the degenerate wokery, Timeless Child
monster, and the fake regenerations after Capaldi any company paying
for the rights will not have the freedom to make any money from it
since wokery destroys profits.
The BBC will have to pay producers to make the show, usually the
lowest bidder,
... but if the BBC selects the lowest bidder, they will probably drive
even MORE viewers away!!
if their want to impose their disgusting agender based on DEI,
discrimination, exclusion, and inequity, and where's the money going
to come from?
Yeah, right, Aggy, WE should be ABSOLUTELY disgusted by the
DISCRIMINATION and INEQUITY displayed by the BBC in EXCLUDING Females
from the lead role in 'Doctor Who'
I have no problem with a low-budget, minimal effects show if we had
decent stories... after all, it's what I grew up on! But
The BBC are not interested in decent stories. They're only interested
in political messages after they were taken over by a bunch of
far-left activist to going the sex offenders the BBC already
nurtured.
Or if they were taken over by a bunch of far-right activist, either!!
----
Daniel70
Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/06/2026 8:57 am, The True Doctor wrote:
if their want to impose their disgusting agender based
on DEI, discrimination, exclusion, and inequity, and
where's the money going to come from?
Yeah, right, Aggy, WE should be ABSOLUTELY disgusted by the
DISCRIMINATION and INEQUITY displayed by the BBC in EXCLUDING
Females from the lead role in 'Doctor Who'
That's why it'll never be openly retconned... as the BBC are
never going to admit publicly that casting a woman as The Doctor
was wrong. It would send the wrong signal in this modern world
that we live in.
Verily, in article <xn0pr7jw0xuoi6h007@post.eweka.nl>, did >blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
How many times do I have to tell you! He told them to "turn off
their TV and go and touch grass". It's not the same thing.
You're doing a Daniel on it now!
However, when the lead actor of TV shows tells the fans of that
show to turn it off and go outside, then he can't really
complain when thousands of people do exactly that. So maybe it
was not the best attitude to take because of a few criticisms.
He's not the only entertainment bigwig who made that mistake. I think
their bubbles misled them. In their daily experience, *everyone* is >progressive to a fault and other views are only held by a few cranks
online. They think that they're shedding a tiny but vocal minority, and >they're genuinely shocked when it turns out those people were >representative.
----
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos
In article <xn0pr7j12xtfqdr002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Things can change... if and when a new production team come
on board, the funding is there, and they have scripts for a
new series. My opinion, based on sound reasoning and logic
is, it could be a few years. But until then, it's cancelled.
There was a Christmas special planned, it's cancelled.
So I think it's fair enough to use the term, for now.
The BBC has put DW out for tender.
On 12/06/2026 12:52, Daniel70 wrote:
On 12/06/2026 7:14 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:A RED cards means .... they're out for the rest of the game AND miss
Mex vs. RSA, 3 sending offs already and its only the
first match.
Three red cards and it wasn't even a dirty game!
the next game as well?? Or just the rest of THIS game??
They also miss the next game.
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a
thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is
out there.
Somewhere.
On 16/06/2026 13:57, Daniel70 wrote:
On 15/06/2026 10:41 pm, The True Doctor wrote:
<Snip>
Time Lord: If you're thinking of escaping by jumping through that
window I wouldn't try.
Doctor: You wouldn't survive the fall from this height.
THE DOCTOR: I've fallen from far greater heights in my past and
survived.
Yes, SHE has fallen from Outer Space back down to Earth and through
the roof of a Bus!! ;-P
It was a train. It was Rosa Parks who fell through a bus.
Verily, in article <xn0pr7m3kxxladz00g@post.eweka.nl>, did blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a
thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is
out there.
Somewhere.
But then how do creators get paid?
If we don't reward creators, shows won't last. Passion
projects exist, but they seldom last as long or turn out as
well as professional projects.
Some creators need to be rewarded.
"and shake their fist at the clouds."
In article <xn0pr7kmoxvlx9o00a@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/06/2026 8:57 am, The True Doctor wrote:
if their want to impose their disgusting agender based
on DEI, discrimination, exclusion, and inequity, and
where's the money going to come from?
Yeah, right, Aggy, WE should be ABSOLUTELY disgusted by the
DISCRIMINATION and INEQUITY displayed by the BBC in EXCLUDING
Females from the lead role in 'Doctor Who'
That's why it'll never be openly retconned... as the BBC are
never going to admit publicly that casting a woman as The Doctor
was wrong. It would send the wrong signal in this modern world
that we live in.
The proble now is the Timeless Child Abomination.
In article <11137pm$396nc$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 18/06/2026 8:57 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 15/06/2026 20:26, Blueshirt wrote:
I have no problem with a low-budget, minimal effects show if we had
decent stories... after all, it's what I grew up on! But
The BBC are not interested in decent stories. They're only interested
in political messages after they were taken over by a bunch of
far-left activist to going the sex offenders the BBC already
nurtured.
Or if they were taken over by a bunch of far-right activist, either!!
Beware Farage!
Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-18 12:59:06 +0000, Blueshirt said:
The True Doctor wrote:
Doctor Who has no international audience whatsoever
This is not true, as the 2005 - 2023 era is now streaming on
AMC+ and I have seen plenty of fans discussing some of
those episodes on Doctor Who web forums... AMC only signed
their distribution deal with the BBC a few months ago, so
even in 2026 somebody overseas was interested in the show.
The Ncuti Gatwa seasons are still on Disney+ too... although
I don't see too many people discussing those episodes. But
he's there, strutting his stuff, and weeping those tears
for our overseas comrades.
But bother of those streaming options cost money, which most
people simply won't be spending, so the potential audience is
again relatively miniscule.
Miniscule to you, but Disney+ have millions of subscribers around the world.
I don't know much about AMC apart from they made "The Walking Dead"
(and its many spin-offs) and own the "BBC America" TV channel in the
US, so they must be reasonably big in the USA. So to say "Doctor Who"
on these services has no
potential audience is clearly not correct...
of course, that doesn't mean all of the Disney+/AMC+ subscribers want
to watch episodes of "Doctor Who", maybe it is only a small
percentage... but the option is there for them if they want to.
AMC+ have the better deal as there are some really good "Doctor Who"
stories between 2005 and 2017... after 2017, not so much.
The two Ncuti Gatwa seasons on Disney+ might be an acquired taste, but
I'm sure some people, somewhere, like them.
Here in New Zealand we used to have old episodes (some really old, not
just the Quitopher onwards stuff) playing on regular free-to-air
channels, as well as Sky TV, which is a much bigger potential audience
than AMC+ and Disney+ combined will ever have here. Same in other
countries that used to broadcast the show.
The toothpaste isn't going to go back into the tube. Most decent TV
shows are on the big streaming platforms now, free-to-air TV are only getting the crumbs... and that isn't going to change. No mater how many people go out and shake their fist at the clouds.
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is out there.
Somewhere.
Verily, in article <xn0pr7m3kxxladz00g@post.eweka.nl>, did blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is out there.
Somewhere.
But then how do creators get paid?
If we don't reward creators, shows won't last. Passion projects exist,
but they seldom last as long or turn out as well as professional
projects.
Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/06/2026 8:15 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 16/06/2026 13:57, Daniel70 wrote:
On 15/06/2026 10:41 pm, The True Doctor wrote:
THE DOCTOR: I've fallen from far greater heights in my past and survived.
Yes, SHE has fallen from Outer Space back down to Earth and through
the roof of a Bus!! ;-P
It was a train. It was Rosa Parks who fell through a bus.
"Six of one, ...."
Well... unless you are waiting at the bus station for the train to arrive.
:-)
On 18/06/2026 8:57 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 15/06/2026 20:26, Blueshirt wrote:
<Snip>
in a lot of 'spare' cash to throw at "Doctor Who" ... or they'd be
making it!
Unfortunately this is not like licencing Doctor Who to a company like
Big Finish or Virgin Publishing where they pay a fee for the right
to make and distribute Doctor Who audios or novels and take all of
the profits. Doctor Who has no international audience whatsoever and
will not make the licence any money whatsoever after it went woke.
After the BBC turned the Doctor gay no one will touch it or watch
it.
If the BBC insists on keeping the degenerate wokery, Timeless Child
monster, and the fake regenerations after Capaldi any company paying
for the rights will not have the freedom to make any money from it
since wokery destroys profits.
The BBC will have to pay producers to make the show, usually the
lowest bidder,
... but if the BBC selects the lowest bidder, they will probably drive
even MORE viewers away!!
In most cases those creators, actors, etc. have all already been paid
... massively over-paid ... for doing their job. The fact that they
want to still get "residuals" decades later is simply pure greed. Do I
still get paid when a computer program I wrote for a company I no
longer work for is used? Nope.
It similar to the pure greed whereby ex-politicans are still paid an
annual salary and get perks for life!
People are paid to do a job. They shouldn't get "bonuses" and they definitely shouldn't continue to be paid after they finish the job.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pr7j12xtfqdr002@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Things can change... if and when a new production team come
on board, the funding is there, and they have scripts for a
new series. My opinion, based on sound reasoning and logic
is, it could be a few years. But until then, it's cancelled.
There was a Christmas special planned, it's cancelled.
So I think it's fair enough to use the term, for now.
The BBC has put DW out for tender.
Really Dave? You do know what that actually means and how the
process works though, you do?
Doctor Who is cancelled.
Until it's not.
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a
thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is
out there.
Somewhere.
Verily, in article <xn0pr7m3kxxladz00g@post.eweka.nl>, did >blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a
thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is
out there.
Somewhere.
But then how do creators get paid?
If we don't reward creators, shows won't last. Passion projects exist,
but they seldom last as long or turn out as well as professional
projects.
----
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos
On 18/06/2026 8:15 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 16/06/2026 13:57, Daniel70 wrote:Yes, a train, just re-watched (or, rather, am still re-watching. Part
On 15/06/2026 10:41 pm, The True Doctor wrote:
<Snip>
Time Lord: If you're thinking of escaping by jumping through that
window I wouldn't try.
Doctor: You wouldn't survive the fall from this height.
THE DOCTOR: I've fallen from far greater heights in my past and
survived.
Yes, SHE has fallen from Outer Space back down to Earth and through
the roof of a Bus!! ;-P
It was a train. It was Rosa Parks who fell through a bus.
way through.) that episode.
That's what I get for programming my PVR to record two programs at the
same time .... no re-watching!! ;-)
----
Daniel70
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0pr7m3kxxladz00g@post.eweka.nl>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a
thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is
out there.
Somewhere.
But then how do creators get paid?
I was only pointing out there are alternatives for the
free-loaders that think everything should be free... the main
streaming services are going nowhere.
I have Disney+ and Prime Video... whilst we use our daughter's
Netflix via password sharing. The big shows on the streaming
services are better than most things on the free-to-air
channels. Which seem to be full of cookery and reality TV
shows these days... when the football isn't on.
If we don't reward creators, shows won't last. Passion
projects exist, but they seldom last as long or turn out as
well as professional projects.
Some creators need to be rewarded.
I wouldn't reward RTD!
On 19/06/2026 8:38 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
<Snip>
"and shake their fist at the clouds."
.... and what have the clouds ever done to you .... except rain on your >parade, maybe??
--
Daniel70
On 19/06/2026 9:40 pm, The Doctor wrote:
In article <xn0pr7kmoxvlx9o00a@post.eweka.nl>,Do YOU EVER actually READ the posts that YOU are responding to??
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/06/2026 8:57 am, The True Doctor wrote:
if their want to impose their disgusting agender based
on DEI, discrimination, exclusion, and inequity, and
where's the money going to come from?
Yeah, right, Aggy, WE should be ABSOLUTELY disgusted by the
DISCRIMINATION and INEQUITY displayed by the BBC in EXCLUDING
Females from the lead role in 'Doctor Who'
That's why it'll never be openly retconned... as the BBC are
never going to admit publicly that casting a woman as The Doctor
was wrong. It would send the wrong signal in this modern world
that we live in.
The problem now is the Timeless Child Abomination.
EVER??
--
Daniel70
On 19/06/2026 9:39 pm, The Doctor wrote:
In article <11137pm$396nc$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 18/06/2026 8:57 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 15/06/2026 20:26, Blueshirt wrote:
<Snip>
I have no problem with a low-budget, minimal effects show if we had
decent stories... after all, it's what I grew up on! But
The BBC are not interested in decent stories. They're only interested
in political messages after they were taken over by a bunch of
far-left activist to going the sex offenders the BBC already
nurtured.
Or if they were taken over by a bunch of far-right activist, either!!
Beware Farage!
Why?? Is he living in Canada, now?? Or Australia??
----
Daniel70
On 2026-06-19 10:38:02 +0000, Blueshirt said:
Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-18 12:59:06 +0000, Blueshirt said:
The True Doctor wrote:
Doctor Who has no international audience whatsoever
This is not true, as the 2005 - 2023 era is now streaming on
AMC+ and I have seen plenty of fans discussing some of
those episodes on Doctor Who web forums... AMC only signed
their distribution deal with the BBC a few months ago, so
even in 2026 somebody overseas was interested in the show.
The Ncuti Gatwa seasons are still on Disney+ too... although
I don't see too many people discussing those episodes. But
he's there, strutting his stuff, and weeping those tears
for our overseas comrades.
But bother of those streaming options cost money, which most
people simply won't be spending, so the potential audience is
again relatively miniscule.
Miniscule to you, but Disney+ have millions of subscribers around the world.
And how many BILLIONS have access to free-to-air TV? Paid streaming
services will always have far smaller audiences than free-to-air. :-)
I don't know much about AMC apart from they made "The Walking Dead"
(and its many spin-offs) and own the "BBC America" TV channel in the
US, so they must be reasonably big in the USA. So to say "Doctor Who"
on these services has no
potential audience is clearly not correct...
I didn't say "no potential audience" ... I said they have a far smaller >potential audience.
of course, that doesn't mean all of the Disney+/AMC+ subscribers want
to watch episodes of "Doctor Who", maybe it is only a small
percentage... but the option is there for them if they want to.
AMC+ have the better deal as there are some really good "Doctor Who"
stories between 2005 and 2017... after 2017, not so much.
The two Ncuti Gatwa seasons on Disney+ might be an acquired taste, but
I'm sure some people, somewhere, like them.
Here in New Zealand we used to have old episodes (some really old, not
just the Quitopher onwards stuff) playing on regular free-to-air
channels, as well as Sky TV, which is a much bigger potential audience
than AMC+ and Disney+ combined will ever have here. Same in other
countries that used to broadcast the show.
The toothpaste isn't going to go back into the tube. Most decent TV
shows are on the big streaming platforms now, free-to-air TV are only
getting the crumbs... and that isn't going to change. No mater how many
people go out and shake their fist at the clouds.
As I've said before. Many shows make it to free-to-air channels*,
albeit it at a later date. If they're going to survive, streaming
services need to learn to share, with each other and with free-to-air >channels. People simply don't want to and can't keep paying out >ever-increasing amounts of money to numerous services just for a few
shows on each one. It's a ridiculous business model that is
unsustainable, as many such services have already discovered.
* "Free-to-air" doesn't mean just broadcast TV. Most free-to-air networks
have their own free streaming service these days. Here in New Zealand,
many shows are first available on the free streaming service and then
on regular broadcast TV when the schedule allows. Big shows like
"Game of Thrones" have played on free-to-air TV here in New Zealand,
even if it was months after they played on subscription Sky TV.
On 2026-06-19 12:21:09 +0000, Blueshirt said:
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is out there.
Somewhere.
Almost. It can be very difficult / impossible to find episodes of old
shows though. :-(
On 2026-06-19 13:07:35 +0000, The True Melissa said:
Verily, in article <xn0pr7m3kxxladz00g@post.eweka.nl>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is out there.
Somewhere.
But then how do creators get paid?
If we don't reward creators, shows won't last. Passion projects exist,
but they seldom last as long or turn out as well as professional
projects.
In most cases those creators, actors, etc. have all already been paid
... massively over-paid ... for doing their job. The fact that they
want to still get "residuals" decades later is simply pure greed. Do I
still get paid when a computer program I wrote for a company I no
longer work for is used? Nope.
It similar to the pure greed whereby ex-politicans are still paid an
annual salary and get perks for life!
People are paid to do a job. They shouldn't get "bonuses" and they >definitely shouldn't continue to be paid after they finish the job.
On 2026-06-19 11:27:07 +0000, Blueshirt said:
Daniel70 wrote:
On 18/06/2026 8:15 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 16/06/2026 13:57, Daniel70 wrote:
On 15/06/2026 10:41 pm, The True Doctor wrote:
THE DOCTOR: I've fallen from far greater heights in my past and survived.
Yes, SHE has fallen from Outer Space back down to Earth and through >>>>> the roof of a Bus!! ;-P
It was a train. It was Rosa Parks who fell through a bus.
"Six of one, ...."
Well... unless you are waiting at the bus station for the train to arrive. >>
:-)
If you waiting at the bus station, then you'll be lucky if a bus even >arrives ... or six will arrive 45minutes late. :-p
On 2026-06-19 11:05:23 +0000, Daniel70 said:
On 18/06/2026 8:57 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 15/06/2026 20:26, Blueshirt wrote:
<Snip>
in a lot of 'spare' cash to throw at "Doctor Who" ... or they'd be
making it!
Unfortunately this is not like licencing Doctor Who to a company like
Big Finish or Virgin Publishing where they pay a fee for the right
to make and distribute Doctor Who audios or novels and take all of
the profits. Doctor Who has no international audience whatsoever and
will not make the licence any money whatsoever after it went woke.
After the BBC turned the Doctor gay no one will touch it or watch
it.
If the BBC insists on keeping the degenerate wokery, Timeless Child
monster, and the fake regenerations after Capaldi any company paying
for the rights will not have the freedom to make any money from it
since wokery destroys profits.
The BBC will have to pay producers to make the show, usually the
lowest bidder,
... but if the BBC selects the lowest bidder, they will probably drive
even MORE viewers away!!
The tender process doesn't pick the 'winner' simply because they're the >cheapest. If it did, you would have bridges and buildings all over the
world collapsing because the cheapest company picked from the tenders
used sub-quality concrete. :-)
Verily, in article <1114f52$3ksla$1@dont-email.me>, did
YourName@YourISP.com deliver unto us this message:
In most cases those creators, actors, etc. have all already been paid
... massively over-paid ... for doing their job. The fact that they
want to still get "residuals" decades later is simply pure greed. Do I
still get paid when a computer program I wrote for a company I no
longer work for is used? Nope.
It similar to the pure greed whereby ex-politicans are still paid an
annual salary and get perks for life!
People are paid to do a job. They shouldn't get "bonuses" and they
definitely shouldn't continue to be paid after they finish the job.
If piracy becomes the norm, there won't be studio income to invest in
new shows. The system falls apart. It can tolerate some piracy and even
use it as a kind of advertising, but not if it becomes what most people
do.
----
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos
On 18/06/2026 10:39 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 12/06/2026 12:52, Daniel70 wrote:O.K., thanks.
On 12/06/2026 7:14 am, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:A RED cards means .... they're out for the rest of the game AND miss
Mex vs. RSA, 3 sending offs already and its only the
first match.
Three red cards and it wasn't even a dirty game!
the next game as well?? Or just the rest of THIS game??
They also miss the next game.
----
Daniel70
In article <MPG.449f8c0455f5c7f898a0a4@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
If piracy becomes the norm, there won't be studio income to invest in
new shows. The system falls apart. It can tolerate some piracy and even >use it as a kind of advertising, but not if it becomes what most people >do.
What about Youtube?
Verily, in article <1114r5d$9aa$34@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did >doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
In article <MPG.449f8c0455f5c7f898a0a4@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
If piracy becomes the norm, there won't be studio income to invest in
new shows. The system falls apart. It can tolerate some piracy and even
use it as a kind of advertising, but not if it becomes what most people
do.
What about Youtube?
The classic Who channel has ads, so I suppose a trickle of revenue is
going in to reward them for licensing it.
----
The True Melissa - Canal Winchester - Ohio
United States of America - North America - Earth
Solar System - Milky Way - Local Group
Virgo Cluster - Laniakea Supercluster - Cosmos
On 2026-06-19 13:07:35 +0000, The True Melissa said:
Verily, in article <xn0pr7m3kxxladz00g@post.eweka.nl>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is out there.
Somewhere.
But then how do creators get paid?
If we don't reward creators, shows won't last. Passion projects exist,
but they seldom last as long or turn out as well as professional
projects.
In most cases those creators, actors, etc. have all already been paid
... massively over-paid ... for doing their job. The fact that they want
to still get "residuals" decades later is simply pure greed. Do I still
get paid when a computer program I wrote for a company I no longer work
for is used? Nope.
It similar to the pure greed whereby ex-politicans are still paid an
annual salary and get perks for life!
People are paid to do a job. They shouldn't get "bonuses" and they definitely shouldn't continue to be paid after they finish the job.
On 20/06/2026 8:17 am, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-19 13:07:35 +0000, The True Melissa said:
Verily, in article <xn0pr7m3kxxladz00g@post.eweka.nl>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Doctor wrote:
There is a backlash towards streaming in NA.
Torrents, binaries, and hacked Firesticks are a thing.
Nobody needs to pay for anything. Everything is out there.
Somewhere.
But then how do creators get paid?
If we don't reward creators, shows won't last. Passion projects exist,
but they seldom last as long or turn out as well as professional
projects.
In most cases those creators, actors, etc. have all already been paid
... massively over-paid ... for doing their job. The fact that they want
to still get "residuals" decades later is simply pure greed. Do I still
get paid when a computer program I wrote for a company I no longer work
for is used? Nope.
It similar to the pure greed whereby ex-politicans are still paid an
annual salary and get perks for life!
I left the Australian Army in Jan, 1993, .... and have been on a
reasonable pension ever since .... because my terms of Employment when I >signed up stated such.
Whilst I was in the Army, to save money the Government offered members
the opportunity to switch to a 'new, improved' Pension fund to get a
much better pension from Age 55 .... but nothing between Date of
Discharge and Age 55.
I bet THAT offer wasn't to show how generous the Government were.
--People are paid to do a job. They shouldn't get "bonuses" and theyThen, perhaps, they should be paid more WHILST doing the job!
definitely shouldn't continue to be paid after they finish the job.
--
Daniel70
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 46:38:35 |
| Calls: | 1,100 |
| Files: | 1,339 |
| Messages: | 275,566 |