Well, I don't know how "knowledgeable" I am, but I'll give it a shot!
I really don't think it had anything to do with the show being at risk of being cancelled. The ratings were always good...and then later, great. I believe it just had to do with Peter's salary. And also his fear of being 'trapped' in a tv series. And his perfectionism, and wanting more creative input in the show. As the years went on he did get more control and was allowed to input his ideas...even becoming executive producer for the newer episodes.

I just thought of another thing about endings. In Bye-Bye Columbo comes to Brandt's house without his raincoat and it happens to be pouring out. This was something that Lev & Link always wanted to use as an ending for the final Columbo.

And James, regarding your post above....the one about how the episode deals with I.Q stuff and puzzles..and how Columbo puts such an emphasis on the word "that".....I just don't know. I'm a bit confused on what you are implying. But that's ok...I get confused easily.

If you think about it, the ending to Bye Bye is much like that of "Murder under Glass" where Paul Gerard tells Columbo that he should have gone into another profession. Intimating, I think, that Gerard would have been better off if Columbo had become a chef instead of a police detective.

What I'm implying is: I think we were given a "minimum information" puzzle to solve...just like the gold pieces and asphalt.

That also happens in Death Lends a Hand, when Brimmer tells Columbo that he should have taken him up on the job he offered him.
Very clever, James, about the minimum information puzzle! I just don't know......maybe we could get some other people to "weigh" in on this!!

That's true regarding "Death Lends a Hand". And regarding the raincoat...in "Now You See Him", Mrs. C buys him a new one and he's seen without any raincoat in several scenes.

Thanks, I was hoping we could get others to think about it and tell me I'm crazy or just maybe there's something to it...

Take care

You are not crazy. You know how we all are here.....we disect every nuance of every episode!

Could our hero have meant by "that" a change in his goals and lifestyle--from serving the public to serving himself? He's a natural public servant, feeling as called to his duty as many priests and teachers feel called to theirs? Then again, maybe I'm reading too much into it, too.

That may be going a bit far. The way he says it, I think there's something very specific intended. Which leads me to believe that it was a "minimum information" puzzle to solve -- just like the gold pieces.

Ok...how about this....David pointed this out earlier.....could it be the whole possible "ending" of the series thingy. It was the last episode of the 6th season. And maybe it was a reference to Peter himself...and that he could never do "that", meaning be anything other than an actor, and also Columbo?
But if we go with your "minimum information" theory, James, well do you have any insight there as what the puzzle could be?
I'm getting a headache!!

Every time I see that episode, I keep thinking that Columbo is specifically addressing a direct suggestion posed by Brandt; but I've never been able to figure out what he may be referencing. No insights -- that's why I thought I'd try here.

I assumed that Bikel was suggesting a career in crime, as Columbo had just demonstrated that he would be too smart to be caught.

Btw, as someone who always watched columbo in italian, I have to say it doesn't come across this way in the italian version: brandt asks him "tenente, non ha mai pensato di cambiare professione?" "lieutenant, have you ever thought to change your line of work?", and he answers "no, mai, non saprei fare altro" "no, never, I wouldn't be able to do anything else", implying he knows how to do ONE thing very well and that is being a detective, so at least in the italian version there's no hidden meaning.