I'm surprised NBC is willing to risk that. Level three: will Leno regret that he made this move, thus affecting the quality of the show? I honestly have to wonder what's happening in Leno's head these days. Maybe he made this deal out of loyalty to his friends at the network. But does he truly want to work for a 10 p.m. audience after doing the late-night thing for so long? Level four: will viewers get sick of Leno quickly? You have to think that many of the eyeballs out there might yearn for scripted programming after the novelty of seeing Leno at an earlier time slot wears off. Level five: if such a high-profile move fails, what will it do for NBC's brand equity? I would imagine that this is a huge concern. NBC does not want to have a failure right now. Don't think it can't happen just because it's Jay Leno. Level six: is O'Brien really a team player in all this? What does he honestly think of the Leno move? It's an interesting question, I think.

What this all boils down to is fear. If you ask me, Zucker didn't want to put Leno on at 10 p.m., not when you get right down to it. He was frightened, though, frightened of the specter of a Jay Leno at another network. Why was he as scared as a short-seller during a market rally? Because the thought of Leno reeling in the ratings in an 11:30 p.m. time slot was too much for him to bear. To which I say, why don't you grow a pair, Jeff.

Would the world end for NBC if Leno jumped ship? No, it wouldn't, and I can prove it. Did David Letterman's jump to CBS (NYSE: CBS) kill the network? It didn't, obviously. In fact, one could argue that the competition only improved Leno's resolve to win. If Leno worked at ABC, it probably would have been good for O'Brien. And GE shareholders, for that matter. Because O'Brien would know that the stakes were serious and that he had better be on his game. Always. It's good to have a little fire under your seat to keep you hopping. Leno would have supplied the flame.

Now, though, NBC has to put up with keeping two major late-night egos happy and in check. It's not going to be an easy task. Again, though, I guess I have to retain some empathy for Zucker. Put yourself in his place: if Leno were allowed to leave for ABC or wherever, media pundits would probably have crucified him. It's sort of like the Disney-Pixar thing: many pundits, and Mouse shareholders, proffered the theory that overpaying for Pixar was a better thing than having Pixar fall into the hands of a studio rival. But when you change your programming model not only to appease a star, but to prevent said star from setting up a tent in the enemy's camp, then you might be saying that you have no confidence in your ability to innovate and create something new. Remember Conan O'Brien's first foray into late-night theater? There wasn't a lot of confidence in him. Yet, he turned out to be the heir to the iconic throne once held by Johnny Carson. Hey, I'm all for experimenting and trying something new, but I'd rather it perhaps be a new scripted concept by fresh, cheap talent. Leno reportedly will earn $30 million per year in his new gig. Yes, in relative terms, he may be inexpensive. Nevertheless, that $30 million investment might be better spent elsewhere. As it is now, that sum seems redundant since NBC also has a stake in O'Brien's success.

Maybe I'll turn out completely wrong about all this. Maybe Leno will hit this out of the park. But, I have my reservations, both from a creative and a capital-allocation standpoint. We'll just have to wait and see...

Disclosure: I own Disney, GE; positions can change at any time.