# Conan has a really wild way to get back



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

He just revealed what he's going to do on the remaining shows...



Spoiler



Try comedy bits and new characters that aren't really all that funny, but are horribly expensive.

He just introduced a new "Tonight Show character"...

A car I've never heard of before, apparently terribly expensive, with mouse ears and mouse whiskers attached.

Its themesong was the 'original master recording of the Rolling Stones doing "Satisfaction"'.

"Does that add anything to this bit?" Conan asked? "No. It does make it cost 1.5 million, tho', and NBC has to pay for it all."

The bit lasted maybe sixty seconds.

As mentioned, he plans to do this for the rest of the week.

They must have already signed the papers, so now he doesn't care and can take revenge.


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

I liked when he said they didn't have any babies that had been born to staff members during his tenure on The Tonight Show so he showed all the hamsters that had been born instead.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

One of the funnier bits was him talking about getting the anatomically correct dolls and showing his kids where NBC had touched him.


I'd love to confirm what Adam Sandler was calling NBC though


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

Is it safe to assume this thread will contain spoilers?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

gastrof said:


> A car I've never heard of before, apparently terribly expensive, with mouse ears and mouse whiskers attached.


A Bugatti.

I think the Bugatti Veyron


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

terpfan1980 said:


> One of the funnier bits was him talking about getting the anatomically correct dolls and showing his kids where NBC had touched him.
> 
> I'd love to confirm what Adam Sandler was calling NBC though


See you next Tuesday.


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

Kablemodem said:


> Is it safe to assume this thread will contain spoilers?


Thanks for the reminder. Title and content adjusted.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

Spoilers? For a talk show?

...Keep in mind that whatever Conan does on the show wouldn't air if NBC didn't want it to. So a bit that costs 1.5 million, if NBC didn't want that to air, it wouldn't.


----------



## Alecp (Dec 10, 2001)

Yeah - I doubt that he has an unlimited budget to do whatever the hell he wants. But it does make for a funny (and uplifting) bit.


----------



## pcguru83 (Jan 18, 2005)

Color be a bit surprised. The Bugatti bit was cut from Hulu!


----------



## dilbert27 (Dec 1, 2006)

Well now that it is offical that Conan's last tonight show is Friday lets see how wild he gets in his final 2 shows.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TV_LENO_OBRIEN?SITE=MAFAL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

Looks like they signed the deal and will announce it this morning (Thursday).


----------



## NJChris (May 11, 2001)

Sounds kind of childish, IMHO.


----------



## Enrique (May 15, 2006)

NJChris said:


> Sounds kind of childish, IMHO.


Which is Conan(Which is why I think he would have never been a success one way or the other on the Tonight Show).


----------



## NJChris (May 11, 2001)

Enrique said:


> Which is Conan(Which is why I think he would have never been a success on way or the other on the Tonight Show).


Maybe it's why I never thought he was funny. He's like a wooden pinocchio trying to be funny.


----------



## FilmCritic3000 (Oct 29, 2004)

NJChris said:


> Maybe it's why I never thought he was funny. He's like a wooden pinocchio trying to be funny.


I'll take that over Leno's Nerf comedy - safe, bland, mediocre, and as dull as an old butter knife.


----------



## Sabich (Aug 3, 2006)

Leno's a comic genius though. He reads typos from newspapers & tries to make people off the street look like idiots. 
Doesn't get any funnier than that. It's so great that he'll be able to bring all that class back to The Tonight Show.


----------



## NJChris (May 11, 2001)

Sabich said:


> Leno's a comic genius though. He reads typos from newspapers & tries to make people off the street look like idiots.
> Doesn't get any funnier than that. It's so great that he'll be able to bring all that class back to The Tonight Show.


 I'd rather do without either one.

Leno I think can be a bit mean to his guests. Conan is just a wannabe.

I'd rather them prop Johnny up behind the desk.......


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

pcguru83 said:


> Color be a bit surprised. The Bugatti bit was cut from Hulu!


Part of the $1.5M cost is the rights to play the song on the 'net. NBC must have stepped in and killed it on Hulu to stop that money drain, but you can see it here (for now):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/21/conan-blowing-nbcs-money_n_430883.html

How much you wanna bet that the Stones told them they want 75 cents per play?


----------



## dilbert27 (Dec 1, 2006)

NJChris said:


> I'd rather do without either one.
> 
> Leno I think can be a bit mean to his guests. Conan is just a wannabe.
> 
> I'd rather them prop Johnny up behind the desk.......


Well while your at it might as well prop Ed up on the couch also.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

dilbert27 said:


> Well while your at it might as well prop Ed up on the couch also.


This isn't Weeknights at Bernie's. This is The Tonight Show.

The two of you aren't the first people I've heard say that they should just put old reruns of Johnny on after the news. The ratings for NBC can't get any worse. Perhaps they could use that tech that James Cameron used for avatar and have a virtual Johnny Carson complete with his voice (taken from voice samples, you can probably recreate a person's voice with something like AutoTune.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

Sirius Black said:


> Spoilers? For a talk show?


Well, when it aired last night, several hours after this thread, I already knew everything that was going to happen. I will feel free to ignore all spoiler rules going forward if people don't really care about them.


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

I don't care about spoilers for this kind of stuff...


Oh I finally saw the video....that was some funny sheet.


----------



## tiams (Apr 19, 2004)

Conan asked people to donate to Ben Stiller's charity for Haiti and then follows up by announcing he just blew $1.5 million of NBC's money to dress a car up in mouse ears. Disgusting that money is wasted like that for entertainment.


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

NJChris said:


> Sounds kind of childish, IMHO.


He wants to get back at Zucker for having him arrested back in the '80s at Harvard.


----------



## IJustLikeTivo (Oct 3, 2001)

tiams said:


> Conan asked people to donate to Ben Stiller's charity for Haiti and then follows up by announcing he just blew $1.5 million of NBC's money to dress a car up in mouse ears. Disgusting that money is wasted like that for entertainment.


Beyond stupid and it will be remembered when he looks for a new gig.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

tiams said:


> Conan asked people to donate to Ben Stiller's charity for Haiti and then follows up by announcing he just blew $1.5 million of NBC's money to dress a car up in mouse ears. Disgusting that money is wasted like that for entertainment.


The bit was a joke. You DO know that The Tonight Show is a comedy show, right?


----------



## 5thcrewman (Sep 23, 2003)

Doesn't NBC own that car? It's their 'character.' 
What a chance to auction it off to raise money for relief efforts. 
I bet Jey would bid on it.
It's only a waste if the owner of the car (NBC) doesn't do something.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

5thcrewman said:


> Doesn't NBC own that car? It's their 'character.'
> What a chance to auction it off to raise money for relief efforts.
> I bet Jey would bid on it.
> It's only a waste if the owner of the car (NBC) doesn't do something.


I kinda doubt they bought the car. A Buggati Veyron costs more than $1.5M. They might have leased it or got a demo.

Eh. It's $1,550,000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugatti_Veyron

Maybe it's what Conan was going for, but I still think the $1.5M is almost entirely the music rights.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I can't believe we're really discussing the cost. It was a comedy bit. Do you really think that just because they said it cost $1.5 million that it really did cost $1.5 million? They didn't wreck the car. They didn't damage it in any way by putting the mouse ears and whiskers on it. They played "Satisfaction" once on the air and then pulled it from the Hulu clips. I'd be surprised if that bit cost more than $25,000.


----------



## xuxa (Oct 8, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I can't believe we're really discussing the cost. It was a comedy bit. Do you really think that just because they said it cost $1.5 million that it really did cost $1.5 million? They didn't wreck the car. They didn't damage it in any way by putting the mouse ears and whiskers on it. They played "Satisfaction" once on the air and then pulled it from the Hulu clips. I'd be surprised if that bit cost more than $25,000.


Without a doubt the music rights cost much much much more than $25,000 even for what has already been played. Closer to the 1.5 million.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

xuxa said:


> Without a doubt the music rights cost much much much more than $25,000 even for what has already been played. Closer to the 1.5 million.


How do you figure? Why would it cost NBC $1 million to play the song one time on one show? Any of the re-airings you're seeing on the internet are unauthorized and NBC won't have to pay for those.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> How do you figure? Why would it cost NBC $1 million to play the song one time on one show? Any of the re-airings you're seeing on the internet are unauthorized and NBC won't have to pay for those.


The reairings on Hulu were authorized.


----------



## TheMerk (Feb 26, 2001)

netringer said:


> The reairings on Hulu were authorized.


NBC cut the Bugatti bit from the Hulu rebroadcast. Go ahead and look, there is an awkward fade to black after the hamster bit, then a commercial break, then the intro of Sandler.


----------



## EscapeGoat (Oct 12, 2008)

xuxa said:


> Without a doubt the music rights cost much much much more than $25,000 even for what has already been played. Closer to the 1.5 million.


Even geriatric greedheads like the Rolling Stones don't make a million dollars in royalties from one song used on one show.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

pcguru83 said:


> Color be a bit surprised. The Bugatti bit was cut from Hulu!


Not surprising at all. The fact that the background music for the bit was a recording of the Rolling Stones singing Satisfaction made that clip significantly more expensive to stream on the internet. Conan even said that playing that song was going to make the web airing more expensive.

If you look at the SNL episodes on Hulu, you'll notice that they will usually not contain the musical performances, and any sketch or bit that involves music that require royalties will usually be cut as well. For instance, in the SNL episode hosted by Joseph Gordon Levitt, they cut off his monologe from the point where the song and dance number started. That was to save money on the royalaties that they would have had to pay if the song was released on the web.


----------



## xuxa (Oct 8, 2001)

EscapeGoat said:


> Even geriatric greedheads like the Rolling Stones don't make a million dollars in royalties from one song used on one show.


not millions of dollars but in the 6 figures.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

xuxa said:


> not millions of dollars but in the 6 figures.


That's possible. My previous estimate of $25k might be low. But the point I was trying to make was that it didn't really cost anywhere near $1.5 million.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

IJustLikeTivo said:


> Beyond stupid and it will be remembered when he looks for a new gig.


A little bit green in your feelings toward Conan? This is at least two threads where you've basically pooh-poohed the guy and/or that he'll be back on TV soon or have any significant following when he does.

Are you willing to make a large public wager on that?


----------



## xuxa (Oct 8, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> That's possible. My previous estimate of $25k might be low. But the point I was trying to make was that it didn't really cost anywhere near $1.5 million.


If they hadn't cut it from the online version and future reruns it might have approached in the upper 6 figures. By cutting it, they probably limited it to <500K. The Stones also aren't the ones getting the money either, it is ABKCO who own the rights to that song. You would be surprised how much sync licenses really are. Just someone doing a cover of that song would most liekly be more expensive than the 25K, using the master recording is very pricey.


----------



## Marco (Sep 19, 2000)

terpfan1980 said:


> A little bit green in your feelings toward Conan? This is at least two threads where you've basically pooh-poohed the guy and/or that he'll be back on TV soon or have any significant following when he does.


Don't overreact. IJLT dislikes almost 100% of people in the public eye.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

Marco said:


> Don't overreact. IJLT dislikes almost 100% of people in the public eye.


I'm just trying to figure out what close family member of IJLT was in some way personally harmed by Conan or any of his act.


----------



## TiVoJedi (Mar 1, 2002)

Wasn't that song sung once on American Idol? So FOX paid a large sum of money to use it?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

terpfan1980 said:


> A little bit green in your feelings toward Conan? This is at least two threads where you've basically pooh-poohed the guy and/or that he'll be back on TV soon or have any significant following when he does.
> 
> Are you willing to make a large public wager on that?


Is this different from the O'Brien fans vilifying Leno?


----------



## TheMerk (Feb 26, 2001)

TiVoJedi said:


> Wasn't that song sung once on American Idol? So FOX paid a large sum of money to use it?


I don't know how much Fox pays for the right to have the songs performed on American Idol, but they would certainly be paying for _performance rights_.

I think the bit on Conan last night would have fallen under _retransmission rights_.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

xuxa said:


> If they hadn't cut it from the online version and future reruns it might have approached in the upper 6 figures. By cutting it, they probably limited it to <500K. The Stones also aren't the ones getting the money either, it is ABKCO who own the rights to that song. You would be surprised how much sync licenses really are. Just someone doing a cover of that song would most liekly be more expensive than the 25K, using the master recording is very pricey.


Since you clearly understand this better than I do, help me understand why it would cost NBC $500k to play a Stones song on The Tonight Show. What's the difference between that and a classic rock radio station playing that song during drive time? Surely a radio station isn't paying that much to play the song one time. Is the only difference the number of viewers/listeners? Is there a different scale for songs played on the radio vs. played on a TV show?

Also, what determines that Song A costs $10 to air and Song B costs $10,000 to air? Is it just the amount that the individual license holder chooses to charge? If so, could the rights holder choose to waive/reduce the fee for any specific use? Or is there some kind of standardized scale that says a platinum record costs X, a gold record costs Y, etc.?


----------



## xuxa (Oct 8, 2001)

TheMerk said:


> I don't know how much Fox pays for the right to have the songs performed on American Idol, but they would certainly be paying for _performance rights_.
> 
> I think the bit on Conan last night would have fallen under _retransmission rights_.


it is typically called a sync license


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

TiVoJedi said:


> Wasn't that song sung once on American Idol? So FOX paid a large sum of money to use it?


FOX certainly paid some amount of money to clear the rights, yes, but they paid a lot less for the rights to air someone else singing the song than they would have had to pay for the rights to air the Rolling Stones' recording of it.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> What's the difference between that and a classic rock radio station playing that song during drive time? Surely a radio station isn't paying that much to play the song one time. Is the only difference the number of viewers/listeners? *Is there a different scale for songs played on the radio vs. played on a TV show? *


Yes.



> Also, what determines that Song A costs $10 to air and Song B costs $10,000 to air? *Is it just the amount that the individual license holder chooses to charge? If so, could the rights holder choose to waive/reduce the fee for any specific use? * Or is there some kind of standardized scale that says a platinum record costs X, a gold record costs Y, etc.?


Yes and yes.

Most applications of a copyrighted work require explicit permission of the rightsholder and the rightsholder gets to set the price as arbitrarily as he wants.

One of the few instances where the rightsholder is compelled to accept a standard scale royalty amount and he can not object or demand a different price is when some other artist releases a cover of the original work. So, lets say I got out my casio keyboard and recorded myself playing and singing _Satisfaction_, I could go ahead and sell that recording without getting permission from whomever owns that song (usually the person who wrote it, at first anyway). I _would_ however have to pay the rightsholder a royalty of some small amount per unit distributed, and that amount is determined by a scale maintained by the US Copyright Office. If memory serves, it's something like 15 cents per unit for a typical song.

One of the companies that exist mostly just for protecting copyrights and collecting royalties is the Harry Fox Agency. Their website harryfox.com will probably have more detailed information on this subject.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> The bit was a joke. You DO know that The Tonight Show is a comedy show, right?


Next you're gonna tell me that Jimmy Kimmel DIDN'T f**k Ben Affleck...?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

MickeS said:


> Next you're gonna tell me that Jimmy Kimmel DIDN'T f**k Ben Affleck...?


Probably not before they made that video, but I think all bets were off at the wrap party.


----------



## xuxa (Oct 8, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Since you clearly understand this better than I do, help me understand why it would cost NBC $500k to play a Stones song on The Tonight Show. What's the difference between that and a classic rock radio station playing that song during drive time? Surely a radio station isn't paying that much to play the song one time. Is the only difference the number of viewers/listeners? Is there a different scale for songs played on the radio vs. played on a TV show?


It is based on many things but primarily the size of the audience, and media. Radio pays royalties to BMI/ASCAP. Same goes for restaurant, retail establishments and Muzak etc. Radio royalties are less as the song is played without any video images, no 'sync'. When played with video images there is a 'sync' and that costs a good deal more.

MTV is an interesting example, they used to play popular current music in all their dramatic shows (Real World) because the had a waiver since they were also playing the record labels music videos, it was a good advertisement for the labels. However when the dramatic shows began to outnumber the videos played, the labels ceased to allow MTV to use the music for free anymore and now none of the dramatic shows play any popular music. They only use new and up and coming bands only.



> Also, what determines that Song A costs $10 to air and Song B costs $10,000 to air? Is it just the amount that the individual license holder chooses to charge? If so, could the rights holder choose to waive/reduce the fee for any specific use? Or is there some kind of standardized scale that says a platinum record costs X, a gold record costs Y, etc.?


Yes, basically what the market will bear. Yes, artists or most likely rights owner, can waive reduce the fee etc. which happens most likely with shows like American Idol, Glee due to advertising exposure. One popular way to sell sync licenses for tv/film is using the 'most favored nation" clause.


----------



## inaka (Nov 26, 2001)

Sabich said:


> Leno's a comic genius though. He reads typos from newspapers & tries to make people off the street look like idiots.
> Doesn't get any funnier than that. It's so great that he'll be able to bring all that class back to The Tonight Show.


Two bits shamelessly stolen from Late Night With David Letterman and Howard Stern.


----------



## xuxa (Oct 8, 2001)

busyba said:


> Yes.
> 
> One of the companies that exist mostly just for protecting copyrights and collecting royalties is the Harry Fox Agency. Their website harryfox.com will probably have more detailed information on this subject.


And BMI and ASCAP. The both have large, complex and always changing system/rules to get royalties paid for copyrighted works worldwide.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

How music licensing works



> According to the book "All you need to know about the music business" by Donald Passman, "The fees for synchronization licenses are really all over the board, and they vary with the usage and the importance of the song." For example, Passman's book mentions some fee ranges:
> 
> * Low-end TV usage (e.g. -- music is playing from a jukebox in a scene, but no one in the scene is paying any attention to the music) -- free (for exposure) to $2,000 for a 5-year license. In a film, the fee would be $10,000 in perpetuity.
> * A more popular song is worth more, perhaps $3,000 for TV and $25,000 for film.
> ...


What I'd love to see is a breakdown of which songs cost what amounts. I haven't been able to find that anywhere in the quick search I've done. I recall hearing, not long ago, that the theme to Jaws is particularly pricey. What others?


----------



## xuxa (Oct 8, 2001)

danterner said:


> How music licensing works
> 
> What I'd love to see is a breakdown of which songs cost what amounts. I haven't been able to find that anywhere in the quick search I've done. I recall hearing, not long ago, that the theme to Jaws is particularly pricey. What others?


The example of pricing in the article you linked to must be old as it is pretty low for the current market.

Too bad there isn't a public Kelly Blue Book 

I have heard Happy Birthday is around 10K for use in film/tv. Also back in 95 it is Microsoft licensed the Stones "Start Me Up" for around $8-10 million, some say up to 14 million. That was back in 95.


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

Tonight he...



Spoiler



had a famous racehorse in a mink Snuggie, watching restricted NFL footage on a decent sized flatscreen.

Estimated price? Over 4 million dollars.


----------



## Dssturbo1 (Feb 23, 2005)

it was reported they leased the Bugatti for the show from a museum. it was just another comedy bit and no it didn't cost nbc anywhere close to $1.5M


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

xuxa said:


> The example of pricing in the article you linked to must be old as it is pretty low for the current market.
> 
> Too bad there isn't a public Kelly Blue Book
> 
> I have heard Happy Birthday is around 10K for use in film/tv. Also back in 95 it is Microsoft licensed the Stones "Start Me Up" for around $8-10 million, some say up to 14 million. That was back in 95.


Even though those prices above may be low now, which of those prices quotes looks right for what Conan did?

Seems like this one:

* A more popular song is worth more, perhaps $3,000 for TV and $25,000 for film.

So triple it, and it's what, 10k. It's not a theme song, it's never going to be released on DVD, or be shown ever again.

I don't see any reason it would be more than Happy Birthday.

Start me up was the theme music for a major TV campaign, a multi hundred million dollar advertising campaign that millions would see everyday for months.

-smak-


----------



## xuxa (Oct 8, 2001)

smak said:


> Even though those prices above may be low now, which of those prices quotes looks right for what Conan did?
> 
> Seems like this one:
> 
> ...


Non popular/more obscure indie songs in background can get around 15-20K for less than 30 second play on shows with low to medium ratings.

and your description is why start me up got 8-10 million almost 15 years ago. Which would be significantly more today.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

Howard Stern has a bit where a contestent competes with Gary. A short section a song is played. They have to identiy the song and artist (name that tune). That segments never aired on the E! Show and doesn't air on Howard's VoD. They don't want to pay rights fees.

A number of TV series had to edit out songs because they didn't have the right to include it on DVD. I'm not sure if the rights were unavailable or too expensive.

An increasing number of people are "pirating" songs. Artists/record companies are looking for new sources of revenue. Satellite radio now has to pay royalties significantly higher then the royalties paid by broadcast stations.



DevdogAZ said:


> Since you clearly understand this better than I do, help me understand why it would cost NBC $500k to play a Stones song on The Tonight Show. What's the difference between that and a classic rock radio station playing that song during drive time? Surely a radio station isn't paying that much to play the song one time. Is the only difference the number of viewers/listeners? Is there a different scale for songs played on the radio vs. played on a TV show?
> 
> Also, what determines that Song A costs $10 to air and Song B costs $10,000 to air? Is it just the amount that the individual license holder chooses to charge? If so, could the rights holder choose to waive/reduce the fee for any specific use? Or is there some kind of standardized scale that says a platinum record costs X, a gold record costs Y, etc.?


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Dssturbo1 said:


> it was reported they leased the Bugatti for the show from a museum. it was just another comedy bit and no it didn't cost nbc anywhere close to $1.5M


OK, I have to ask... did anyone SERIOUSLY believe that it did?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

MickeS said:


> OK, I have to ask... did anyone SERIOUSLY believe that it did?


Hmmmm, let's see....



NJChris said:


> Sounds kind of childish, IMHO.





tiams said:


> Conan asked people to donate to Ben Stiller's charity for Haiti and then follows up by announcing he just blew $1.5 million of NBC's money to dress a car up in mouse ears. Disgusting that money is wasted like that for entertainment.





IJustLikeTivo said:


> Beyond stupid and it will be remembered when he looks for a new gig.


All signs point to yes.


----------



## Sirius Black (Dec 26, 2001)

Since this whole dust-up started, I'm fairly certain I read somewhere that Conan's ratings have spiked significantly. That the bit initially cost $1.5 million dollars is a drop in the bucket compared to the revenue generated from the ratings spike. They are in business to make money. They are not a charity. If NBC didn't want that to air, it wouldn't have.


----------



## inaka (Nov 26, 2001)

C'mon you guys thought they really spent 1.5 mil on that bit?

Did you also think they *bought* the horse too? 
Waiting for shots of Andy on TMZ cleaning out the newly created horse stall...


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

inaka said:


> C'mon you guys thought they really spent 1.5 mil on that bit?
> 
> Did you also think they *bought* the horse too?
> Waiting for shots of Andy on TMZ cleaning out the newly created horse stall...


AND really made a REAL mink coat for the horse?



Busyba is right. Somepeople actually believe it.


----------



## inaka (Nov 26, 2001)

I don't even think the NFL Super Bowl footage was real NFL footage. Looked like USFL footage (which is commonly used in the background of TV shows, etc.), which is maybe why they showed it from far away at an angle, etc.

Either way, both had me laughing.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

But that really was Pee Wee Herman. He probably works for scale.


----------



## IJustLikeTivo (Oct 3, 2001)

busyba said:


> Hmmmm, let's see....
> 
> All signs point to yes.


All signs point to people thinking it was stupid since it was a slam to his bosses. Not that we necessarily thought it cost 1.5 million. I assumed the borrowed the car but I had no idea what the license cost.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

Kablemodem said:


> But that really was Pee Wee Herman. He probably works for scale.


And that was pretty funny


----------



## dilbert27 (Dec 1, 2006)

jsmeeker said:


> AND really made a REAL mink coat for the horse?
> 
> 
> 
> Busyba is right. Somepeople actually believe it.


It was not a mink coat it was a mink Snuggie!


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

jsmeeker said:


> Busyba is *P.T. Barnum was* right. Somepeople actually believe it.


FYP.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

IJustLikeTivo said:


> All signs point to people thinking it was stupid since it was a slam to his bosses. Not that we necessarily thought it cost 1.5 million. I assumed the borrowed the car but I had no idea what the license cost.


Former bosses.

-smak-


----------



## IJustLikeTivo (Oct 3, 2001)

smak said:


> Former bosses.
> 
> -smak-


In 76 minutes anyway.

While the way they treated everyone sucks, it must be nice to have real FU money at his age.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Dear Internet....


----------



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

morac said:


> Dear Internet....


----------



## stalemate (Aug 21, 2005)

Do people even say "Dear Internet?"


----------



## pcguru83 (Jan 18, 2005)

I seriously thought of IJustLikeTiVo when I saw that. Hilarious. 

"It's NOT REAL! I just wanted to make that clear. They ruined a real Picasso!"


----------



## IJustLikeTivo (Oct 3, 2001)

And we're wrong, the naysayers among us, me included. He was pulling all our legs. And he ended on a classy note.

So long Coco, we hardly knew you.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

IJustLikeTivo said:


> So long Coco, we hardly knew you.


Hardly? I've been watching him regularly since 1993, first on "Late Night," then on "The Tonight Show"; I think I know him pretty well. 

Here's a link to a sad picture that ran in the L.A. Times today -- it shows two NBC Universal employees taking down a sign that pointed to the queue area for Conan's audience.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

trainman said:


> Here's a link to a sad picture that ran in the L.A. Times today -- it shows two NBC Universal employees taking down a sign that pointed to the queue area for Conan's audience.


Which, as I understand, was occurring minutes after recording for the last show began. Seriously, guys? You couldn't have waited a couple of days... or even until the show was done recording... to start taking those signs down?

(Or am I misunderstanding, and these signs intended to be very temporary, to be put up and taken down on a regular basis?)


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

I'd guess that those signs are now sitting in the homes of some of the shows crew members that snagged them while they still could.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

scandia101 said:


> I'd guess that those signs are now sitting in the homes of some of the shows crew members that snagged them while they still could.


Or before someone else did.

It is funny because I read this thread and did not see the first two money wasters, but saw them recapped on the last night with the latest one that had me cracking up.

I actually originally believed there was some weird way he could have done this when I first read about it here. Although I did struggle with the idea that conan would have some kind of special clause that allowed him to spend ridiculous amounts of money. Cavier on a Picasso from Dinosaur bones from the Smithsonian was pretty funny too.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

I thought this would be a great opportunity to let you guys know about how I have some great ocean front property for sale in North Dakota, if you're interested send me a PM. I'll give you a great deal!!!!


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

The $5 million might have been a joke, but just *playing "Lovely Rita Meter Maid" when Tom Hanks came out cost $500,000 * for real!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/23/conans-last-show-spends-5_n_433974.html
It was funny because it took me a few minutes to remember what that very familiar song was. Don' mess with Yoko.

Now I wonder when Paul Shaffer plays all those songs on Letterman if they check ahead of time for how much the rights cost.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

netringer said:


> The $5 million might have been a joke, but just *playing "Lovely Rita Meter Maid" when Tom Hanks came out cost $500,000 * for real!
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/23/conans-last-show-spends-5_n_433974.html
> It was funny because it took me a few minutes to remember what that very familiar song was. Don' mess with Yoko.
> 
> Now I wonder when Paul Shaffer plays all those songs on Letterman if they check ahead of time for how much the rights cost.


Well, I'd take that "report" with a grain of salt. The discussion over the earlier use of "Satisfaction" revealed that NBC has a blanket agreement with the music publishers that allows them use of "live plus same day" use of the music catalog. (Internet and other rebroadcast and redistribution would be licensed for an additional fee, of course.)

Source: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/nbc-confirms-deal-conan-obrien-speeds-nbc-show/story?id=9621682

Additionally, unlike in the case of "Satisfaction," there was no "mechanical licensing" fees because they didn't play the original recording, they performed a portion themselves. There may be performance royalties payable to the current license holder to the Lennon/McCartney songbook (last I heard, it was still owned by the estate of Michael Jackson, not Yoko Ono), but I'm not sure if performance royalties for a portion of a song would come to $500,000.


----------



## SnakeEyes (Dec 26, 2000)

Seeing as how the info on Lovely Rita came from a member of the house band for Fallon, I'd say it's pretty solid.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

SnakeEyes said:


> Seeing as how the info on Lovely Rita came from a member of the house band for Fallon, I'd say it's pretty solid.


Different shows, different owners (Fallon's show is an NBC Universal show, Conan's show was a Conaco show, AFAIK), and both possibly mean different licensing agreements.

Also, was ?uestlove referring to the mechanical, synchronization, or performance licensing rate? Live plus same day or rebroadcast rate? The whole song, or just a portion? It's not that simple just to say $500k to buy the rights to the song... music licensing is a lot more complex than that.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

I also find the $500K price for a play-on to be wildly unbelievable, but on the other hand, the guy who said it has to be given a lot of credibility since, after all, doing play-ons *is his job*.

So I really don't know what to believe at this point.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

busyba said:


> I also find the $500K price for a play-on to be wildly unbelievable, but on the other hand, the guy who said it has to be given a lot of credibility since, after all, doing play-ons *is his job*.
> 
> So I really don't know what to believe at this point.


I would say playing is the guy's job, and _paying_ is left for someone else!


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

orangeboy said:


> I would say playing is the guy's job, and _paying_ is left for someone else!


 Yeah, but part of his job probably is being made aware by the people paying what _not_ to play because it's too expensive.


----------

