Submitted by gotellauntrhodie t3_xt1b1w in television

I can't believe it has taken this long for a decision to be reached about the fate of Sandman. It was an incredible show, with a great reception online. The viewership was really good and it stayed in the Top 10 for weeks.

I truly cannot understand Netflix's process in deciding what should and shouldn't be renewed. If it isn't enough for millions of people to watch the show, then what is enough? Of course, it wasn't a juggernaut like Stranger Things S1. But 99% of Netflix shows don't reach those heights anyway.

I feel like if Sandman was on any other service, it would've been renewed by now. What is the hold up?



You must log in or register to comment.

tottieyang t1_iqndauz wrote

budget and profits. no other reasons.


Fantastic_Wallaby_61 t1_iqnuetd wrote

Yup if the numbers don’t work can’t blame them


goatjugsoup t1_iqohiew wrote

can and will


PerfectZeong t1_iqomerb wrote

How? They're the reason it exists at all. HBO could pick it up tomorrow they dont seem rushing to do it.


Radulno t1_iqq0cc4 wrote

HBO actually already refused, they were proposed before Netflix (not sure if HBO or HBO Max).

Too expensive for its audience seemed to be the reason and it seems to be why Netflix hesitates for the renewal (though it isn't rare for them to take time for renewing something so I wouldn't see anything there).


Firvulag t1_iqompx9 wrote

> profits.

The rumour is that Netflix themselves dont know how to interpret their own data, it's hard to tell if a show has any value.

A lot of people watched sandman? Great! Did a lot of new people sign up for it? well... Will more people sign up for season 2? maybe..?

Not even netflix is exactly sure about it, which is a huge problem for them in all of this.


Radulno t1_iqq0ao4 wrote

That "rumour" is stupid though, Netflix is doing that since a long time, they know how to interpret data. Hell they even make their shows based on data.


IvarTheBloody t1_iqxsfq5 wrote

Yeah and that seems to be going so well, what is Netflixs success rate like.

2% of new shows are breakout hits.

8% are pretty good or very good but there is a 70% chance they will never make it to the end before getting canned.

Maybe 20% of just average shows tha maybe get a couple seasons.

70% filler and complet shit that gets cancelled after 1 season.


Radulno t1_iqxv1pa wrote

I mean considering they're the only profitable service and by far the most successful, yes it's going well lol.

They cancel more but they cancel failing shows without enough audience like every other service. They also simply produce way more so in absolute numbers they have more in every category. By the way, random numbers like you give are useless (also quality is entirely subjective so you can't say a show is bad or filler just because you don't like it, plenty of people will like it if it gets renewed)

Apple is a special case since they don't care for profit, they don't play the same game than the others (Amazon neither).


IvarTheBloody t1_iqxwl9e wrote

Of course Apple cares about profits just like every company, they needed to play catch up to Netflix and they were never going to do that by quantity so they chose to go for quality instead.

In 10 years time Netflix may have a 1000 different shows but if 800 of them are cancelled and finished without a resolution they really only have 200 shows because no one starts a show if you know it dosn't have a conclusion.

Were as in 10 years time Apple may have only have made 300 shows total but if 250 of them are finished with endings they will have a better catalogue of quality content.


ijakinov t1_iqnq5yy wrote

It being “incredible” is subjective and online reception means nothing. People shit on lots of popular shows online. Being in the top 10 is only one metric. There’s a lot more important metrics to take into account and one of them is cost. Neil Gaiman even acknowledged himself that the show is really really expensive and seems fine with Netflix taking their time to make sure it’s worth it. Another important metric is how many people actually finish the show and aren’t just starting it and dropping it because hours watched only hides that. You weigh viewership against cost and you make sure you look at all angles such as completion rates/speed. This isn’t exclusive to Netflix, a network TV channel isn’t going to renew a really expensive show that explodes the first episode than significantly falls by the final of the cost outweighs the value. HBO famously cancelled one of their best performing originals at the time Rome Because it was too expensive.


Radulno t1_iqq0hcl wrote

To be fair, for Rome, HBO later regretted the cancellation.


ijakinov t1_iqqneau wrote

Because things happened later on that made them regret it. Point is it's not about getting exacty past X hours total or Y viewers per episode because varying costs can outweigh the value. In Rome case, cost outweight the value initiially and they got strong DVD sales internationally that brought them additional value they weren't aware about at the time.


MurielHorseflesh t1_iqnhrs5 wrote

The problem we have with streaming services over regular tv with advertising is that if a show like The Sandman is a success on regular tv, advertisers coming running to pay for a slot somewhere in the show, that fast and large monetary input gets the wheels turning far faster when approving the next season.

Netflix probably didn’t gain any new subscribers from The Sandman. That’s nothing against the show. But streaming services have mostly stagnated and plateaued with growth. They lose some and gain some a month as people drift around but ultimately they have roughly the same revenue coming in per month.

The Sandman whilst critically lauded and well received by the audience probably didn’t make Netflix any more money that month than they did the month before.

So now they have to sit and figure out where they can find the money for season 2 and when they can fit that into the income/outcome structure they have. They only have so much money to play with, they have plenty of other things to fund before they can get to The Sandman season 2. So they make us wait.


reddig33 t1_iqnvl1u wrote

Would be interesting if canceled streaming shows would go running to broadcast for a second chance (both for the show and the broadcaster). It’s not like there’s much quality on broadcast networks right now.


jakeba t1_iqnyirh wrote

They can try now, but the shows are too expensive to make so broadcast networks arent interested.


Radulno t1_iqq0t45 wrote

Lol if something like The Sandman failed because it didn't find enough audience for its cost, it has no chance on network TV. It's less viewers and they have less budget to spend on shows.


Radulno t1_iqq0nml wrote

They also probably have the problem that anyone that wants Netflix has Netflix now or close to it and it's not a new show or two that will change that, at worst it changes the churn rate (people cancel a little later or come back earlier). That's why their growth have slowed, they're close to market saturation really.

As for advertising, that's why all the services are starting to do it.

Also yeah, The Sandman is expensive and didn't have enough viewers to justify its budget so it's a risk. Netflix has plenty of money but they also can't afford to run something at a loss completely, they're not Amazon or Apple (which don't play by the same rules than all the others btw, their business model shouldn't be compared)


IvarTheBloody t1_iqxtsmv wrote

The problem Netflix is already running into is they have no catalogue of finished shows, everything gets cancelled as soon as it drops viewers.

Does anyone go and watch shows that you know have been cancelled and will never get a ending, why should I bother keeping my Netflix subscription when all the shows I would want to go back and rewatch have no endings.

Stiff like the OA, great show, absolutely loved it but what's the point in rewatching it when I know the cliffhanger will never get resolved.

Apple are taking it slow and steady but I guarantee in 10 years they will have the best catalogue of finished good shows out of all the streaming services, probably even better than HBO.

Just look at SEE, no one watches it, it's expensive as fuck and yet they still gave it a 3rd season to finish up, so that even 10 years down the line new subscribers can go back and binge a great show that is complete.


im_a_dick_head t1_iqs5a48 wrote

I don't get why Netflix doesn't make some lower budget shows without crazy effects and famous actors. I like procedurals and stuff but Netflix doesn't have/make many of them, I go to Hulu/Peacock for that stuff. I'm mainly talking about shows like first responder procedurals or even medical shows, they don't make those they just take them from other networks.


archlector t1_iqpx2qv wrote

A show like Sandman would never have been made in the traditional advertising driven model. Your post is delusional, lol.


interloper-666 t1_iqnrsbq wrote

The same thing happened with Raised by Wolves on HBOmax. Its a bad sign...


lightsongtheold t1_iqo0bo7 wrote

Same thing happening right now with Westworld…


PerfectZeong t1_iqomx9k wrote

What's the point of westworld like damn that show is no longer about anything. It's so up Its own ass.


SteelmanINC t1_iqnmtkv wrote

Honestly it looked cool from the trailer but the show wound up being pretty dissapointing. Especially half way through once it got to all the vortex nonsense.


Asiriya t1_iqob1zk wrote

So agree. Who wrote those scripts and thought “ this is worth spending 100milly on


emerald00 t1_iqygu7i wrote

The vortex stuff was directly from the comic. If they would have skipped it people would be pissed.


SteelmanINC t1_iqynjr9 wrote

Feel like I’d rather something be good than true to the source material.


Ryase_Sand t1_iqpc8pu wrote

Episodes 1-4 could have been a whole season. 5 and 6 deviated but were great imo. 7-10 were...okay.


Radulno t1_iqq10g4 wrote

This may actually be a big problem for the show if people dropped it at those points. Netflix also looks to completion rate and where people stopped


lightsongtheold t1_iqo0a3w wrote

The Sandman would never have been made on any other service. Rumours have it costing over $160 million for the first season! It was a hit show but it really needed to be a mega hit rather than a show that just did slightly better than Keep Breathing, Anatomy of a Scandal, and Never Have I Ever.

It probably will get renewed as long as they can get the budget down for a second season.


Asiriya t1_iqoay0n wrote

What a fucking waste of money


Mentoman72 t1_iqof25b wrote

I'm burnt out on a lot of huge budget stuff currently. Aside from HOTD I'm not watching any of the massively budgeted shows currently coming out. Maybe I just prefer smaller scaled stories.


Radulno t1_iqq0yev wrote

The only ones I can see are Amazon or Apple because they can burn money without a problem due to their business model (their services have no intention to be profitable on themselves)


lightsongtheold t1_iqr9f5h wrote

Netflix is actually profitable nowadays. That is significant because it has an ARPU about twice as high as Amazon Prime but Prime has a content budget less than half of that of Netflix. My guess is that is enough to make Prime very close to break even levels.

No doubt Apple are losing a ton of cash. They spend almost as much as Amazon on the service, charge a lot less, and have practically no subscribers. They do have the cash to lose money for a while and continue to build the service at a time when others are struggling with sluggish growth and economic tailwinds.

You might be right that either of those streamers might have been an alternative home for The Sandman but I’m not sure Amazon would have given $160 million to an IP as obscure as The Sandman. They do spend big but usually only on IP or top tier creatives. Apple probably would have though as they do spend top dollar on completely original IP or more obscure IP like The Sandman.


LostInStatic t1_iqoayvx wrote

>It was an incredible show, with a great reception online. The viewership was really good and it stayed in the Top 10 for weeks.

As much as you think you know, you don't. The number one reason renewal talks always drag out is budget issues.


catnapspirit t1_iqnedm4 wrote

Past experience would say if it hasn't happened by now, it ain't happening. - sympathetic The OA fan


Radulno t1_iqq0vom wrote

That would be wrong though, plenty of shows have been renewed pretty late by Netflix.


reddit455 t1_iqnf7zy wrote

>I truly cannot understand Netflix's process in deciding what should and shouldn't be renewed.


the fact that there's no official announcement is not necessarily related to a decision having been made or not.


maybe they won't announce anything until they can line up the SCHEDULES for the talent they're going to NEED (like Neil himself?).


Good Omens Season 2 on Prime is being worked on, and Sandman Act 3 (audible) literally dropped this week. they'd been doing post production for months.


took 2-3 years for the audible versions so far (they practically do those on zoom)


maybe because Michael Sheen is Lucifer in Sandman audible.. he's also Aziraphael in Good Omens. (TV, and audio book with David Tennant)


"Netflix" needs to get in line like everyone else.


Dim_e t1_iqnjjn4 wrote

True but in this case a week ago Neil Gaiman was explaining why it hadn't been renewed yet.


mr_math24 t1_iqnetzr wrote

As someone who has never read the comics, I fell off after episode 7. It just never hooked me. I'm a fan of most big budget fantasy series, and I love David Thewlis.... I wanted to like it!


batsofburden t1_iqnuryq wrote

It's worth giving another season for episode 6 alone, imo.


redmandolin t1_iqoda3y wrote

Yeah I stopped paying attention at 7 to be quit honest, but 11 is really good even if you watch is standalone!


Portgas t1_iqtx3tm wrote

Same. The show had like three legit good episodes. The rest is boring.


trash_boat_brt t1_iqo7yiq wrote

The major thing restraining it is the COMPLETION RATE. So many people started the show but not everyone got to actually finish it. Its been reported that it only had 43% who started it completed it within the first four weeks(which is something Netflix really considers when deciding fates of their shows). Normally completion rates under 50% rarely get renewed and considering that this cost so much to make, i think it'll get cancelled but another streamer will definetly grab it lol


a_satanic_mechanic t1_iqnslrk wrote

Neil Gaiman might be asking for more money than they want to give him.


fiercetankbattle t1_iqo2gk6 wrote

It isn’t just Netflix sat in a room by themselves thinking about this. I won’t pretend to know how the relationship works, but I’m assuming they are negotiating with WB- i.e WB want more money put into S2, Netflix want to scale back?


quarrystone t1_iqodm8y wrote

There’s no travesty here. Networks renewing their shows is their own prerogative and viewers aren’t owed any news until they decide. We are not entitled to information about their viewing metrics, even if a small amount of people on here think they are that important.

Theoretically they could stay quiet until the day they drop new episodes if at all.


interfail t1_iqpiyfk wrote

We're supposed to be getting up in arms now about a show not being renewed yet less than 2 months after premiering?


dougyoung1167 t1_iqptk25 wrote

And why do you all think you should know immediately what they are doing and planning? Most fan talk and promos are to "get viewers" yet they pretty much have them, sooo .....let the anticipation without ad monies begin.


be-like-water-2022 t1_iqq7x2x wrote

Reruns, it's not about how good it is, but how many times people rewatch it.


5ronins t1_iqqelnu wrote

Unpopular opinion.

Sandman is interesting but unsatisfying. The journey is wild but the 3rd act resolutions are pretty boring. An enthusiastic No way! Cool! Folowed by a confused Really? Thats my reaction to every episode.


Stupidstuff1001 t1_iqswp43 wrote

Sandman was a good premise but a lot of it was bad.

  • started off super strong.
  • constatine stuff was great.
  • hell stuff was okay. The battle didn’t really feel epic.
  • cereal convention was bad. They came off as stupid serial killers as opposed to criminal masterminds.
  • the vortex stuff was terrible. Both child actors did poorly and it felt disjointed.
  • the show has a very poor cinematography. It has that British feel to it which everything feels washed.

The show just went all over the place in terms of quality. You had the diner and death episodes which were great but you had the vortex stuff which was really bad.

If I was Netflix I would probably pass on how much it costs unless you can get better writers / directors / cinematographers / casting directors. Which is a lot to replace for a show that was a huge gamble.


root_fifth_octave t1_iqnxl19 wrote

It was one of the reasons I reactivated my subscription.

Would be cool to see more of it.


abbu_d_slytherin t1_iqp2rrg wrote

I may be in minority but it was so damn boring and below average show


djkhan23 t1_iqr4for wrote

I get the reasons but I will cancel my Netflix sub if they cancel this show.

It's too good to cancel


TravelingFlipper t1_iqncpdo wrote

It wasn’t really THAT good. The comics are WAY better


respectfulpanda t1_iqnd4tw wrote

Great! Netflix needs to renew the comics!

What subreddit is this again?


testingtor t1_iqneflz wrote

Yeah, its right up there with genocide. Such a travesty.