We all gonna pretend like Stephen Colbert just didn't get fired

[Patrick Chewing]

I'm looking at you, board Libs. What happened to your boy?? I thought talking about Trump 24/7 was a winning strategy?

[Overdrive]

I'm looking at you, board Libs. What happened to your boy?? I thought talking about Trump 24/7 was a winning strategy?

Ah censoring suddenly is ok?

[Baller234]

Ah censoring suddenly is ok?

He wasn't censored, the show was operating at a loss. Then he went on air publicly and trashed his own bosses.

Imagine you ran a company and you had an employee who was losing you money AND talking shit.

He is free to start his own podcast.

[Overdrive]

He wasn't censored, the show was operating at a loss. Then he went on air publicly and trashed his own bosses.

Imagine you ran a company and you had an employee who was losing you money AND talking shit.

He is free to start his own podcast.

So you're saying a company is allowed to decide what's ok to be prodcasted through its outlets without impairing freedom of speech?

[Baller234]

So you're saying a company is allowed to decide what's ok to be prodcasted through its outlets without impairing freedom of speech?

Sorry could you ask this question again but in english? :oldlol:

[Overdrive]

translate.google.com

I figured you wouldn't answer that.

[Lakers Legend#32]

Even this is not working as a distraction from Epstein.

[Lakers Legend#32]

Sorry could you ask this question again but in english? :oldlol:

Patrick Chewing weighs 400 pounds.

[Patrick Chewing]

Ah censoring suddenly is ok?

Censoring?? What an idiotic response. :roll:

[j3lademaster]

Sorry could you ask this question again but in english? :oldlol:

Sentence is concise with no major grammatical errors. Your attempt to discredit him by acting like he can’t speak English is incredibly disingenuous.

[warriorfan]

Sentence is concise with no major grammatical errors. Your attempt to discredit him by acting like he can’t speak English is incredibly disingenuous.

You’re a ch1nk.

[bladefd]

Let's put it into proper perspective. While the show was losing money, it was the most watched late night show over the last 9 years. That tells you all late night shows are losing viewership over the years. Streaming services are taking over the traditional tv. Colbert will be snatched up right away by a streaming service and continue like John Oliver did with HBO. It's not going anywhere.

Second, this is another news Trump is talking about to draw your attention away from Epstein files. That is still the top news.

[BurningHammer]

Wonder which late night show will fall next after the biggest one on national TV does.

[Baller234]

Let's put it into proper perspective. While the show was losing money, it was the most watched late night show over the last 9 years. That tells you all late night shows are losing viewership over the years. Streaming services are taking over the traditional tv. Colbert will be snatched up right away by a streaming service and continue like John Oliver did with HBO. It's not going anywhere.

Second, this is another news Trump is talking about to draw your attention away from Epstein files. That is still the top news.

You really are delusional. Colbert can barely draw flies with hundreds of millions of dollars backing him, what makes you think he has a shot of succeeding as a streamer or podcaster? :oldlol:

He's not edgy, he's not shocking, he's not contrarian. What exactly does he bring to the table other than "Trump and conservatives bad?" Lol, Jon Stewart is way more popular than Colbert and he even his podcast show tanked hard. He had to come crawling back to the Daily Show.

Turns out that telling half the country to fukk off on a nightly basis makes people not want to watch you. :oldlol:

[BurningHammer]

You really are delusional. Colbert can barely draw flies with hundreds of millions of dollars backing him.

The Late Show has been #1 in 11:30PM late night show slot for a long time. Over 20 million viewers have been watching the show on regular basis. :confusedshrug:

[Baller234]

The Late Show has been #1 in 11:30PM late night show slot for a long time. Over 20 million viewers have been watching the show on regular basis. :confusedshrug:

Lol he's competing with 2 other guys, wow big accomplishment.

If the show is ruch a raging success, why isn't CBS more desperate to keep it going?

[Patrick Chewing]

The Late Show has been #1 in 11:30PM late night show slot for a long time. Over 20 million viewers have been watching the show on regular basis. :confusedshrug:

Good God, is this Canadian Math? 20 million? Try 2 million ya fat dunce.

https://www.tvinsider.com/1202434/late-night-ratings-2025-gutfeld-kimmel-colbert-fallon/


Nobody watches this garbage anymore. Carson used to average 9 million a night.

[diamenz]

we can't rule out the possibility that axing colbert, including the entire show, was an 'under the table' part of the settlement between trump and cbs as icing on the cake on top of the $16 million.

why? despite the fact that the show's numbers are down, it was still their big money maker. it was still cbs's golden boy. what the hell else brings in the kind of money the late show does these days? some csi or criminal minds equivalent type show? not even close. the late show would still consistently go viral and bring in the big bucks. if money was the issue, you renegotiate. a media company doesn't give up an asset that valuable without trying to salvage it. why didn't they approach colbert and ask him to take a pay cut? or cut his staff down? for them to just trash it doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

[warriorfan]

we can't rule out the possibility that axing colbert, including the entire show, was an 'under the table' part of the settlement between trump and cbs as icing on the cake on top of the $16 million.

why? despite the fact that the show's numbers are down, it was still their big money maker. it was still cbs's golden boy. what the hell else brings in the kind of money the late show does these days? some csi or criminal minds equivalent type show? not even close. the late show would still consistently go viral and bring in the big bucks. if money was the issue, you renegotiate. a media company doesn't give up an asset that valuable without trying to salvage it. why didn't they approach colbert and ask him to take a pay cut? or cut his staff down? for them to just trash it doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

CBS said that the show was losing 40 mil a year. Cost 100 mill to make and they were getting only 60 back. Even if Colbert did it for free it would have been a liability at this point.

[John8204]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwOLo_U6bTw

Those last ten minutes were absolute insanity.

[Norcaliblunt]

We all gonna pretend like young independent people care?

Literally only old fart liberals and conservatives care about this.

No young independent individual gives a shit about network TV.

LMAO!!!!!!!?

[Norcaliblunt]

Yo also with all this speculation that they have been running on a loss proves that these same liberal oligarchs could theoretically run cheap restaurants on a loss and provide food for the unfortunate. But they don’t.


They run Stephan Cobert on a loss but won’t feed people on a loss.

Let that sink in.

[John8204]

Yo also with all this speculation that they have been running on a loss proves that these same liberal oligarchs could theoretically run cheap restaurants on a loss and provide food for the unfortunate. But they don’t.


They run Stephan Cobert on a loss but won’t feed people on a loss.

Let that sink in.

Imagine believing Hollywood accounting. Let's see them open the books and explain how the number 1 show on late night loses 1 million dollars a week. Colbert gets 15 million a year on a show that brings in 200 million dollars a year in ad revenue. Is this a situation where they are spending money on the show or is it a slush account that they deliberately run at deficit to avoid taxes. These networks offer us nothing and then cry poverty. Whose cable bill has gone down but you have networks that run reruns and barely anything else.

[Norcaliblunt]

Imagine believing Hollywood accounting. Let's see them open the books and explain how the number 1 show on late night loses 1 million dollars a week. Colbert gets 15 million a year on a show that brings in 200 million dollars a year in ad revenue. Is this a situation where they are spending money on the show or is it a slush account that they deliberately run at deficit to avoid taxes. These networks offer us nothing and then cry poverty. Whose cable bill has gone down but you have networks that run reruns and barely anything else.

Yup the math ain’t mathing.

It never does with these capitalistic clowns.

People believing they can pay Cobert millions at a loss but can’t pay average workers?

Lmao!!!!!!

[John8204]

Yup the math ain’t mathing.

It never does with these capitalistic clowns.

People believing they can pay Cobert millions at a loss but can’t pay average workers?

Lmao!!!!!!

15 million dollars is very little money for running 160 shows a year, that's less than the cost of one episode of Severence. This is fraud pure and simple

[Norcaliblunt]

15 million dollars is very little money for running 160 shows a year, that's less than the cost of one episode of Severence. This is fraud pure and simple

The whole industry is money laundering.

That’s the story.

Point plank simple period end of discussion.

[highwhey]

Imagine believing Hollywood accounting. Let's see them open the books and explain how the number 1 show on late night loses 1 million dollars a week. Colbert gets 15 million a year on a show that brings in 200 million dollars a year in ad revenue. Is this a situation where they are spending money on the show or is it a slush account that they deliberately run at deficit to avoid taxes. These networks offer us nothing and then cry poverty. Whose cable bill has gone down but you have networks that run reruns and barely anything else.

it's a dying format

and yeah, they fired colbert. i mean, paramount just signed a billion dollar deal for the streaming rights to southpark

[Lakers Legend#32]

We all gonna pretend like young independent people care?

Literally only old fart liberals and conservatives care about this.

No young independent individual gives a shit about network TV.

LMAO!!!!!!!?

That's why an old fat Mexican started this thread.

[bladefd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwOLo_U6bTw

Those last ten minutes were absolute insanity.

"Just another world leader we wish had just stuck with art."

100% true

[ZenMaster]

Imagine believing Hollywood accounting. Let's see them open the books and explain how the number 1 show on late night loses 1 million dollars a week. Colbert gets 15 million a year on a show that brings in 200 million dollars a year in ad revenue. Is this a situation where they are spending money on the show or is it a slush account that they deliberately run at deficit to avoid taxes. These networks offer us nothing and then cry poverty. Whose cable bill has gone down but you have networks that run reruns and barely anything else.

I heard he was bringing in around 500 million in ad revenue per year, might even be closer to a billion.

[diamenz]

Imagine believing Hollywood accounting. Let's see them open the books and explain how the number 1 show on late night loses 1 million dollars a week. Colbert gets 15 million a year on a show that brings in 200 million dollars a year in ad revenue. Is this a situation where they are spending money on the show or is it a slush account that they deliberately run at deficit to avoid taxes. These networks offer us nothing and then cry poverty. Whose cable bill has gone down but you have networks that run reruns and barely anything else.

yup - creative accounting. i'm sure they're in the red but it's not 40mill. and it's funny how the knives came out just after colbert calls them out on their bribe. on top of that cbs needs government approval for that skydance merger and trump can tie it up for as long as he wants to. offering up colbert's head ensures them no trouble moving forward. not too hard to connect the dots here.

[ZenMaster]

yup - creative accounting. i'm sure they're in the red but it's not 40mill. and it's funny how the knives came out just after colbert calls them out on their bribe. on top of that cbs needs government approval for that skydance merger and trump can tie it up for as long as he wants to. offering up colbert's head ensures them no trouble moving forward. not too hard to connect the dots here.


According to Nielsen data for Q2 2025, The Late Show averaged 2.42 million viewers across 41 first-run episodes, securing a 9% audience share and outperforming competitors like ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel Live! (1.77 million viewers) and NBC’s The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon (1.19 million). However, only 219,000 of those viewers—roughly 9%—fell within the coveted 18-49 demographic, a critical group for advertisers. This marks a significant drop from the show’s peak of 3.81 million viewers in 2018 and a 32% decline over the past five years, reflecting a broader trend of diminishing audiences for late-night programming.

or The Late Show, ad revenue dropped 40% from $121.1 million in 2018 to $70.2 million last year, unable to offset the costs of a 200-person staff, a Manhattan theater, and Colbert’s multi-million-dollar salary.

Glad this show is over, at least for a while, it was political garbage.

[diamenz]

Glad this show is over, at least for a while, it was political garbage.

i never thought colbert was funny or classy. jon stewart is better at going at trump comedically but he's underwhelming.

[Baller234]

I'll actually concede that I think Colbert can be funny. I always thought he had decent comedic timing and also the personality and the wit to go along with it.

Stewart is funny, Colbert is funny. Not all time greats or anything like that but they CAN be funny.

John Oliver on the other hand is the complete opposite of funny. Never made me laugh once. Awful. He might be the worst thing on Earth after cancer.

[ArbitraryWater]

Ah censoring suddenly is ok?

This comment should serve as reminder for you to never talk about others intelligence again here :lol


It also woke me up to the fact of how little you understand.

[ArbitraryWater]

Sentence is concise with no major grammatical errors. Your attempt to discredit him by acting like he can’t speak English is incredibly disingenuous.

Try reading it again word for word

[Overdrive]

This comment should serve as reminder for you to never talk about others intelligence again here :lol


It also woke me up to the fact of how little you understand.

Oh man. Guess I need to spell it out for you:

You guys were ranting about FB and twitter censoring people and esp twitter banning Trump before they took a turn. It's not my argument it's yours and baller didn't even answer my last post because he knew it was a trap he couldn't get out of.

So here's it for you. While the circumstances are fishy: It's absolutely no deal for CBS to get rid of Colbert. Doesn't matter if it's an econimical or ideological decision. It's their business.

I barely say anything about intelligence. I once attacked you, true, because you absolutely didn't follow my points.
The one mostly attacking people on their IQ is WF, who I'm pretty sure has never taken a standardized test and doesn't even know what an IQ says about a person.

[Baller234]

Colbert isn't being "censored" though, his show is simply being cancelled. If for whatever reason he fails to get a contract from another network, he is still free to start his own podcast or his own streaming show on any of the major social media platforms.

The question is who would even tune in? Like I said all he has to offer at this point is "Trump bad".

Even Stewart failed to draw an audience on his own.

[Patrick Chewing]

Oh man. Guess I need to spell it out for you:

You guys were ranting about FB and twitter censoring people and esp twitter banning Trump before they took a turn. It's not my argument it's yours and baller didn't even answer my last post because he knew it was a trap he couldn't get out of.

So here's it for you. While the circumstances are fishy: It's absolutely no deal for CBS to get rid of Colbert. Doesn't matter if it's an econimical or ideological decision. It's their business.

I barely say anything about intelligence. I once attacked you, true, because you absolutely didn't follow my points.
The one mostly attacking people on their IQ is WF, who I'm pretty sure has never taken a standardized test and doesn't even know what an IQ says about a person.

Firing someone cause they were losing money isn't censorship you assclown. Colbert is free to create a podcast and continue his unfunny and unhinged rants against Trump all he likes. What CBS did was a business decision. You're so clueless that you probably didn't realize that Colbert went on his same show and bashed the very same CBS and told Trump to go F himself. And here your clown ass is talking about censorship. :oldlol:

[j3lademaster]

Firing someone cause they were losing money isn't censorship you assclown. Colbert is free to create a podcast and continue his unfunny and unhinged rants against Trump all he likes. What CBS did was a business decision. You're so clueless that you probably didn't realize that Colbert went on his same show and bashed the very same CBS and told Trump to go F himself. And here your clown ass is talking about censorship. :oldlol:

I guess that’ll depend on how much you trust the numbers. Why are they running Colbert at a loss for so many years? Is Disney actually that incompetent that they keep spending $300mil on movies like Capt Marvel 2? Or are they actually maximizing their explicit costs on paper while minimalizing total revenue so they can report losses for tax purposes? These companies didn’t get to where they are by hiring scores of dumb dumbs.

[Patrick Chewing]

I guess that’ll depend on how much you trust the numbers. Why are they running Colbert at a loss for so many years? Is Disney actually that incompetent that they keep spending $300mil on movies like Capt Marvel 2? Or are they actually maximizing their explicit costs on paper while minimalizing total revenue so they can report losses for tax purposes? These companies didn’t get to where they are by hiring scores of dumb dumbs.

They placed their bets on Trump failing or getting in trouble i suppose and they failed miserably.

I mean Kimmel and Colbert are bashing Trump on a nightly basis and they've been doing so for years. It gets old and tiring. And you alienate half the country which is not going to watch your show because they do not want to be insulted night in and night out. Was he leading in ratings compared to Kimmel and Fallon? Sure. But his numbers were a fraction of what Leno, Letterman, and Carson used to do. And Carson was adamant about keeping politics out of his show.

[Baller234]

I guess that’ll depend on how much you trust the numbers. Why are they running Colbert at a loss for so many years? Is Disney actually that incompetent that they keep spending $300mil on movies like Capt Marvel 2? Or are they actually maximizing their explicit costs on paper while minimalizing total revenue so they can report losses for tax purposes? These companies didn’t get to where they are by hiring scores of dumb dumbs.

Nobody sets out to lose on an investment so that they could write it off on their taxes.

The $300m Disney loses on a failed film isn't profitable for them just because it's a tax write off.

[j3lademaster]

Nobody sets out to lose on an investment so that they could write it off on their taxes.

The $300m Disney loses on a failed film isn't profitable for them just because it's a tax write off.

Where in my post did I say losing on an investment is profitable because it's a tax writeoff?


I guess that’ll depend on how much you trust the numbers. Why are they running Colbert at a loss for so many years? Is Disney actually that incompetent that they keep spending $300mil on movies like Capt Marvel 2? Or are they actually maximizing their explicit costs on paper while minimalizing total revenue so they can report losses for tax purposes? These companies didn’t get to where they are by hiring scores of dumb dumbs.

[Lakers Legend#32]

LOL with Trump's 30% approval rating Fatty Patty Chewing is still claiming half the country supports the convicted felon.

[Overdrive]

Colbert isn't being "censored" though, his show is simply being cancelled. If for whatever reason he fails to get a contract from another network, he is still free to start his own podcast or his own streaming show on any of the major social media platforms.

The question is who would even tune in? Like I said all he has to offer at this point is "Trump bad".

Even Stewart failed to draw an audience on his own.

Yeah and Trump wasn't censored either. It was a business decision aswell back then. Those tech CEOs don't care for libs or conservatives. They want to gain more money and power and they'll suppprt what they feel has a better chance to get them more.

Trump was just as free to voice his opinion somewhere else, but there was a big outcry for it being censorship, because a private company decided who'll they offer their service to. Both is ok. Twitter banning Trump was just as ok as CBS canceling Colbert. Both isn't censorship imo. It just reminded me of that past episode.

[Overdrive]

Firing someone cause they were losing money isn't censorship you assclown. Colbert is free to create a podcast and continue his unfunny and unhinged rants against Trump all he likes. What CBS did was a business decision. You're so clueless that you probably didn't realize that Colbert went on his same show and bashed the very same CBS and told Trump to go F himself. And here your clown ass is talking about censorship. :oldlol:

Honest question: Did you read the whole post?

[Baller234]

Yeah and Trump wasn't censored either. It was a business decision aswell back then. Those tech CEOs don't care for libs or conservatives. They want to gain more money and power and they'll suppprt what they feel has a better chance to get them more.

Trump was just as free to voice his opinion somewhere else, but there was a big outcry for it being censorship, because a private company decided who'll they offer their service to. Both is ok. Twitter banning Trump was just as ok as CBS canceling Colbert. Both isn't censorship imo. It just reminded me of that past episode.

Twitter was caught red handed buddy. If they weren't outright targeting right wing accounts, they were "soft banning" them and limiting their reach. They were meeting regularly with the FBI and were told what was deemed allowable discussion. Hunter Biden's laptop? Not allowed.

Colbert's show being cancelled on CBS is not even remotely the same as Twitter banning Trump. Nobody is entitled to have their own show on CBS. You aren't entitled to a Twitter account either, but Twitter does have a good faith obligation to it's user base. Banning people or banning stories for political reasons undermines that obligation. CBS can at least claim Colbert was costing them money, but it costs Twitter nothing to retain a user. In fact censorship makes less people want to use Twitter which only costs them money. Banning Trump was purely a political tactic.

[warriorfan]

Yeah and Trump wasn't censored either. It was a business decision aswell back then. Those tech CEOs don't care for libs or conservatives. They want to gain more money and power and they'll suppprt what they feel has a better chance to get them more.

Trump was just as free to voice his opinion somewhere else, but there was a big outcry for it being censorship, because a private company decided who'll they offer their service to. Both is ok. Twitter banning Trump was just as ok as CBS canceling Colbert. Both isn't censorship imo. It just reminded me of that past episode.

Europoor meltdown. Go watch your weird belgium shows no one knows or gives two ****s about.

[Lebron23]

Europoor meltdown. Go watch your weird belgium shows no one knows or gives two ****s about.

I actually lmao with your insult

[Overdrive]

Twitter was caught red handed buddy. If they weren't outright targeting right wing accounts, they were "soft banning" them and limiting their reach. They were meeting regularly with the FBI and were told what was deemed allowable discussion. Hunter Biden's laptop? Not allowed.

Colbert's show being cancelled on CBS is not even remotely the same as Twitter banning Trump. Nobody is entitled to have their own show on CBS. You aren't entitled to a Twitter account either, but Twitter does have a good faith obligation to it's user base. Banning people or banning stories for political reasons undermines that obligation. CBS can at least claim Colbert was costing them money, but it costs Twitter nothing to retain a user. In fact censorship makes less people want to use Twitter which only costs them money. Banning Trump was purely a political tactic.

They could've just claimed that hosting Trump cost them advertisment revenue. Is twitter's good faith obligation factual for social media or just something people assume? Why would they cut their possibilities to get rid of unwanted content? Twitter isn't speakers corner and the Musk-turnaround pretty much showed they enforce the same principles just into another political direction. In the end sm is just a tool used by ideologists to steer the masses, while corps cash in on the money it makes them from gullible zealots. Both free speech and censorship aren't anything to discuss about when it comes to that as it's core business model isn't voicing opinions. It's getting you into a loop where they can start to pitch you stuff you'll spend your money on.

The same applies to a clearly politically motivated late night show host. CBS doesn't give a shit about what Colbert has to say. As long as he ads revenue. Doesn't even have to be directly generated by his show. Can be indirect profitability by just having him on the network. People tuning in hours before his show etc.

It's just that the twitter thing was a huge issue for one side, while there's not much outcry over Colbert's sacking.

[Baller234]

They could've just claimed that hosting Trump cost them advertisment revenue. Is twitter's good faith obligation factual for social media or just something people assume? Why would they cut their possibilities to get rid of unwanted content? Twitter isn't speakers corner and the Musk-turnaround pretty much showed they enforce the same principles just into another political direction. In the end sm is just a tool used by ideologists to steer the masses, while corps cash in on the money it makes them from gullible zealots. Both free speech and censorship aren't anything to discuss about when it comes to that as it's core business model isn't voicing opinions. It's getting you into a loop where they can start to pitch you stuff you'll spend your money on.

The same applies to a clearly politically motivated late night show host. CBS doesn't give a shit about what Colbert has to say. As long as he ads revenue. Doesn't even have to be directly generated by his show. Can be indirect profitability by just having him on the network. People tuning in hours before his show etc.

It's just that the twitter thing was a huge issue for one side, while there's not much outcry over Colbert's sacking.

Can someone translate this into english please?

And no Musk's brand of Twitter is absolutely nothing like the old Twitter. He's not perfect but his version of free speech is eons closer to actual free speech than what we had before. Now X is the undeniable #1 news platform on Earth. Every single bit of important news breaks on X first and everyone has a chance to break it.

If it weren't for Musk the pro-palestinian side would have been totally screwed. Everyone would have been cucked into backing Israel without question, and I say that as someone who is pro-Israel.

[Overdrive]

translate.google.com

[Baller234]

Overdrive is english your second language? Genuinely asking. In another thread I saw Hey Yo quote you for saying "backpaddle" instead of "backpedal".

I thought democrats were supposed to be the educated ones.

[Patrick Chewing]

Overdrive is english your second language? Genuinely asking. In another thread I saw Hey Yo quote you for saying "backpaddle" instead of "backpedal".

I thought democrats were supposed to be the educated ones.

I think he's from the Sudan or some shit.

[Overdrive]

Overdrive is english your second language? Genuinely asking. In another thread I saw Hey Yo quote you for saying "backpaddle" instead of "backpedal".

I thought democrats were supposed to be the educated ones.

Yes. In my native language it's actually paddling back as in rowing a boat into the opposite direction. Same meaning.


I think he's from the Sudan or some shit.

Yes. I post from a mudhut.

[ArbitraryWater]

Oh man. Guess I need to spell it out for you:

You guys were ranting about FB and twitter censoring people and esp twitter banning Trump before they took a turn. It's not my argument it's yours and baller didn't even answer my last post because he knew it was a trap he couldn't get out of.

So here's it for you. While the circumstances are fishy: It's absolutely no deal for CBS to get rid of Colbert. Doesn't matter if it's an econimical or ideological decision. It's their business.

I barely say anything about intelligence. I once attacked you, true, because you absolutely didn't follow my points.
The one mostly attacking people on their IQ is WF, who I'm pretty sure has never taken a standardized test and doesn't even know what an IQ says about a person.


Yeah man, being banned from partaking on the earths prominent social media platforms, effectively taking ones voice, is the same as having your late night primetime TV show canceled.


Yeah and Trump wasn't censored either. It was a business decision aswell back then.

a business decision isnt supposed to override your freedom of speech :lol thats not a ****ing business matter. dont care for libs or conservatives lol, conservative posts are far more checked/restricted reach wise.

As the ADL guy said "freedom of speech doesnt mean freedom of reach" (it does).

[John8204]

South Park delayed a week...

yeah another "business" decision