1
00:00:08,080 --> 00:00:11,879
Speaker 1: Welcome to another episode of Strictly Business, the podcast in

2
00:00:11,920 --> 00:00:14,360
Speaker 1: which we speak with some of the brightest minds working

3
00:00:14,480 --> 00:00:18,800
Speaker 1: in the media business today. I'm Andrew Wallenstein with Variety.

4
00:00:19,880 --> 00:00:22,760
Speaker 1: This week, we are talking about the Emmy Awards that

5
00:00:22,880 --> 00:00:26,800
Speaker 1: aired just a few days ago and registered record low

6
00:00:26,960 --> 00:00:30,560
Speaker 1: ratings and why that is. Well, we'll get into that

7
00:00:31,120 --> 00:00:41,440
Speaker 1: right after the break, and we are back with the

8
00:00:41,479 --> 00:00:45,680
Speaker 1: Strictly Business podcast. It's just me for this episode, no guest,

9
00:00:45,880 --> 00:00:49,760
Speaker 1: but there's plenty to talk about with regard to Monday's

10
00:00:49,880 --> 00:00:55,440
Speaker 1: Emmy Awards. Why well, let's start with record low ratings

11
00:00:55,480 --> 00:00:59,840
Speaker 1: four point three million viewers to be exact. But before

12
00:00:59,880 --> 00:01:03,240
Speaker 1: you ring the alarm for the TV industry, let's not

13
00:01:03,480 --> 00:01:06,479
Speaker 1: panic just yet. There's a lot of reasons we'll get

14
00:01:06,480 --> 00:01:09,640
Speaker 1: into that. There's actually nothing to panic about for the

15
00:01:09,640 --> 00:01:13,240
Speaker 1: Emmys on its seventy fifth anniversary night. And I'm not

16
00:01:13,319 --> 00:01:16,040
Speaker 1: saying they should be popping bottles over at the TV

17
00:01:16,160 --> 00:01:20,640
Speaker 1: Academy either. Bad ratings are bad ratings, but there's a

18
00:01:20,680 --> 00:01:23,920
Speaker 1: whole bunch of extenuating factors we're going to explore that

19
00:01:24,040 --> 00:01:28,440
Speaker 1: should put Monday's ratings into context. I'm not saying it's

20
00:01:28,440 --> 00:01:31,039
Speaker 1: an aberration. I wouldn't predict we're going to see those

21
00:01:31,080 --> 00:01:34,360
Speaker 1: audience figures bounce back up too high in the coming years,

22
00:01:34,560 --> 00:01:39,959
Speaker 1: but let's hope four point three million is the floor. First,

23
00:01:40,080 --> 00:01:42,240
Speaker 1: let's talk about the show itself. I thought it was

24
00:01:42,240 --> 00:01:45,480
Speaker 1: actually quite good, and most of the reviews I've read agreed.

25
00:01:46,240 --> 00:01:50,520
Speaker 1: Particularly smart was the way the telecast leaned into nostalgia,

26
00:01:51,080 --> 00:01:55,600
Speaker 1: bringing together reunited casts from old TV favorites from Cheers

27
00:01:55,760 --> 00:01:59,840
Speaker 1: to Martin. This was not some poorly produced, sloppy train

28
00:02:00,640 --> 00:02:04,360
Speaker 1: that deserved mass viewer turnout. It wasn't like the TV

29
00:02:04,440 --> 00:02:08,480
Speaker 1: shows that were nominated lack drawing power. Now, there was

30
00:02:08,639 --> 00:02:11,600
Speaker 1: no giant Game of Thrones type hit that lorded high

31
00:02:11,600 --> 00:02:14,839
Speaker 1: above them all, but I'm not even sure that's necessary

32
00:02:14,880 --> 00:02:18,040
Speaker 1: to bring viewers in. The same goes for the choice

33
00:02:18,040 --> 00:02:21,720
Speaker 1: of host, which, let's be honest, Anthony Anderson is not

34
00:02:21,919 --> 00:02:25,480
Speaker 1: exactly an A list name, and there was some share

35
00:02:25,520 --> 00:02:29,160
Speaker 1: of controversy due to some scandals in his past, but

36
00:02:29,639 --> 00:02:33,359
Speaker 1: he was actually quite good, beginning to end. The recurring

37
00:02:33,400 --> 00:02:36,040
Speaker 1: bit with his mother in the audience was comedy gold

38
00:02:36,280 --> 00:02:39,640
Speaker 1: all night long, which is really hard to pull off,

39
00:02:39,720 --> 00:02:43,000
Speaker 1: So let's give him some extra credit. On that one.

40
00:02:43,040 --> 00:02:46,400
Speaker 1: All in all, though nothing intrinsically wrong with the Emmy

41
00:02:46,400 --> 00:02:49,880
Speaker 1: production on that I really don't think there's an argument

42
00:02:49,919 --> 00:02:55,640
Speaker 1: to be made otherwise. So what went wrong, Well, I

43
00:02:55,680 --> 00:03:01,320
Speaker 1: think you could argue practically everything else. For starters, Let's

44
00:03:01,360 --> 00:03:04,520
Speaker 1: not forget that the show was airing three months later

45
00:03:04,600 --> 00:03:08,040
Speaker 1: than it actually does thanks to the writers and actors strikes.

46
00:03:08,880 --> 00:03:11,760
Speaker 1: I was actually wondering whether the ems might actually find

47
00:03:11,840 --> 00:03:15,360
Speaker 1: out that airing outside of September might turn out to

48
00:03:15,400 --> 00:03:19,960
Speaker 1: its advantage, but that was not to be. No to

49
00:03:20,000 --> 00:03:23,080
Speaker 1: the contrary, I think what really hurt was that it

50
00:03:23,200 --> 00:03:27,680
Speaker 1: aired just a week after the Golden Globes aired, and

51
00:03:27,800 --> 00:03:32,720
Speaker 1: on that note, the Emmys felt very repetitive, at least

52
00:03:32,720 --> 00:03:36,880
Speaker 1: the Globes, which disclaimer time this podcast is owned by

53
00:03:37,000 --> 00:03:41,560
Speaker 1: Penske Media, which has an ownership stake in that awards franchise.

54
00:03:42,000 --> 00:03:46,040
Speaker 1: The Globes saw a healthy fifty percent ratings uptick year

55
00:03:46,160 --> 00:03:50,280
Speaker 1: over year. But it's not just that it was one

56
00:03:50,360 --> 00:03:53,360
Speaker 1: award show right after the next, or that they both

57
00:03:53,400 --> 00:03:57,160
Speaker 1: award a lot of the same TV categories, but that

58
00:03:57,240 --> 00:04:00,800
Speaker 1: they awarded many of the same TV shows in the

59
00:04:00,840 --> 00:04:08,559
Speaker 1: same TV categories repeatedly succession Beef the Bear. They dominated.

60
00:04:08,880 --> 00:04:11,800
Speaker 1: I think dominated is actually kind of an understatement really

61
00:04:12,560 --> 00:04:16,160
Speaker 1: in all the key categories. I was sick of all

62
00:04:16,200 --> 00:04:20,359
Speaker 1: these shows winning again and again on Globes night. To

63
00:04:20,400 --> 00:04:24,120
Speaker 1: see it happen yet again on any night was really boring,

64
00:04:24,440 --> 00:04:28,400
Speaker 1: even though these shows were actually quite deserving of their honors.

65
00:04:29,320 --> 00:04:33,080
Speaker 1: But to be honest, Succession's final season has been off

66
00:04:33,120 --> 00:04:36,480
Speaker 1: the air for a very long time. To see it

67
00:04:36,520 --> 00:04:41,280
Speaker 1: take a victory lap yet again after all this time, well,

68
00:04:41,880 --> 00:04:44,520
Speaker 1: let's just say it only added to a feeling of

69
00:04:44,680 --> 00:04:48,640
Speaker 1: staldness for both of those award shows. Not so much

70
00:04:48,640 --> 00:04:52,480
Speaker 1: for The Bear, though, which just came off another critically

71
00:04:52,560 --> 00:04:57,760
Speaker 1: acclaimed season more recently, if anything, with star Jeremy Allen

72
00:04:57,800 --> 00:05:01,279
Speaker 1: White enjoying quite a moment for himself these days, with

73
00:05:01,360 --> 00:05:06,200
Speaker 1: a scantily clad Calvin kleinad and heavy rotation and a

74
00:05:06,320 --> 00:05:10,560
Speaker 1: relatively new movie making the rounds during Award season, that

75
00:05:10,640 --> 00:05:13,800
Speaker 1: show at least gave the Emmys an adjult of some timeliness,

76
00:05:13,839 --> 00:05:17,279
Speaker 1: maybe some hipness. I'm actually curious to see if the

77
00:05:17,320 --> 00:05:20,279
Speaker 1: combination of the Emmys and the Globes or giving both

78
00:05:20,360 --> 00:05:23,800
Speaker 1: The Bear and Beef quite a sampling boost on their

79
00:05:23,839 --> 00:05:30,159
Speaker 1: respecting streaming services right now, But I digress also not

80
00:05:30,360 --> 00:05:34,360
Speaker 1: helping the Emmy ratings on Monday night. Besides well, airing

81
00:05:34,440 --> 00:05:38,360
Speaker 1: on Monday night as opposed to a Sunday was the competition.

82
00:05:39,240 --> 00:05:43,039
Speaker 1: The combination of an NFL wild Card game and coverage

83
00:05:43,120 --> 00:05:48,120
Speaker 1: of the Iowa Caucuses that certainly wasn't gonna help. Even

84
00:05:48,240 --> 00:05:51,520
Speaker 1: just one of those alternatives was bound to wreak havoc

85
00:05:51,560 --> 00:05:55,719
Speaker 1: on the ratings. Two of them together, well that's like

86
00:05:55,760 --> 00:05:58,880
Speaker 1: a death sentence. Which isn't to say there's a great

87
00:05:58,960 --> 00:06:04,279
Speaker 1: deal of over life between awards show watchers, football fans,

88
00:06:04,440 --> 00:06:09,240
Speaker 1: and political junkies, but there's certainly enough to cause problems.

89
00:06:09,960 --> 00:06:12,800
Speaker 1: And let's not forget it's not like the Emmys were

90
00:06:12,839 --> 00:06:17,680
Speaker 1: flying high coming into twenty twenty four. Anyway. To the contrary,

91
00:06:18,160 --> 00:06:21,480
Speaker 1: this franchise has been a fairly steady tail spin for

92
00:06:21,600 --> 00:06:26,120
Speaker 1: quite some time. The last show registered a five point

93
00:06:26,200 --> 00:06:29,960
Speaker 1: nine million, which makes the drop to four point three

94
00:06:30,000 --> 00:06:34,760
Speaker 1: million pretty sizable, but it's sobering to think back to

95
00:06:35,000 --> 00:06:39,480
Speaker 1: like twenty sixteen and twenty seventeen, there was eleven point

96
00:06:39,560 --> 00:06:44,400
Speaker 1: four million total viewers, and it's been ticking down ever since,

97
00:06:44,600 --> 00:06:48,560
Speaker 1: except for a nice recovery in twenty twenty one, when

98
00:06:48,680 --> 00:06:53,200
Speaker 1: after dropping to six point four million in twenty twenty,

99
00:06:53,400 --> 00:06:58,400
Speaker 1: it bounced back up to seven point eight million. Now,

100
00:06:58,480 --> 00:07:02,559
Speaker 1: could we see yet another bounce back in twenty twenty five?

101
00:07:03,520 --> 00:07:06,240
Speaker 1: You know, I would bet so. You're not going to

102
00:07:06,320 --> 00:07:11,280
Speaker 1: see another perfect storm of contributing calamities like twenty twenty

103
00:07:11,280 --> 00:07:16,800
Speaker 1: four delivered anytime soon, you know, I'd say the only

104
00:07:16,840 --> 00:07:19,720
Speaker 1: thing that could really hurt the Emmys is the continuing

105
00:07:19,800 --> 00:07:23,360
Speaker 1: fragmentation of the TV universe, the fact that what we

106
00:07:23,440 --> 00:07:26,360
Speaker 1: called a hit five to ten years ago, the kind

107
00:07:26,400 --> 00:07:29,280
Speaker 1: of show that brought together tens of millions, is becoming

108
00:07:29,560 --> 00:07:34,239
Speaker 1: rarer and rarer. But even that isn't necessarily a death

109
00:07:34,320 --> 00:07:38,240
Speaker 1: warrant for the Emmys, you know, I think there's also

110
00:07:38,440 --> 00:07:42,080
Speaker 1: just a broader issue with award shows in general. Others

111
00:07:42,120 --> 00:07:45,760
Speaker 1: are feeling this as well, The Grammys, the Oscars. They

112
00:07:45,800 --> 00:07:50,920
Speaker 1: all have problems of their own, but in general, award shows,

113
00:07:51,040 --> 00:07:55,720
Speaker 1: they're all facing existential issues. They're all facing calls for

114
00:07:56,080 --> 00:07:59,800
Speaker 1: how do we reinvent the format. The Globes in particular,

115
00:08:00,240 --> 00:08:03,600
Speaker 1: I think, face this notion of after going through a

116
00:08:03,760 --> 00:08:08,960
Speaker 1: real sense of going through a break in the action

117
00:08:09,160 --> 00:08:11,320
Speaker 1: for a year. Are they going to come back? Are

118
00:08:11,320 --> 00:08:14,480
Speaker 1: they going to try something completely different? And people, to

119
00:08:14,520 --> 00:08:17,200
Speaker 1: some degree were disappointed, Well, they came back with a

120
00:08:17,280 --> 00:08:20,640
Speaker 1: very traditional show. There was this notion of, well, why

121
00:08:20,720 --> 00:08:24,480
Speaker 1: not shake things up? A lot of these shows don't

122
00:08:24,520 --> 00:08:27,560
Speaker 1: really end up doing that kind of thing. I would

123
00:08:27,640 --> 00:08:30,920
Speaker 1: be very surprised to see the Emmys do that kind

124
00:08:30,960 --> 00:08:34,200
Speaker 1: of thing, and we have not seen any of these

125
00:08:34,240 --> 00:08:38,720
Speaker 1: franchises really deviate from the tried and true. It takes

126
00:08:39,160 --> 00:08:41,800
Speaker 1: a lot of guts to do that kind of thing.

127
00:08:41,840 --> 00:08:45,640
Speaker 1: When you think about the kinds of academies attached to

128
00:08:45,720 --> 00:08:51,160
Speaker 1: these shows that by and large don't want to really gamble.

129
00:08:51,200 --> 00:08:55,720
Speaker 1: There's a lot of traditionalists attached to these shows. Now,

130
00:08:56,240 --> 00:08:59,160
Speaker 1: if you really did try to shake things up and

131
00:08:59,480 --> 00:09:04,680
Speaker 1: try to very different format, would that necessarily put butts

132
00:09:04,720 --> 00:09:08,160
Speaker 1: in seats or butts and couches? Is more to the point,

133
00:09:09,240 --> 00:09:11,959
Speaker 1: I'm dubious that that is the case. I don't necessarily

134
00:09:12,040 --> 00:09:15,320
Speaker 1: know that that is really going to be the thing

135
00:09:15,720 --> 00:09:19,079
Speaker 1: that would juice the ratings for the Emmys or anyone else.

136
00:09:19,160 --> 00:09:22,680
Speaker 1: I do think that award shows in general, it really

137
00:09:22,720 --> 00:09:26,000
Speaker 1: comes down to some very basic things like people wanting

138
00:09:26,120 --> 00:09:31,160
Speaker 1: to tune in for stars making appearances, and maybe stars

139
00:09:31,200 --> 00:09:33,320
Speaker 1: need to do very different things than just get up

140
00:09:33,320 --> 00:09:38,800
Speaker 1: in front of microphones and make the traditional speeches. It

141
00:09:38,920 --> 00:09:43,400
Speaker 1: also is about the kinds of shows or movies that

142
00:09:43,480 --> 00:09:47,280
Speaker 1: are being awarded. But beyond those kind of traditional things,

143
00:09:47,400 --> 00:09:53,040
Speaker 1: I'm not so sure that shaking up traditional formats, as

144
00:09:53,120 --> 00:09:57,800
Speaker 1: many critics point out, really will amount to much. We're

145
00:09:57,800 --> 00:09:59,400
Speaker 1: going to take a break, but when we get back,

146
00:09:59,440 --> 00:10:02,040
Speaker 1: we're going to talk talk more about the Emmys. So

147
00:10:02,240 --> 00:10:18,000
Speaker 1: stick around and we are back with more on the

148
00:10:18,280 --> 00:10:23,079
Speaker 1: Emmy ratings. Look, wherever there are great shows, there are

149
00:10:23,200 --> 00:10:26,280
Speaker 1: fans that are getting behind them, rooting for them in

150
00:10:26,320 --> 00:10:29,800
Speaker 1: competition with other shows, and the fans that love them.

151
00:10:29,960 --> 00:10:33,439
Speaker 1: Even when the very definition of what you call TV

152
00:10:33,559 --> 00:10:37,439
Speaker 1: shows migrates to places like I don't know, TikTok and

153
00:10:37,520 --> 00:10:40,560
Speaker 1: sure laugh now, But I don't think those days are

154
00:10:40,679 --> 00:10:44,200
Speaker 1: that far away. I think places like the Emmys will

155
00:10:44,200 --> 00:10:50,040
Speaker 1: bring us all together to celebrate what success is. Time

156
00:10:50,080 --> 00:10:53,480
Speaker 1: will tell. But while we're talking about award shows, it's

157
00:10:53,559 --> 00:10:57,520
Speaker 1: never too early to look ahead at what's coming next.

158
00:10:57,600 --> 00:11:01,880
Speaker 1: And next month will bring the Grammy Awards. That's going

159
00:11:01,920 --> 00:11:04,320
Speaker 1: to be the next big one coming to CBS on

160
00:11:04,440 --> 00:11:07,440
Speaker 1: February fourth, And I think that's going to be a

161
00:11:07,559 --> 00:11:11,640
Speaker 1: very different story than the one that we just saw

162
00:11:12,400 --> 00:11:15,840
Speaker 1: for the Emmy Awards, which while that one of course

163
00:11:15,920 --> 00:11:19,960
Speaker 1: hit a record low, the Grammys are coming off a

164
00:11:20,080 --> 00:11:24,120
Speaker 1: great performance in twenty twenty three, their best TV ratings

165
00:11:24,240 --> 00:11:28,120
Speaker 1: in three years. Of course, that of course sets up

166
00:11:28,440 --> 00:11:33,400
Speaker 1: a tough comparison. Can they keep it going and continue

167
00:11:33,400 --> 00:11:37,840
Speaker 1: to rise for yet another year? Well, never too early

168
00:11:37,880 --> 00:11:43,199
Speaker 1: to see the drumbeat start for the award show season,

169
00:11:43,360 --> 00:11:48,200
Speaker 1: and the Grammys have already begun to announce performers that

170
00:11:48,480 --> 00:11:52,280
Speaker 1: are going to be appearing on the Grammy Stage on CBS.

171
00:11:52,720 --> 00:11:58,400
Speaker 1: Billie Eilish, Dualipa, Olivia Rodrigo. You know, right there probably

172
00:11:58,760 --> 00:12:02,839
Speaker 1: three among the top ten biggest artists in the game.

173
00:12:03,400 --> 00:12:08,240
Speaker 1: No Taylor Swift, there, no Beyonce. Never mind, these are

174
00:12:08,360 --> 00:12:11,720
Speaker 1: still real big chart toppers. And when it comes to

175
00:12:11,760 --> 00:12:14,520
Speaker 1: the Grammys, and this is of course a huge advantage

176
00:12:14,559 --> 00:12:18,679
Speaker 1: they have over things like the Emmys or the Oscars.

177
00:12:18,800 --> 00:12:22,440
Speaker 1: It is who performs, not who's necessarily up in the

178
00:12:22,440 --> 00:12:26,720
Speaker 1: biggest categories or who's sitting in the audience. Who performs

179
00:12:27,200 --> 00:12:34,400
Speaker 1: that really dictates audience and so when you have three

180
00:12:34,480 --> 00:12:37,079
Speaker 1: heavy hitters like that that are going to be performing,

181
00:12:37,520 --> 00:12:40,120
Speaker 1: that's going to tell you a lot about who's going

182
00:12:40,200 --> 00:12:42,520
Speaker 1: to be showing up to watch for the sixty six

183
00:12:42,960 --> 00:12:45,760
Speaker 1: and you will Grammy Awards, and we're just getting started.

184
00:12:45,800 --> 00:12:49,840
Speaker 1: You're going to obviously see a lot of other performers

185
00:12:49,880 --> 00:12:52,080
Speaker 1: that are going to be joining that stage. And my

186
00:12:52,120 --> 00:12:56,000
Speaker 1: guess is you're also going to see performers that are

187
00:12:56,040 --> 00:13:00,440
Speaker 1: probably from previous generation. Grammys are always good at getting

188
00:13:00,440 --> 00:13:04,560
Speaker 1: people from not just who are the current chart toppers,

189
00:13:04,559 --> 00:13:09,960
Speaker 1: but also the performers of old and so that is

190
00:13:10,040 --> 00:13:12,480
Speaker 1: really a very good sign for the Grammys. Will it

191
00:13:12,559 --> 00:13:17,800
Speaker 1: be good enough for them to continue a growth story

192
00:13:17,880 --> 00:13:23,000
Speaker 1: that from a ratings perspective has been in a really

193
00:13:23,040 --> 00:13:26,959
Speaker 1: good place for the past three where I should say

194
00:13:28,440 --> 00:13:32,000
Speaker 1: in a good place since twenty twenty three very well

195
00:13:32,040 --> 00:13:34,640
Speaker 1: could be. That number in twenty three, to be more precise,

196
00:13:34,720 --> 00:13:40,040
Speaker 1: was twelve point five million viewers. That was up from

197
00:13:40,600 --> 00:13:44,040
Speaker 1: nine point two in twenty twenty one nine point six

198
00:13:44,240 --> 00:13:48,960
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty two, a very far cry from the

199
00:13:49,000 --> 00:13:52,280
Speaker 1: heights of say twenty sixteen or twenty seventeen, when it

200
00:13:52,320 --> 00:13:56,040
Speaker 1: was as high as twenty five million, twenty six point

201
00:13:56,160 --> 00:14:00,480
Speaker 1: one million. Still, this is really quite a comeback story.

202
00:14:01,080 --> 00:14:03,640
Speaker 1: And that's of course also to speak nothing of the

203
00:14:03,679 --> 00:14:06,200
Speaker 1: demo numbers, what they get in the eighteen to forty

204
00:14:06,280 --> 00:14:09,240
Speaker 1: nine range, where it used to be as high as

205
00:14:09,280 --> 00:14:12,480
Speaker 1: seven point seven million, seven point eight it's now dipped

206
00:14:12,760 --> 00:14:17,800
Speaker 1: below the three million number. But still, the Grammys is

207
00:14:18,040 --> 00:14:23,040
Speaker 1: quite a success story at CBS, and I don't think

208
00:14:23,040 --> 00:14:26,760
Speaker 1: it's necessarily about the nominations there. It really is about

209
00:14:27,040 --> 00:14:30,120
Speaker 1: who shows up on that stage, and so I think

210
00:14:30,160 --> 00:14:35,040
Speaker 1: the Grammys is something that is poised to be a

211
00:14:35,080 --> 00:14:39,160
Speaker 1: big story. The Academy Awards is a little farther out,

212
00:14:39,200 --> 00:14:44,320
Speaker 1: but it is also a similar story there, where after

213
00:14:44,400 --> 00:14:49,600
Speaker 1: bottoming out, say and around twenty twenty one, down to

214
00:14:49,760 --> 00:14:53,520
Speaker 1: ten point four million, after climbing way way high to

215
00:14:53,720 --> 00:14:57,600
Speaker 1: thirty four million north of that in twenty sixteen, it

216
00:14:57,600 --> 00:15:01,760
Speaker 1: has slowly gone back up in twenty two and twenty three,

217
00:15:01,920 --> 00:15:05,880
Speaker 1: going to sixteen point six million eighteen point eight million.

218
00:15:06,240 --> 00:15:09,280
Speaker 1: It's going to be interesting to see if, just like

219
00:15:09,360 --> 00:15:14,920
Speaker 1: with the Grammys, whether that growth story continues. Awards shows

220
00:15:15,080 --> 00:15:18,440
Speaker 1: are a very tough business to be in, but we've

221
00:15:18,480 --> 00:15:22,320
Speaker 1: seen in recent years from the oscars from the Grammys

222
00:15:22,680 --> 00:15:24,920
Speaker 1: that when you do it right, when you put the

223
00:15:25,040 --> 00:15:30,080
Speaker 1: right energy, the right production values, and you make smart choices,

224
00:15:30,720 --> 00:15:33,200
Speaker 1: you can do the right things. And I think v

225
00:15:33,280 --> 00:15:36,360
Speaker 1: Emmys are now at a place where they're going to

226
00:15:36,440 --> 00:15:39,320
Speaker 1: have to make some hard choices, and once they get

227
00:15:39,440 --> 00:15:43,040
Speaker 1: rid of all the mitigating factors that made twenty twenty

228
00:15:43,240 --> 00:15:48,920
Speaker 1: four such a disaster, they will probably find their way

229
00:15:48,960 --> 00:15:51,960
Speaker 1: back to success in twenty twenty five. I know I'm

230
00:15:52,000 --> 00:15:54,760
Speaker 1: certainly rooting for them, and so we'll have to check

231
00:15:54,800 --> 00:15:58,520
Speaker 1: back then. Anyway, that's enough for me this week. We'll

232
00:15:58,520 --> 00:16:01,800
Speaker 1: be back with another episode of Strictly Business next week.

233
00:16:02,000 --> 00:16:08,640
Speaker 1: Thank you for tuning in. M