The Television Academy’s “wheel deal” with the four major networks has two years left to run, securing the show’s home until 2026. But it’s not too early to think about the show’s long-term future, especially given that conglomerates’ investments in their linear ownership structures are rapidly declining.
When ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox signed an eight-year deal for the Emmys in 2018—making the ceremony an annual event (known as the “wheel”)—storm clouds were already brewing. But at the time, Netflix was the only real streaming provider, and Disney+, Max, Apple TV+ and the rest were still a year or two away.
By 2026, a lot will have changed. Just last week, Disney further downsized its existing networks. Rumor has it that CBS is looking to cut its budgets, including specials (which means the Daytime Emmys may soon need a new home). Even Fox just had to make cuts.
If a new deal is negotiated, it would likely be with the conglomerates, not the broadcast networks. This year, ABC’s broadcast of the primetime Emmys will not be available on Hulu until the next day. By 2026, I can guarantee you, all major TV event licenses will be streaming-first deals, with the Emmys, for example, airing simultaneously on Disney+/Hulu/ABC, NBC/Peacock, and CBS/Paramount+ (that is, if it still exists).
Given this, I believe some companies are more inclined to keep the Emmys alive than others. Perhaps one of them will take full control of the show, as is already the case with the Oscars (ABC), the Grammys (CBS), the Tonys (CBS), and the Golden Globes (currently CBS).
There are pros and cons to giving out just one Emmy. If the show moves from network to network, no one really has the motivation to produce a big ratings winner — because a competitor will benefit from all the marketing and momentum the next year. Perhaps leaving the show to a single network could free up more energy to make it a much louder event.
On the other hand, things didn’t go so well the last time the Emmys were held in one place. From 1966 to 1986, the Emmys alternated between ABC, NBC and CBS. Then upstart Fox came along with an offer the TV Academy couldn’t refuse and stole exclusive rights to the show. That sweet payday came at a price: lower ratings on the fourth network.
Eventually, the TV Academy gave the show exclusive to ABC, but after two years, everyone involved realized that a deal with the networks made more sense, since it was the biggest night on television. If you give the Emmys to just one company, they suddenly own them, and the competition may be less inclined to make a big deal out of it. And so the show has been in rotation on the networks ever since.
However, I have another idea that, surprisingly, hasn’t been widely discussed: Make the Primetime Emmys a TV and streaming “barrier” (in other words, have them air live on all networks at the same time).
That’s right, don’t just broadcast the ceremony in one place each year—make it available everywhere, like in a State of the Union address or a charity show called “Stand Up to Cancer.”
Think about it: Currently, the TV Academy receives about $8 million annually in licensing fees, which are split between the four networks. What if every broadcaster, every corporation and every streamer contributed a share to the pot? The TV Academy could earn a few dollars more and the costs for each broadcaster would be lower.
Most importantly, there would be a simulcast of the Emmys on all channels and streamers. It would be an opportunity for the television industry to get in front of a much larger audience and remind them why they love the medium. Viewership would increase. It would be a level playing field because everyone is broadcasting the same ceremony. Perhaps a committee of executives from all the networks could come together to plan the broadcast in conjunction with the producers and the Academy.
So why wait until 2026? Let’s turn the wheel around and start a mega Emmy simulcast next year. The clock is ticking.
