WEBVTT - Emmy Ratings Low Delivers Awards-Show Gut Check

0:00:08.080 --> 0:00:11.879
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to another episode of Strictly Business, the podcast in

0:00:11.920 --> 0:00:14.360
<v Speaker 1>which we speak with some of the brightest minds working

0:00:14.480 --> 0:00:18.800
<v Speaker 1>in the media business today. I'm Andrew Wallenstein with Variety.

0:00:19.880 --> 0:00:22.760
<v Speaker 1>This week, we are talking about the Emmy Awards that

0:00:22.880 --> 0:00:26.800
<v Speaker 1>aired just a few days ago and registered record low

0:00:26.960 --> 0:00:30.560
<v Speaker 1>ratings and why that is. Well, we'll get into that

0:00:31.120 --> 0:00:41.440
<v Speaker 1>right after the break, and we are back with the

0:00:41.479 --> 0:00:45.680
<v Speaker 1>Strictly Business podcast. It's just me for this episode, no guest,

0:00:45.880 --> 0:00:49.760
<v Speaker 1>but there's plenty to talk about with regard to Monday's

0:00:49.880 --> 0:00:55.440
<v Speaker 1>Emmy Awards. Why well, let's start with record low ratings

0:00:55.480 --> 0:00:59.840
<v Speaker 1>four point three million viewers to be exact. But before

0:00:59.880 --> 0:01:03.240
<v Speaker 1>you ring the alarm for the TV industry, let's not

0:01:03.480 --> 0:01:06.479
<v Speaker 1>panic just yet. There's a lot of reasons we'll get

0:01:06.480 --> 0:01:09.640
<v Speaker 1>into that. There's actually nothing to panic about for the

0:01:09.640 --> 0:01:13.240
<v Speaker 1>Emmys on its seventy fifth anniversary night. And I'm not

0:01:13.319 --> 0:01:16.040
<v Speaker 1>saying they should be popping bottles over at the TV

0:01:16.160 --> 0:01:20.640
<v Speaker 1>Academy either. Bad ratings are bad ratings, but there's a

0:01:20.680 --> 0:01:23.920
<v Speaker 1>whole bunch of extenuating factors we're going to explore that

0:01:24.040 --> 0:01:28.440
<v Speaker 1>should put Monday's ratings into context. I'm not saying it's

0:01:28.440 --> 0:01:31.039
<v Speaker 1>an aberration. I wouldn't predict we're going to see those

0:01:31.080 --> 0:01:34.360
<v Speaker 1>audience figures bounce back up too high in the coming years,

0:01:34.560 --> 0:01:39.959
<v Speaker 1>but let's hope four point three million is the floor. First,

0:01:40.080 --> 0:01:42.240
<v Speaker 1>let's talk about the show itself. I thought it was

0:01:42.240 --> 0:01:45.480
<v Speaker 1>actually quite good, and most of the reviews I've read agreed.

0:01:46.240 --> 0:01:50.520
<v Speaker 1>Particularly smart was the way the telecast leaned into nostalgia,

0:01:51.080 --> 0:01:55.600
<v Speaker 1>bringing together reunited casts from old TV favorites from Cheers

0:01:55.760 --> 0:01:59.840
<v Speaker 1>to Martin. This was not some poorly produced, sloppy train

0:02:00.640 --> 0:02:04.360
<v Speaker 1>that deserved mass viewer turnout. It wasn't like the TV

0:02:04.440 --> 0:02:08.480
<v Speaker 1>shows that were nominated lack drawing power. Now, there was

0:02:08.639 --> 0:02:11.600
<v Speaker 1>no giant Game of Thrones type hit that lorded high

0:02:11.600 --> 0:02:14.839
<v Speaker 1>above them all, but I'm not even sure that's necessary

0:02:14.880 --> 0:02:18.040
<v Speaker 1>to bring viewers in. The same goes for the choice

0:02:18.040 --> 0:02:21.720
<v Speaker 1>of host, which, let's be honest, Anthony Anderson is not

0:02:21.919 --> 0:02:25.480
<v Speaker 1>exactly an A list name, and there was some share

0:02:25.520 --> 0:02:29.160
<v Speaker 1>of controversy due to some scandals in his past, but

0:02:29.639 --> 0:02:33.359
<v Speaker 1>he was actually quite good, beginning to end. The recurring

0:02:33.400 --> 0:02:36.040
<v Speaker 1>bit with his mother in the audience was comedy gold

0:02:36.280 --> 0:02:39.640
<v Speaker 1>all night long, which is really hard to pull off,

0:02:39.720 --> 0:02:43.000
<v Speaker 1>So let's give him some extra credit. On that one.

0:02:43.040 --> 0:02:46.400
<v Speaker 1>All in all, though nothing intrinsically wrong with the Emmy

0:02:46.400 --> 0:02:49.880
<v Speaker 1>production on that I really don't think there's an argument

0:02:49.919 --> 0:02:55.640
<v Speaker 1>to be made otherwise. So what went wrong, Well, I

0:02:55.680 --> 0:03:01.320
<v Speaker 1>think you could argue practically everything else. For starters, Let's

0:03:01.360 --> 0:03:04.520
<v Speaker 1>not forget that the show was airing three months later

0:03:04.600 --> 0:03:08.040
<v Speaker 1>than it actually does thanks to the writers and actors strikes.

0:03:08.880 --> 0:03:11.760
<v Speaker 1>I was actually wondering whether the ems might actually find

0:03:11.840 --> 0:03:15.360
<v Speaker 1>out that airing outside of September might turn out to

0:03:15.400 --> 0:03:19.960
<v Speaker 1>its advantage, but that was not to be. No to

0:03:20.000 --> 0:03:23.080
<v Speaker 1>the contrary, I think what really hurt was that it

0:03:23.200 --> 0:03:27.680
<v Speaker 1>aired just a week after the Golden Globes aired, and

0:03:27.800 --> 0:03:32.720
<v Speaker 1>on that note, the Emmys felt very repetitive, at least

0:03:32.720 --> 0:03:36.880
<v Speaker 1>the Globes, which disclaimer time this podcast is owned by

0:03:37.000 --> 0:03:41.560
<v Speaker 1>Penske Media, which has an ownership stake in that awards franchise.

0:03:42.000 --> 0:03:46.040
<v Speaker 1>The Globes saw a healthy fifty percent ratings uptick year

0:03:46.160 --> 0:03:50.280
<v Speaker 1>over year. But it's not just that it was one

0:03:50.360 --> 0:03:53.360
<v Speaker 1>award show right after the next, or that they both

0:03:53.400 --> 0:03:57.160
<v Speaker 1>award a lot of the same TV categories, but that

0:03:57.240 --> 0:04:00.800
<v Speaker 1>they awarded many of the same TV shows in the

0:04:00.840 --> 0:04:08.559
<v Speaker 1>same TV categories repeatedly succession Beef the Bear. They dominated.

0:04:08.880 --> 0:04:11.800
<v Speaker 1>I think dominated is actually kind of an understatement really

0:04:12.560 --> 0:04:16.160
<v Speaker 1>in all the key categories. I was sick of all

0:04:16.200 --> 0:04:20.359
<v Speaker 1>these shows winning again and again on Globes night. To

0:04:20.400 --> 0:04:24.120
<v Speaker 1>see it happen yet again on any night was really boring,

0:04:24.440 --> 0:04:28.400
<v Speaker 1>even though these shows were actually quite deserving of their honors.

0:04:29.320 --> 0:04:33.080
<v Speaker 1>But to be honest, Succession's final season has been off

0:04:33.120 --> 0:04:36.480
<v Speaker 1>the air for a very long time. To see it

0:04:36.520 --> 0:04:41.280
<v Speaker 1>take a victory lap yet again after all this time, well,

0:04:41.880 --> 0:04:44.520
<v Speaker 1>let's just say it only added to a feeling of

0:04:44.680 --> 0:04:48.640
<v Speaker 1>staldness for both of those award shows. Not so much

0:04:48.640 --> 0:04:52.480
<v Speaker 1>for The Bear, though, which just came off another critically

0:04:52.560 --> 0:04:57.760
<v Speaker 1>acclaimed season more recently, if anything, with star Jeremy Allen

0:04:57.800 --> 0:05:01.279
<v Speaker 1>White enjoying quite a moment for himself these days, with

0:05:01.360 --> 0:05:06.200
<v Speaker 1>a scantily clad Calvin kleinad and heavy rotation and a

0:05:06.320 --> 0:05:10.560
<v Speaker 1>relatively new movie making the rounds during Award season, that

0:05:10.640 --> 0:05:13.800
<v Speaker 1>show at least gave the Emmys an adjult of some timeliness,

0:05:13.839 --> 0:05:17.279
<v Speaker 1>maybe some hipness. I'm actually curious to see if the

0:05:17.320 --> 0:05:20.279
<v Speaker 1>combination of the Emmys and the Globes or giving both

0:05:20.360 --> 0:05:23.800
<v Speaker 1>The Bear and Beef quite a sampling boost on their

0:05:23.839 --> 0:05:30.159
<v Speaker 1>respecting streaming services right now, But I digress also not

0:05:30.360 --> 0:05:34.360
<v Speaker 1>helping the Emmy ratings on Monday night. Besides well, airing

0:05:34.440 --> 0:05:38.360
<v Speaker 1>on Monday night as opposed to a Sunday was the competition.

0:05:39.240 --> 0:05:43.039
<v Speaker 1>The combination of an NFL wild Card game and coverage

0:05:43.120 --> 0:05:48.120
<v Speaker 1>of the Iowa Caucuses that certainly wasn't gonna help. Even

0:05:48.240 --> 0:05:51.520
<v Speaker 1>just one of those alternatives was bound to wreak havoc

0:05:51.560 --> 0:05:55.719
<v Speaker 1>on the ratings. Two of them together, well that's like

0:05:55.760 --> 0:05:58.880
<v Speaker 1>a death sentence. Which isn't to say there's a great

0:05:58.960 --> 0:06:04.279
<v Speaker 1>deal of over life between awards show watchers, football fans,

0:06:04.440 --> 0:06:09.240
<v Speaker 1>and political junkies, but there's certainly enough to cause problems.

0:06:09.960 --> 0:06:12.800
<v Speaker 1>And let's not forget it's not like the Emmys were

0:06:12.839 --> 0:06:17.680
<v Speaker 1>flying high coming into twenty twenty four. Anyway. To the contrary,

0:06:18.160 --> 0:06:21.480
<v Speaker 1>this franchise has been a fairly steady tail spin for

0:06:21.600 --> 0:06:26.120
<v Speaker 1>quite some time. The last show registered a five point

0:06:26.200 --> 0:06:29.960
<v Speaker 1>nine million, which makes the drop to four point three

0:06:30.000 --> 0:06:34.760
<v Speaker 1>million pretty sizable, but it's sobering to think back to

0:06:35.000 --> 0:06:39.480
<v Speaker 1>like twenty sixteen and twenty seventeen, there was eleven point

0:06:39.560 --> 0:06:44.400
<v Speaker 1>four million total viewers, and it's been ticking down ever since,

0:06:44.600 --> 0:06:48.560
<v Speaker 1>except for a nice recovery in twenty twenty one, when

0:06:48.680 --> 0:06:53.200
<v Speaker 1>after dropping to six point four million in twenty twenty,

0:06:53.400 --> 0:06:58.400
<v Speaker 1>it bounced back up to seven point eight million. Now,

0:06:58.480 --> 0:07:02.559
<v Speaker 1>could we see yet another bounce back in twenty twenty five?

0:07:03.520 --> 0:07:06.240
<v Speaker 1>You know, I would bet so. You're not going to

0:07:06.320 --> 0:07:11.280
<v Speaker 1>see another perfect storm of contributing calamities like twenty twenty

0:07:11.280 --> 0:07:16.800
<v Speaker 1>four delivered anytime soon, you know, I'd say the only

0:07:16.840 --> 0:07:19.720
<v Speaker 1>thing that could really hurt the Emmys is the continuing

0:07:19.800 --> 0:07:23.360
<v Speaker 1>fragmentation of the TV universe, the fact that what we

0:07:23.440 --> 0:07:26.360
<v Speaker 1>called a hit five to ten years ago, the kind

0:07:26.400 --> 0:07:29.280
<v Speaker 1>of show that brought together tens of millions, is becoming

0:07:29.560 --> 0:07:34.239
<v Speaker 1>rarer and rarer. But even that isn't necessarily a death

0:07:34.320 --> 0:07:38.240
<v Speaker 1>warrant for the Emmys, you know, I think there's also

0:07:38.440 --> 0:07:42.080
<v Speaker 1>just a broader issue with award shows in general. Others

0:07:42.120 --> 0:07:45.760
<v Speaker 1>are feeling this as well, The Grammys, the Oscars. They

0:07:45.800 --> 0:07:50.920
<v Speaker 1>all have problems of their own, but in general, award shows,

0:07:51.040 --> 0:07:55.720
<v Speaker 1>they're all facing existential issues. They're all facing calls for

0:07:56.080 --> 0:07:59.800
<v Speaker 1>how do we reinvent the format. The Globes in particular,

0:08:00.240 --> 0:08:03.600
<v Speaker 1>I think, face this notion of after going through a

0:08:03.760 --> 0:08:08.960
<v Speaker 1>real sense of going through a break in the action

0:08:09.160 --> 0:08:11.320
<v Speaker 1>for a year. Are they going to come back? Are

0:08:11.320 --> 0:08:14.480
<v Speaker 1>they going to try something completely different? And people, to

0:08:14.520 --> 0:08:17.200
<v Speaker 1>some degree were disappointed, Well, they came back with a

0:08:17.280 --> 0:08:20.640
<v Speaker 1>very traditional show. There was this notion of, well, why

0:08:20.720 --> 0:08:24.480
<v Speaker 1>not shake things up? A lot of these shows don't

0:08:24.520 --> 0:08:27.560
<v Speaker 1>really end up doing that kind of thing. I would

0:08:27.640 --> 0:08:30.920
<v Speaker 1>be very surprised to see the Emmys do that kind

0:08:30.960 --> 0:08:34.200
<v Speaker 1>of thing, and we have not seen any of these

0:08:34.240 --> 0:08:38.720
<v Speaker 1>franchises really deviate from the tried and true. It takes

0:08:39.160 --> 0:08:41.800
<v Speaker 1>a lot of guts to do that kind of thing.

0:08:41.840 --> 0:08:45.640
<v Speaker 1>When you think about the kinds of academies attached to

0:08:45.720 --> 0:08:51.160
<v Speaker 1>these shows that by and large don't want to really gamble.

0:08:51.200 --> 0:08:55.720
<v Speaker 1>There's a lot of traditionalists attached to these shows. Now,

0:08:56.240 --> 0:08:59.160
<v Speaker 1>if you really did try to shake things up and

0:08:59.480 --> 0:09:04.680
<v Speaker 1>try to very different format, would that necessarily put butts

0:09:04.720 --> 0:09:08.160
<v Speaker 1>in seats or butts and couches? Is more to the point,

0:09:09.240 --> 0:09:11.959
<v Speaker 1>I'm dubious that that is the case. I don't necessarily

0:09:12.040 --> 0:09:15.320
<v Speaker 1>know that that is really going to be the thing

0:09:15.720 --> 0:09:19.079
<v Speaker 1>that would juice the ratings for the Emmys or anyone else.

0:09:19.160 --> 0:09:22.680
<v Speaker 1>I do think that award shows in general, it really

0:09:22.720 --> 0:09:26.000
<v Speaker 1>comes down to some very basic things like people wanting

0:09:26.120 --> 0:09:31.160
<v Speaker 1>to tune in for stars making appearances, and maybe stars

0:09:31.200 --> 0:09:33.320
<v Speaker 1>need to do very different things than just get up

0:09:33.320 --> 0:09:38.800
<v Speaker 1>in front of microphones and make the traditional speeches. It

0:09:38.920 --> 0:09:43.400
<v Speaker 1>also is about the kinds of shows or movies that

0:09:43.480 --> 0:09:47.280
<v Speaker 1>are being awarded. But beyond those kind of traditional things,

0:09:47.400 --> 0:09:53.040
<v Speaker 1>I'm not so sure that shaking up traditional formats, as

0:09:53.120 --> 0:09:57.800
<v Speaker 1>many critics point out, really will amount to much. We're

0:09:57.800 --> 0:09:59.400
<v Speaker 1>going to take a break, but when we get back,

0:09:59.440 --> 0:10:02.040
<v Speaker 1>we're going to talk talk more about the Emmys. So

0:10:02.240 --> 0:10:18.000
<v Speaker 1>stick around and we are back with more on the

0:10:18.280 --> 0:10:23.079
<v Speaker 1>Emmy ratings. Look, wherever there are great shows, there are

0:10:23.200 --> 0:10:26.280
<v Speaker 1>fans that are getting behind them, rooting for them in

0:10:26.320 --> 0:10:29.800
<v Speaker 1>competition with other shows, and the fans that love them.

0:10:29.960 --> 0:10:33.439
<v Speaker 1>Even when the very definition of what you call TV

0:10:33.559 --> 0:10:37.439
<v Speaker 1>shows migrates to places like I don't know, TikTok and

0:10:37.520 --> 0:10:40.560
<v Speaker 1>sure laugh now, But I don't think those days are

0:10:40.679 --> 0:10:44.200
<v Speaker 1>that far away. I think places like the Emmys will

0:10:44.200 --> 0:10:50.040
<v Speaker 1>bring us all together to celebrate what success is. Time

0:10:50.080 --> 0:10:53.480
<v Speaker 1>will tell. But while we're talking about award shows, it's

0:10:53.559 --> 0:10:57.520
<v Speaker 1>never too early to look ahead at what's coming next.

0:10:57.600 --> 0:11:01.880
<v Speaker 1>And next month will bring the Grammy Awards. That's going

0:11:01.920 --> 0:11:04.320
<v Speaker 1>to be the next big one coming to CBS on

0:11:04.440 --> 0:11:07.440
<v Speaker 1>February fourth, And I think that's going to be a

0:11:07.559 --> 0:11:11.640
<v Speaker 1>very different story than the one that we just saw

0:11:12.400 --> 0:11:15.840
<v Speaker 1>for the Emmy Awards, which while that one of course

0:11:15.920 --> 0:11:19.960
<v Speaker 1>hit a record low, the Grammys are coming off a

0:11:20.080 --> 0:11:24.120
<v Speaker 1>great performance in twenty twenty three, their best TV ratings

0:11:24.240 --> 0:11:28.120
<v Speaker 1>in three years. Of course, that of course sets up

0:11:28.440 --> 0:11:33.400
<v Speaker 1>a tough comparison. Can they keep it going and continue

0:11:33.400 --> 0:11:37.840
<v Speaker 1>to rise for yet another year? Well, never too early

0:11:37.880 --> 0:11:43.199
<v Speaker 1>to see the drumbeat start for the award show season,

0:11:43.360 --> 0:11:48.200
<v Speaker 1>and the Grammys have already begun to announce performers that

0:11:48.480 --> 0:11:52.280
<v Speaker 1>are going to be appearing on the Grammy Stage on CBS.

0:11:52.720 --> 0:11:58.400
<v Speaker 1>Billie Eilish, Dualipa, Olivia Rodrigo. You know, right there probably

0:11:58.760 --> 0:12:02.839
<v Speaker 1>three among the top ten biggest artists in the game.

0:12:03.400 --> 0:12:08.240
<v Speaker 1>No Taylor Swift, there, no Beyonce. Never mind, these are

0:12:08.360 --> 0:12:11.720
<v Speaker 1>still real big chart toppers. And when it comes to

0:12:11.760 --> 0:12:14.520
<v Speaker 1>the Grammys, and this is of course a huge advantage

0:12:14.559 --> 0:12:18.679
<v Speaker 1>they have over things like the Emmys or the Oscars.

0:12:18.800 --> 0:12:22.440
<v Speaker 1>It is who performs, not who's necessarily up in the

0:12:22.440 --> 0:12:26.720
<v Speaker 1>biggest categories or who's sitting in the audience. Who performs

0:12:27.200 --> 0:12:34.400
<v Speaker 1>that really dictates audience and so when you have three

0:12:34.480 --> 0:12:37.079
<v Speaker 1>heavy hitters like that that are going to be performing,

0:12:37.520 --> 0:12:40.120
<v Speaker 1>that's going to tell you a lot about who's going

0:12:40.200 --> 0:12:42.520
<v Speaker 1>to be showing up to watch for the sixty six

0:12:42.960 --> 0:12:45.760
<v Speaker 1>and you will Grammy Awards, and we're just getting started.

0:12:45.800 --> 0:12:49.840
<v Speaker 1>You're going to obviously see a lot of other performers

0:12:49.880 --> 0:12:52.080
<v Speaker 1>that are going to be joining that stage. And my

0:12:52.120 --> 0:12:56.000
<v Speaker 1>guess is you're also going to see performers that are

0:12:56.040 --> 0:13:00.440
<v Speaker 1>probably from previous generation. Grammys are always good at getting

0:13:00.440 --> 0:13:04.560
<v Speaker 1>people from not just who are the current chart toppers,

0:13:04.559 --> 0:13:09.960
<v Speaker 1>but also the performers of old and so that is

0:13:10.040 --> 0:13:12.480
<v Speaker 1>really a very good sign for the Grammys. Will it

0:13:12.559 --> 0:13:17.800
<v Speaker 1>be good enough for them to continue a growth story

0:13:17.880 --> 0:13:23.000
<v Speaker 1>that from a ratings perspective has been in a really

0:13:23.040 --> 0:13:26.959
<v Speaker 1>good place for the past three where I should say

0:13:28.440 --> 0:13:32.000
<v Speaker 1>in a good place since twenty twenty three very well

0:13:32.040 --> 0:13:34.640
<v Speaker 1>could be. That number in twenty three, to be more precise,

0:13:34.720 --> 0:13:40.040
<v Speaker 1>was twelve point five million viewers. That was up from

0:13:40.600 --> 0:13:44.040
<v Speaker 1>nine point two in twenty twenty one nine point six

0:13:44.240 --> 0:13:48.960
<v Speaker 1>in twenty twenty two, a very far cry from the

0:13:49.000 --> 0:13:52.280
<v Speaker 1>heights of say twenty sixteen or twenty seventeen, when it

0:13:52.320 --> 0:13:56.040
<v Speaker 1>was as high as twenty five million, twenty six point

0:13:56.160 --> 0:14:00.480
<v Speaker 1>one million. Still, this is really quite a comeback story.

0:14:01.080 --> 0:14:03.640
<v Speaker 1>And that's of course also to speak nothing of the

0:14:03.679 --> 0:14:06.200
<v Speaker 1>demo numbers, what they get in the eighteen to forty

0:14:06.280 --> 0:14:09.240
<v Speaker 1>nine range, where it used to be as high as

0:14:09.280 --> 0:14:12.480
<v Speaker 1>seven point seven million, seven point eight it's now dipped

0:14:12.760 --> 0:14:17.800
<v Speaker 1>below the three million number. But still, the Grammys is

0:14:18.040 --> 0:14:23.040
<v Speaker 1>quite a success story at CBS, and I don't think

0:14:23.040 --> 0:14:26.760
<v Speaker 1>it's necessarily about the nominations there. It really is about

0:14:27.040 --> 0:14:30.120
<v Speaker 1>who shows up on that stage, and so I think

0:14:30.160 --> 0:14:35.040
<v Speaker 1>the Grammys is something that is poised to be a

0:14:35.080 --> 0:14:39.160
<v Speaker 1>big story. The Academy Awards is a little farther out,

0:14:39.200 --> 0:14:44.320
<v Speaker 1>but it is also a similar story there, where after

0:14:44.400 --> 0:14:49.600
<v Speaker 1>bottoming out, say and around twenty twenty one, down to

0:14:49.760 --> 0:14:53.520
<v Speaker 1>ten point four million, after climbing way way high to

0:14:53.720 --> 0:14:57.600
<v Speaker 1>thirty four million north of that in twenty sixteen, it

0:14:57.600 --> 0:15:01.760
<v Speaker 1>has slowly gone back up in twenty two and twenty three,

0:15:01.920 --> 0:15:05.880
<v Speaker 1>going to sixteen point six million eighteen point eight million.

0:15:06.240 --> 0:15:09.280
<v Speaker 1>It's going to be interesting to see if, just like

0:15:09.360 --> 0:15:14.920
<v Speaker 1>with the Grammys, whether that growth story continues. Awards shows

0:15:15.080 --> 0:15:18.440
<v Speaker 1>are a very tough business to be in, but we've

0:15:18.480 --> 0:15:22.320
<v Speaker 1>seen in recent years from the oscars from the Grammys

0:15:22.680 --> 0:15:24.920
<v Speaker 1>that when you do it right, when you put the

0:15:25.040 --> 0:15:30.080
<v Speaker 1>right energy, the right production values, and you make smart choices,

0:15:30.720 --> 0:15:33.200
<v Speaker 1>you can do the right things. And I think v

0:15:33.280 --> 0:15:36.360
<v Speaker 1>Emmys are now at a place where they're going to

0:15:36.440 --> 0:15:39.320
<v Speaker 1>have to make some hard choices, and once they get

0:15:39.440 --> 0:15:43.040
<v Speaker 1>rid of all the mitigating factors that made twenty twenty

0:15:43.240 --> 0:15:48.920
<v Speaker 1>four such a disaster, they will probably find their way

0:15:48.960 --> 0:15:51.960
<v Speaker 1>back to success in twenty twenty five. I know I'm

0:15:52.000 --> 0:15:54.760
<v Speaker 1>certainly rooting for them, and so we'll have to check

0:15:54.800 --> 0:15:58.520
<v Speaker 1>back then. Anyway, that's enough for me this week. We'll

0:15:58.520 --> 0:16:01.800
<v Speaker 1>be back with another episode of Strictly Business next week.

0:16:02.000 --> 0:16:08.640
<v Speaker 1>Thank you for tuning in. M