[jonnathanson]

How is a pilot a waste of time, talent, and money? Pilots are basically the MVPs of TV shows. In many cases it's less wasteful to develop and test a pilot than to develop an entire season of a show, only to have it fail. (Of course, even pilots are imperfect indicators of a show's potential for success, but now we're diving into a deeper rabbit hole and a digression).

Nobody's claiming pilots are cheap, efficient, or anything of the sort. But they do serve a purpose. In the TV development business, it's better to know if a $1M pilot is going to bomb than a $10M+ season is going to bomb.

Netflix is in a unique position to change the way development is traditionally done, however, and over time, if they're successful, they may start to eliminate the need for traditional pilots -- or at least figure out how to make the pilot a more truly MVP, i.e., a lot quicker and less costly. But for the time being, they're paying above-market rates for development and production, and if anything, they're taking bigger risks on production and development than networks do.

It's all part of a gameplan, and I respect that. They're buying a lot of short-term risk in hope of nailing a sustainable, scalable, long-term model for original content. It's basically what HBO had to do back in the day, and what AMC had to do to become what it is today. This is why Netflix doesn't need to buy AMC; Netflix needs to replicate AMC (sort of), and eventually replace AMC (among others).

[TheCondor]

Pilots warp the content, you've got one shot to win or lose it all so there can't be any spacing. Works great for some stories, doesn't work for some others. By the same logic, you shouldn't start a company because 90% will fail, you should start 10 or 15 to try and have a winner or two in your portfolio, right? When your the guy running one of those, don't you want to give it your best and learn from mistakes and not assume that failure rate?

If Netflix can assess the content pre-pilot and then give the creators the money and space to tell their story, they don't need AMC or any of the old media, the creators will come to them. They're now selling DVDs of some of their content, they could potentially even syndicate it back... They have a lot of tools, they just need stories.

[jonnathanson]

"By the same logic, you shouldn't start a company because 90% will fail, you should start 10 or 15 to try and have a winner or two in your portfolio, right?"

That's not at all the logic I was following, but interestingly enough, that's basically the VC portfolio strategy: counting on 1 company to earn 100x all the others combined. Spreading out the investment such that any one, or two, or ten can afford to fail so long as one wins big. Remarkably similar economics, in fact. It's how the TV networks have operated for so long. Networks aren't like founders; they're like VCs. The series creators are like the founders (sort of), the studios are like angel investors or accelerators, and the networks are like VCs.

But that's beside the point. My logic is that a pilot is a lower-cost proof of concept of a series (and even a pilot is extremely expensive and often wasteful). If anything, production companies and studios (not networks) should be making them, and should be finding faster, cheaper, and more minimal ways to do so -- eventually rendering the necessity for a full-fledged pilot obsolete. There is no reason why Lean series development and product/market testing can't happen, especially if a company like Netflix is the buyer.

To a certain extent, this is actually starting to happen. A lot of studios (again, not networks; let's be clear about that distinction) are pre-marketing and pre-releasing proof of concept videos and other materials before pitching them to networks and going down the tradition pilot path.

"If Netflix can assess the content pre-pilot and then give the creators the money and space to tell their story, they don't need AMC or any of the old media, the creators will come to them."

I never said Netflix needs AMC; in fact, I recall saying the exact opposite. Currently, FYI, Netflix is playing the "old media" game in going to, paying for (at a premium), and developing with the "content" marketplace in Hollywood. I don't think enough people quite grok that. As I said, this seems like a necessary step until such time as Netflix commands enough respect and power within that market to rewrite the rules and change the economics of distribution.

[officemonkey]

A pilot for a series with Kevin Spacey and David Fincher attached is a waste of time, talent and money. They are known quantities with proven track records.

You either give them the money to produce the series or you don't.