The following interview was conducted with Laurie S. Silvers, Co-founder and wife of Mitchell 
Rubenstein (fellow Co-founder) who will serve with her husband in the capacity of Vice 
Chairmen for USA's newly acquired SCI-FI Channel.  The interview was conducted on 8/4/92 
from her offices in Boca Raton, Florida.

Question: "Tell us how you and your husband founded the SCI-FI Channel."

Laurie: "Well, oh gosh, this goes back three and a half years or so.  Mitchell Rubenstein and
I own cable systems in the Mid West and in Palm Beach County, Florida, and as operators of 
systems we would be pitched periodically by new cable networks that wanted to get on our 
system.  I have to credit Mitchell for coming up with the concept because it really was his, 
but one day he mentioned to me, 'You know, there's movie channels, there's movie channels, 
and there's movie channels, and there's sports and news, but science fiction is such a big 
part of the market place that I can't imagine why someone out there hasn't, you know, 
considered it as a stand alone network.'  It was really that seed of an idea that I looked at
him and said, 'Well Mitchell, I think you're crazy.' and I went back to whatever paper work I
was working on at the time.  He said, 'No, I'm serious.' So what we did was conducted a 
little bit of a grass roots research and went to the local bookstore and looked at how much 
shelf space was devoted to the genre, because we know shelf space in a book store translates 
to dollars and cents.  So, if a book store was devoting a significant amount of space, that 
means people were buying it!  Sure enough, you go in any book store whether it's Manhattan or
Miami Beach, you'll find a tremendous amount of shelf space is devoted to science fiction, 
fantasy and horror!  So we took that one step further and we went and looked in the video 
stores. We looked at the games that children were playing.  We looked at the top grossing 
movies of all time, and over and over and over again it came home that it was all coming out 
of the genre, and that this was just a wealth of entertainment product.  It just had not been
properly addressed as a cable network.  So we commissioned a national Gallop Pole (and this 
was our first legitimate foray into research) and we had them survey the current universe of 
cable subscribers, and asked them if they in fact would be interested in watching a service 
devoted to science fiction, fantasy and horror?  We positioned it against (in the pole that 
galloped it) MTV and Nickelodeon.  The reason being that when you say MTV or Nickelodeon, 
you automatically know what you're talking about.  That those are franchise channels.  
MTV's music and Nickelodeon is kid's programming.  Same thing with THE SCI-FI Channel.  
Even though it's a network that's not on the air, you say SCI-FI Channel to any body and 
they know exactly the type of programming they're going to get on that network.  Gallop 
felt that was very important to position it against another franchise network and believe 
it or not, Gallop's results were that 47% of the people poled would watch the SCI-FI 
Channel over MTV or Nickelodeon, and that's just wild!  Those are wild numbers because we 
all know how successful MTV and Nickelodeon are.  So, that's really how it started.  You 
know, Mitchell just had no idea that the thought had some merit and we just followed it 
through a little bit, and once Gallop's results came back to us we knew that we were on 
to something very significant, and of course the next step; the eternal step was selling 
it to the cable operator.  No matter how great your idea, how fabulous your programming 
looks, unless the people are watching it, it doesn't matter.  That of course is the whole 
story of how we built the business, and that's about it."

Question:  "Do you or your husband have a background in science fiction and horror, or 
are you fans of the subject?"

Laurie:  "To be very honest with you, we enjoy science fiction.  I would label myself as 
a casual fan.  I have children, so I would say the predominant time I spend in a movie 
theatre is in a science fiction, fantasy film because I'm generally with my children, 
and that's what they want to see.  I have read it.  I've read a tremendous amount of 
Isaac Asimov, but I'm not a source of knowledge.  I don't go far back where I've been 
reading it since I was a kid and just continued it all the way through.  I'd say that 
Mitchell probably has more of a knowledge of science fiction.  We were attracted to it 
for several reasons, but one of the big ones was as strictly a business venture.  We 
understood that it deserved the recognition in the market place as a stand alone 
business, as stand alone network, and I think that understanding and our basic business 
skills are what were really important.  We didn't want to offend the SCI-FI fan. It's a 
very intellectual group, like someone who is a collector of fine art.  You don't want to
pretend you know everything about art.  you either do or you don't.  We felt the same 
about science fiction and decided early on to establish a board of advisors, and on that 
board we assembled:  Isaac Asimov (Of course this was before they passed away),  "Star 
Trek" creator Gene Roddenberry, and Martin Greenberg.  We chose these three for a lot of
reasons, but it was a real working group.  No so much that they came to the office 
everyday, but they leant us so much insight into what science fiction fans really wanted,
and how we could program the network in a high concept style that would meet the appetite
that was really out there, of which is really important to us.  So am I a fan?  Was my 
intent on programming this to satisfy my own desires?  No.  It was my intent to become 
programmed to satisfy the desire of science fiction fans, which I look at as a very 
broad base.  I know that there's a core of science fiction aficionados.  They really 
are experts in the field of science fiction; but than there's people like myself who 
consider their selves casual fans that we also want the network to appeal to.  So in 
that sense, it's going to have a broader base if you will."

Question:  "Is this your first venture into creating a national television network?"

Laurie:  "Uh well, how many new national networks does one create?  (Laughs.)  I think 
one will do it for my life time, thanks a lot.  (Laughs.)  Uh, yeah this is our first 
venture.  As I mentioned, Mitchell and I own cable systems, so we were cable operators 
in the Mid West and in Florida, and we also owned a television station in the Orlando 
area of which we have since sold.  Our interest of which was station WKCF.  We also 
have owned radio stations.  We currently own in the Vero Beach area in the Florida 
market, so we have experience as broadcasters.  We have experience as cable operators.
We are also lawyers by back ground.  We have defended broadcasters, and cable operators 
before we ever did any ownership on our own.  We have a business sense on how this could 
be developed and placed in a market, but we were always very careful to be very honest 
about our own background and our own working knowledge.  Now Martin Greenberg, our last
remaining board of advisors member is considered by many to be one of the leading 
experts in science fiction today and he is continuing in his capacity as consultant for
the USA Network and is a tremendous force in the direction of their programming.  
Interestingly enough, when USA acquired SCI-FI from us, they liked our plan and in fact
the programming goes pretty much along the lines that Mitchell and I had developed.  The
mix of the old and the new.  The only thing that's different is the acceleration of the 
process.  In other words, USA's obviously a very successful network.  It's parents are 
Paramount and MCA, two major Hollywood studios, so they have a lot of product available 
to them that wouldn't have been available to us as entrepreneurs say for 10 years, based 
on our plan.  They also have the financial ability to develop a made of TV movie every 
month, and starting with the first month the SCI-FI Channel will have one made for 
SCI-FI Channel movie a month.  That's 12 a year.  Which makes it the second largest 
developer of new product for cable next to USA Network.  More so that any of Turner's,
HBO, or any of the others.  We're very excited about that and there are series in the 
works under development.  So it's very exciting.  It's everything we planned and plotted
and we had considered from day one through year ten, and they've really just sunk the 
money into it.  Of course the sky's the limit after that."

Question:  "Was SCI-FI offered for sale to USA directly or were there other networks in 
the bidding for it's purchase?"

Laurie:  "Our plan was to strike a strategic alliance.  It always was.  We had hired 
investment bankers Lehman Brothers and Salomon brothers to put this together because 
obviously it's very expensive to do a national network.  The days of entrepreneurs 
doing it are few and far between because the cost is so high.  So we decided early on 
we would strike a strategic alliance.  Now that doesn't really pin down what that 
alliance would be.  Would it be a join venture? Would it be a partnership?  Would it be 
a sale? W e weren't really sure how this was going to take place.  One thing we knew was
that we didn't want to just take some foreign money with lots of strings attached to it 
and be in a situation where we didn't have any synergies.  We were looking to always get 
involved wither with another programming network, with a Hollywood studio,with a major 
production company because we always saw the development of new product.  That's 
something very important to setting us apart from the other networks. Watching reruns 
of wonderful science fiction will always have a home on SCI-FI Channel.  There will 
always be "The War of the Worlds", "The Day the Earth Stood Still"... There will always 
be those great movies and series, and they will always have a place on SCI-FI.  We were 
also very determined that there be new product development.  We want to be if you will 
a laboratory with lots of experimentation coming out of our network.  That's what we 
saw as really exciting and cutting edge. So we felt a strategic alliance with a studio 
or network that could help us develop these plans were very important.  USA came along 
and quite frankly they laid down in front of us a plan that they had for the network 
that was so exciting and so significant that when the concept of selling to USA was 
first purposed it felt sort of like selling a child. (Sighs.)  It's very gut wrenching,
but on the other hand when you know that it's time to let the child go, you have to do 
it.  I just felt I was so committed to this project.  I felt it was so important!  The 
developing of the programming is the key here and I know they can do it.  I've seen what
they have done so far with their own network in the terms of the audience they're trying 
to attract, and we both felt it was in the best interest for everybody to do it!  It 
wasn't that we were trying to sell it.  There were other suitors.  There were a lot of 
other suitors.  There was a lot of money, but you know strictly a venture firm comes in 
and they want to see profits right away and you have to promise returns on capital.  
Things like that strap a company so that your plans for development are delayed, and 
this situation accelerated the development, not delayed it."

Question:  "Would you say the success of that type of programming on the USA Network 
influenced USA's proposal to take over SCI-FI?"

Laurie:  "Yes, oh sure!  They were buying our concept.  They were buying our packaging.  
They were buying the programming we had outlined.  They were buying our business plan.  
They were buying everything!  IF we had programmed it differently perhaps it wouldn't 
have been so attractive to them."

Question:  "When you and Mitch began acquiring your programming, did you have difficulty 
acquiring rare seldom seen programming such as the original "Dark Shadows" series and 
"Flash Gordon" serials?"

Laurie:  "We had for about eighteen months worked on a data base of programming so that
we knew just about everything and where it was.  In who's hands it was, and what was 
available and what was not.  We spent a lot of time developing that programming data.  
The only problem I might say that we had is trying to tie up a hot property for 
exclusive rights on SCI-FI Channel because we didn't exist.  I mean, who's going to do 
that?  Who's going to take a product like, for instance, "Dark Shadows" and tie it up 
for us when we may not ever happen.  They're tied up and they can't negotiate with 
anyone else.  In that sense it was difficult, but we did it."

Question:  "Now that USA owns SCI-FI, will they be honoring the contracts you previously 
made with Disney / MGM Studios in Orlando to produce segments there?"

Laurie:  "Yes, I don't know what the scope of the production is, but I know that USA 
Network does intend to honor that contract that SCI-FI has with Disney.  I don't have 
any other information except that they do intend to honor the contract."

Question:  "Will SCI-FI under USA continue to be involved with fan clubs of various 
shows and science fiction conventions?"

Laurie:  "We had a director of fan club relations that came to us from Disney that left
right before the sales transaction because she got married and resigned.  One of the 
first things USA did was hire a director of fan club relations from New York.  There is
a very strong interest in developing further the SCI-FI fan community.  The support has 
been incredible. They look forward to having a presence at the SCI-FI conventions and 
eventually to have their own SCI-FI conventions."

Question:  "Will SCI-FI fans be directly involved with the network's development of 
programming?"

Laurie:  "Yes, in fact Martin Greenberg is very heavily involved in the science fiction 
writer community and he is very active at seeing to it that young writers of science 
fiction are brought into the fold and are given an opportunity to help develop projects."

Question:  "As you were formerly SCI-FI's CEO's and now serve with Mitchell Rubenstein 
as Vice Chairman for USA, how do you feel about the reduction in network authority?"

Laurie:  "Well, Mitchell and I are Co-Vice Chairman of the network so we are still very 
much involved with the network, making sure our vision is achieved.  We don't have as 
much of a burden on our shoulders as we did before when we were juggling everything - 
doing everything, so we're able to have a broader approach to what's going on.  Both 
Mitch and I still have a lot to say in the operation and the programming development of
the network, but I have to be quite honest with you. When the USA Network acquired SCI-FI
they brought it in under the leadership of USA Network president and CEO Kay Koplovitz 
who will serve in the same capacity for SCI-FI and she is really an incredible visionary.  
She sees programming and the future of cable television the way few people do that are in 
it from day to day.  Sometimes you get so into business with its problems and complexes 
that you lose sight of what you're really going after.  She has a vision.  She's really 
very special and very incredible, and working with her in the development of SCI-FI has 
really been quite a unique experience for us!"

-END-