Some of my (minor) concerns:
1. Doing the throwback approach might be confusing for some. Beyond the long, long
time readers who will get it, it might be too much of a niche within a niche. Then again, the big numbers on the cover may drive people to really pick up the book and examine it.
2. An Endeavor
in Seekers and an Endeavor
in ROTF. A bit repetitous, but not much you can do about that now. And I would prefer ROTF keep with established tradition of naming NX-class ships after the space shuttles. Perhaps this is an opportunity to create some continuity between the two: create a sense that ships named Endeavor
have as proud a tradition as ships named Enterprise
3. I'm looking forward to the series, but without the political and archeology angles of Vanguard that differentiated it from TOS, I hope there is a new angle to make it stand out.
I didn't even think about that. Would that be a first for Trek lit?
I don't know if I'd consider the above example about NF. That seemed more like continuing to use the same characters across two series. Then again, Seekers sounds like such a direct spin-off that I guess it should really be called a sequel series. Which they may have. I don't have the announcement in front of me. Semantics.