Where Commissioning is Heading - The TV Dumbbell Theory
When I was at Discovery, I was taught a very valuable lesson by the International CEO, JB Perrette. He said to me: “Imagine a dumbbell—two equal weights on either side of a short bar. Now, imagine those weights represent monetary value.
You can spend $1 million (or £’s, or your local currency) on:
Four premium shows at $250k each, or
100 ultra-cheap videos at $10k each.
“The middle bar is where our programming is at now.”
“In theory,” he said, “both ends of the dumbbell drive the same revenue, so don’t bother with the middle.”
I have come to believe he was right.
Each operates on a different business case, taking advantage of different tax breaks and working models, but they each achieve the same financial outcome.
So what doesn’t work? Anything in between.
That means classic TV shows costing $80k-$160k per episode—the very type of content that cable networks built their business on. And as the cable industry implodes, those channels now face a brutal choice:
Go big with fewer, high-cost prestige shows
Go ultra cheap with high-volume, low-cost content that fills hours cheaply
Any channel thats still commissioning into this price point is heading into trouble I believe. You either spend more on less, or less on more but set yourself up for the risks that come associated with that latter strategy.
Regular readers of this newsletter know where I stand—if I were running a cable channel today, I’d be going super cheap.
I’d use acquisitions and co-productions for standout pieces, and commission digital-first content that allows producers to effectively monetise online and gives me ultra-cheap content for my channel.
I know this is hard reading for some TV businesses, but my advice is start pivoting now.
After all, 10% production fee of $1 million is still 10% of $1 million, whether it’s commissioned across four TV episodes or 100 cheap webisodes.
The Death of the Middle
This pattern isn’t unique to TV. It plays out across multiple industries:
Retail: High-end brands like Gucci thrive and budget retailers like Primark dominate—while mid-tier department stores collapse.
Automotive: Luxury brands like Ferrari and Rolls-Royce succeed, and budget-friendly brands like Skoda and Dacia sell in volume—while mid-range sedans struggle.
Politics: Hardliners dominate public discourse, while centrists struggle to cut through.
The same logic applies to content creation. You’re either making big-budget, premium content that commands attention—or low-cost, high-volume content that floods the market.
The middle ground - the handle of the dumbbell? It’s bending under pressure.
TV’s Broken Dumbbell
For traditional broadcasters, this dumbbell is cracked—if not completely broken.
Why? Because the low-cost end isn’t viable anymore:
Too much compliance – Legal teams, editorial rules, and regulatory hurdles push up costs.
Too many deliverables – Even "cheap" TV productions need multiple edits, subtitles, and formatting, making them more expensive than they should be.
The cheap content has moved elsewhere – YouTube and TikTok now own the low-cost space, leaving TV unable to compete.
That leaves broadcasters trapped—they cannot outspend streamers for premium content, and they have lost the ability to make low-cost content work.
How TV Can Fix the Dumbbell
Broadcasters need to stop fighting the old model and start adapting. Here’s what they should do:
Take More Risks
Stop over-developing. Greenlight more ideas, faster.
Channels - Reduce Commissioner Involvement in Low-End Productions
Cheap TV becomes too expensive because every commissioner wants to have a say at every stage.
Agree the vision before filming starts, and only review once at the end.
Broadcasters - Acquire More Content—Even If It’s Untested
Stop relying on “broadcast-tested” content. Buy in ready-made shows, even if they haven’t aired elsewhere.
Producers - Think Like a Streamer
Build content libraries, not just schedules. The future is owning intellectual property, not just filling airtime.
Everyone - Lower the Barrier to Entry
Allow cheaper production models to exist within TV, with much fewer compliance hoops - taking on the compliance in house. That will be cheaper than adding a line item for compliance in the budget.
TV’s Broken Dumbbell Is Driving Content into YouTube’s Arms
Right now, TV’s regulatory structure makes it impossible for broadcasters to compete at the low-cost end. That is exactly why platforms like YouTube are winning—they do not have these restrictions.
If broadcasters want to take back control, they must rethink compliance rules and start doing more of the heavy lifting themselves.
If they do not, the future of low-cost content will not be on TV at all.
Why Producers Need to Understand the TV Dumbbell
This shift isn’t just a problem for broadcasters - it’s critical for producers to understand, too.
If you’re developing content right now, you need to ask:
Are we premium enough to compete for high-end commissions?
Or are we scalable and cost-effective enough for the low-cost market?
Or are we stuck in the middle—where commissioning is drying up?
Because the reality is mid-budget TV is disappearing. Developing content without considering where the money is actually going is a waste of time and resources.
Understanding where commissioning is happening - and where it’s headed - is the difference between getting funded or getting ignored.