Originally Posted by little-monster:
“In some way i do not agree with AMC on that. Critical acclaim and emmys are really not all that. It's nice to have them, but it's the ratings that do matter. It's the ratings that earn a network money.”
AMC is playing the reputation game. It looks to me like their plan is to become the HBO of basic cable, somewhere people will automatically give any show a shot, because most of the time it's very high quality. Financially, it's an incredibly risky strategy, and it has already backfired on AMC, when auteur Mad Men showrunner Matt Weiner start demanding insane amounts of money (reportedly he was being paid nearly $10m per season during later seasons), in addition to a fairly big per episode budget
Matt Weiner's demands are supposedly behind AMC slashing The Walking Dead's budget (AMC claims $250,000 was cut, The Hollywood Reporter says $650,000 but does also report an AMC insider saying it's number is inflated), AMC pocketing tax credits from TWD, potentially these budget cuts led to Frank Darabont being fired, and the inflated cost of Mad Men led to AMC trying to negotiate a smaller episode number for Breaking Bad, which pissed Sony off and led to them trying to sell the show to another network.
For reference, the reason TWD got screwed hardest by AMC, is because it's the only show they own and have any control over. Mad Men and Breaking Bad are owned by other companies (Lionsgate and Sony respectively) who can and will sell to another network if they don't get what they want. AMC have solved this problem though, by simply commissioning more shows from themselves (when Mad Men ends, only Hell on Wheels and Better Call Saul will be owned by other studios).
