EXCLUSIVE: Roseanne Barr is nearing a return to primetime. I’ve learned that NBC is finalizing a deal for a new comedy series the Roseanne alumna is co-writing with Nurse Jackie co-creator/former co-showrunner Linda Wallem. 
I hear the project, a multi-camera family comedy, is intended as going straight to series under the 10/90 model used by Lionsgate’s Debmar-Mercury for the Tyler Perry sitcoms on TBS and most recently Anger Management at FX. Universal TV is producing in what would be the studio’s first stab at the 10/90 template. This also would mark the first broadcast network to take on the model, which involves a straight-to-series 10-episode order that triggers a 90-episode back order if a ratings mark is hit. I hear Barr and Wallem are currently working on the script in Hawaii where Barr resides.Barr has experience with long-running family sitcoms: Her eponymous ABC comedy aired 221 episodes and has had a successful afterlife in syndication, which is key for series produced under the 10/90 model. Those series also tend to rely on seasoned sitcom stars in the lead as has been the case with Anger Management (Charlie Sheen) and FX’s upcoming Saint George (George Lopez) and untitled Kelsey Grammer/Martin Lawrence sitcom. NBC’s Roseanne Barr project stems from a development deal she signed with NBC and Universal TV in January, which also included an arc on the network’s flagship comedy The Office.
During the 2011-2012 season, Barr developed a multi-camera comedy at NBC, the 20th TV-produced Downwardly Mobile, which went to pilot. Barr is repped by Paradigm and manager Steven Greener; Wallem is with CAA.
Well, should be interesting to see how a 10/90 model would work on broadcast.
Please, anything BUT Roseanne Barr. She was bad, being nice, on her other shows not to mention overly loud. She really isn’t funny, though she thinks she is. Please NBC do not make the network worse. You really need good actors and show without the likes of Barr.
I hope NBC is not stupid enough to try the 10/90 model. A show doing decent for a few episodes is not enough to judge whether or not it can succeed over 90. Just look how Anger Management had great ratings for the first 10 and now is doing beyond terrible. NBC can also look at the ratings at shows on their own network, like Go On, Whitney, Up All Night and The New Normal, and see how ratings really fall over time if the show is not good enough. People might tune in due to curiosity for a few episodes, but that does not always last.
Ratings are no longer (and actually never have been) the reason why shows last on TV… it’s REVENUE. Yes, ratings USUALLY translate to revenue, but with studios producing a large percentage of the shows on their own networks, they realize there’s greater money in licensing deals… and the only shows that get those (that matter financially, at least) are the ones that hit 100 episodes. This is ESPECIALLY true in a rapidly changing landscape where an increasing number of viewers are (or will be) consuming content via an online stream rather than cable/satellite/a giant metal tower in the middle of a field beaming out a signal.
Also, look at this another way, solely from the “traditional” network POV: If Roseanne’s show is a big hit in season 1, she’d likely want to re-negotiate for a MUCH higher salary for Seasons 2 and beyond (even if she’s under a long-term contract, it’s sort of become the industry norm to renegotiate at that point). BUT, under the 90/10 model, they lock their big name star into a more concrete deal for 100 episodes at Season 1 rates.
you can’t fix stupid!
This 10/100 model seems to me to be a horrible idea. You can very easily end up with 90 episodes of a show that isn’t very good and nobody wants to watch. And who knows how many better series might never get made because you’re committed to four seasons of this one?
what is the impetus for this model? Is it cheaper over all, given how quickly the back 90 are produced? If not, what possible motivation does a network have to agree to it, absent some really hot property that’s in the position to say take it or leave it (which this doesn’t seem to be)?
I agree but I’d think there have to be contingencies for this somewhere in the contracts.
It’s not like this is Fall ’94 and they’re offering a deal like this to Jennifer Aniston.
It’s been a loooong time since Ms. Barr was a TV staple. As bad as NBC is, I can’t imagine they’d fall prey to this so easily.
At least I hope not.
yeah, downwardly mobile went to pilot, because she wouldn’t do it otherwise… if it had to go through the normal process it would not have been filmed.
this is exactly the type of lead balloon nbc should avoid… and yet somehow they’ll figure a way that it makes sense to them… that it’s even gotten this far in the process is scary.
good luck with it… I’m sure it’ll be fantastic.
There should be more multi cam workplace comedies. There were plenty of great multi-cams in the 90s. Spin City, NewsRadio, Just Shoot Me!, the great but short lived Working, etc. There haven’t been many attempts at multi cam work coms in the 21st century, and there haven’t been many good multi cams period.
I like the 9/9/9 plan better.
roseanne????? really?????
What happened to “Downwardly Mobile”?
A comedienne whose time has long past (she couldn’t even keep a cable reality show on the air, remember), doing a 10/90 show (untried on a broadcast net) on a last-place network. What could possibly go wrong?
This is a terrible idea. Makes perfect sense that NBC would do it. Seriously, somebody from Comcast needs to step in there.
Would this be for the 2013-2014 tv season?
NBC… if only they developed comedies that were as funny as their business decisions.
Everyone knows how these shows are made, right? You don’t spend money. You crank out as many episodes, as fast as possible, and then BOOM, you’re done. It’s WAY cheaper than the traditional process, so if the ratings tank, they’ll be where current NBC shows are (below Univision) at a fraction of a cost.
But presumably, network viewership wants something that has a little bit of production value, as opposed to sets they start talking down as soon as they’re done putting them up.
Frankly, it’s a bizarre choice, but it might actually work. Look at the pilots they passed on (after spending millions of dollars), actor options they picked up (those aren’t free), pilot RE-SHOOTS (again, money) and then they’re committed to that production cost every week, so the ratings threshold has to be higher. Honestly, they could shoot 50 episodes of Roseanne’s show to spend the money it’ll cost for I AM VICTOR to actually make it to air.
It’s a shitty, shitty way to do things. But it’s a bottom-line business decision. Plus I assume if the show blows up FRIENDS-STYLE, you don’t have to go through (costly) renegotiation with your stars.
Roseanne can have another hit. She hasn’t lost her edge.
10/90 on NBC?
So Jack Donaghy is apparently still trying to “tank” the network?
How and why is this a successful or ratings winning model?
NBC has had tremendously bad luck with single season comedies that lasted maybe 22 episodes and did NOTHING for the brand, revenue or ratings so why do this?
The bar is set so low on FX that they can do this but the winner here whomever is owed syndication royalties because the 100 eps means it’ll go into syndication.
Roseanne Barr is not likable enough to bank on nor is she successful enough.
This makes zero sense…so that means NBC will do it.
It’s a huge risk and Anger Management has shown that the show could freefall anytime after Episode 11. What if it’s episode 20, you’ve got to live with 80 episodes of horrible ratings. I don’t see the upside for networks.
A past her prime star who couldn’t keep a reality show on basic cable, and whose pilot just last season didn’t get picked up. A business model that’s never been tried on a broadcast net. A network that’s 5th place behind Univision. What could possibly go wrong?
One is a funny woman who started out humble and went bat shit crazy. And the other is Roseanne.
Hahaha!!!
LOL. The truth is most definitely stranger than the fiction…
Batshit. Good title too.
It’s a risky deal, but there are safeguards in play. If Barr’s show falls below a certain level, even after it’s done with the initial 10, the network won’t be in that much trouble, if any at all. The same goes for Sheen’s show, and we might be approaching that point.
Why does everyone forget this?
I think this is excellent. Hate Roseanne all you want but the simple fact is that her CC Roast was huge and her eponymous sitcom airs about 30 times per day on a variety of cable networks. Clearly America hasn’t fallen out of of love with her. This show will be a hit, mark my word.
I still think NBC made a tremendous error in passing on Downwardly Mobile, while I have not seen the pilot nor read the script, I am certain that the reunion of Barr and John Goodman would have been a ratings smash which would have sustained if it was well done.
Once again, Anger Management is NOT doing beyond horrible. In fact, it averages over a million viewers live and has a HUGE DVR number (between 59 and 90 percent of its initial telecast). On top if that, it’s a massive hit in Germany, the UK and many other countries. It will do very, very well in syndication. Obviously, if it wasn’t doing well for the bottom line, FX wouldn’t be doing two more shows like it!
Anger Management is a “massive hit” in the UK?
Last week, according to BARB, Anger Management got 134,000 viewers. That’s represents 0.3 in P2+.
Good lord. Can you imagine the damage that would have been done if this had been the deal for “Smash.”
A hot premiere does not (necessarily) a hit show make. Unless it’s an absolute train wreck, the curiosity factor alone should put them over the renewal benchmark — and then what? If the pilot has major, “Downwardly Mobile” suckage, does NBC pray for failure in the ratings? Do they premiere it against the Superbowl to sink it?
And Barr could simply shoot the table reads on her cellphone for the back 90 because who cares if anyone watches at that point except the network. Everyone is already guaranteed a paycheck no matter what.
I could see a 25/75 option being worth pursuing. It would give the creatives a full season to work out the kinks and at least the network would know how a full season panned out. But this?
Cah-raaaazeee.
is the deal really dependent on the ratings from the pilot? That is INSANE. Like you said, there are MANY misleading factors to why a pilot would get a lot of viewers. It should have to wait for at least 3 episodes. At least.
NBC is truly gambling here with a premise that might work on cable but probably will NOT work on broadcast television. Just look at FX with regards to Anger Management as the ratings are free-falling on that show with cast changes galore on that set as a result of the 10-90 formula. NBC needs to back out of this agreement and just stick with the traditional format of it failing after three episodes and then canceling it thereafter and saving money in the process.
I knew it I knew it!
I think the comedy game is about to really change into this direction of the 10/90.
If Universal owns the show than NBC doesn’t have to worry about its ratings they would’ve already sold it to syndication and overseas and make a bunch of money off of it.