provider for new Trek series as original series download

[AviTrek]

I think this series is a good indication that straight digital will not last. The show was started as a cheap online webisode. Then SyFy decided it wanted more money and made a real TV series out of it. After that experience, why would you think they will make another web series instead of going straight to TV. And Star Trek is starting with a much larger mainstream audience than a SyFy original series.

[TJinPgh]

While the Sanctuary web series was written and produced by the people behind Stargate (hence Amanda Tapping's original involvement) I'm not certain SyFy had anything to do with it's original web run.

I'm of the impression that they didn't sign on until the series was already getting a positive buzz from the web.

Anybody have any links to whether or not that was the case?

EDIT:
According to an interview with Amanda Tapping, they never had any thoughts about the show ever being on TV. Although, she admits that they didn't really make any money from the initial 8 webisodes due to pirating.

She said they still envision returning to the web at some point with original content, though.

[TJinPgh]

A side note on this is that Sanctuary shows how a show can be heavy on special effects and still be cost effective.

It costs less than half (per minute) to produce an episode of Sanctuary than the average TV sitcom. According to SyFy, it costs about half as much to produce an episode of Sanctuary as it does Eureka.

Something to consider with respect to the other thread about doing TNG era programming for DVD and whether or not it could be profitable.

[JoeZhang]

TJinPgh wrote:

---

A side note on this is that Sanctuary shows how a show can be heavy on special effects and still be cost effective.

It costs less than half (per minute) to produce an episode of Sanctuary than the average TV sitcom. According to SyFy, it costs about half as much to produce an episode of Sanctuary as it does Eureka.

Something to consider with respect to the other thread about doing TNG era programming for DVD and whether or not it could be profitable.

Yes but it looks like ass - who wants to watch a Star Trek show that looks like it was made for next to nothing, we already have fan fiction shows for people who like that sort of thing.

[TJinPgh]

JoeZhang wrote:

---

Yes but it looks like ass - who wants to watch a Star Trek show that looks like it was made for next to nothing, we already have fan fiction shows for people who like that sort of thing.

Well, first of all, it hardly "looks like ass." There's absolutely nothing wrong with the visuals for Sanctuary. They are as good as anything that has been in a Trek series over the last decade. And, probably as good as anything Paramount would put into a Trek series any time soon. From what I read about the series, most of what you are probably complaining about is intentional. They were supposedly going for a Van Helsing/300 sort of feel. I think they fairly well achieved it.

But, to answer your question, I'd watch a series done with five year olds with sock puppets if it was better written than that last movie was.

[Temis the Vorta]

Well, first of all, it hardly "looks like ass."

Unless it's undergone a truly remarkable improvement since I gave up after the premiere, it does indeed look a great deal like ass.

My bigger issue with it: the premise and characters were uninteresting. I wouldn't mind a substandard-looking series with kickass characters and plotline. I don't think Paramount or CBS are going to countenance that approach for a premium brand like Star Trek, but there are countless other sci fi stories that could be told.

[Yug]

Temis the Vorta wrote:

---

I don't think Paramount or CBS are going to countenance that approach for a premium brand like Star Trek,

I hate to be the realist here, but Star Trek is not a "premium brand". In fact, anything that's a brand or franchise in general is, by definition, a property that can send it's fan base anywhere, and that can be capitalized on in numerous formats, toys and other merch included.

To us Trekkers, sure, it's great to see Trek treated with respect lately, they made a big budget reboot, honored it’s roots, and it did well. It's currently the jewel in Trek's crown… To sci-fi fans in general, it's in the top 5, probably #2 to Star Wars… BUT, to the average movie seeing, movie going, televison-o-phile, gamer, renter, downloader, casual observer, popcorn munching, Mr. and Mrs. bargain bin consumer... it's still just nerd wank.

That's fine, nerd wank sells. But, the new Trek film was only really part of the recent "novelty property parade" trend that included Transformers, GI Joe, Speed Racer, Terminator, Astro Boy, on and on… Even The A-Team is coming back as a big budget release. All re-appropriated stunt projects to bring in the built-in audiences... and their kids.

It won't be considered some untouchable gold standard property, because Paramount WILL boldly go where the money is. Even if it means numerous "exclusive packaging" versions of the same DVD that the market can bear. If it's potentially profitable, Trek can be anything from a big summer blockbuster, to a cgi webisode series, to a cell phone wallpaper app... and everything in-between. That's the beauty of nerd wank; we'll lap it up gladly. And THAT is what the entertainment industry counts on.

Trek is great, but it hasn't been elevated to any higher standard then it's survived as up to now... and why should it be?

[jefferiestubes8]

Yug wrote:

---

In fact, anything that's a brand or franchise in general is, by definition, a property that can send it's fan base anywhere, and that can be capitalized on in numerous formats,

Yug wrote:

---

Trek can be anything from a big summer blockbuster, to a cgi webisode series

Yug wrote:

---

It [Trek] won't be considered some untouchable gold standard property...

perhaps TOS & TNG but after those two I think anything is fair game.
TOS has been preserved even with the old visual effects in HD for many decades to come.

Yug some interesting thoughts. We have discussed in What channel should a new Trek TV series be on? that the Trek brand would not create direct-to-DVD projects and why the quality of brand that it is won't allow a premium cable channel like HBO or even CBS-owned Showtime to go near it for a new TV series.
When it comes to canon and that is TV or feature films CBS/Paramount chooses cautiously.
Videogames may have little interstitial videos but those are not canon, even with the same actors playing TOS, TNG, & VOY roles.
The closest I can see a webisode series coming is a Trek CGI animated series.
Who knows how desperate CBS will get when the next 2 or 3 Trek features come out of Paramount?

[jefferiestubes8]

This post pertains to USA only:


With Hulu Plus [paid subscription service] starting this Summer

Hulu would charge slightly less than $10 a month to watch TV shows and movies with fewer ads than currently available on the free service and on television, according to one person familiar with the matter.

The service would also be introduced on new devices, including Sony's PlayStation 3 and Microsoft's Xbox 360 game consoles.

FYI the XBox 360 will require a Xbox Live Gold subscription which is $49.99/1 year (less than $5.00/month)

"The free, ad-supported business model is great, but there are many other content owners who have chosen and are successful with other models, subscription or otherwise."-Hulu official on the company's blog in May.

Hulu pay version launch imminent

preview now via email invite:
http://www.hulu.com/plus

Library contents includes
The X-Files All 9 Seasons 201 Episodes
Buffy the Vampire Slayer All 7 Seasons 144 Episodes

CBS hasn't agreed to their programming on Hulu but that may change by the time a Trek series 6 is in pre-production.

What business model would you rather have to see the next Trek series?
free over-the-air TV with 18 minutes per hour advertisements, cable television with 18 minutes per hour advertisements, premium cable channel with no advertisements, or a subscription to the show via one of the above in the Poll?

Satellite & Cable companies charge $12-20./month for Showtime [owned media giant CBS Corporation] which may include Showtime-on-demand as well. If you use a DVR you can re-watch Trek episodes for months...

Would you rather pay for a $10./month Hulu Plus streaming subscription [with some advertisements] that includes a new Star Trek TV series or would you rather pay $14.00/month for Showtime if the next Star Trek series were on Showtime?

Or what about if Hulu or Netflix Instant offered the next Trek series as a subscription only without advertisements just for streaming that series for the season?
Not like their regular monthly subscription but a special separate subscription like a season pass just for Star Trek? [just like Sports packages are a subscription on satellite & cable TV services] As if Star Trek were it's own premium channel?
CBS would make money on every person that signs up.
How much would it cost figuring they would charge $80./season on DVD? $30.?
Essentially this would be very similar to a fanbase paying for production directly to CBS.

[Temis the Vorta]

What business model would you rather have to see the next Trek series?

"Basic cable television with 18 minutes per hour advertisements" is the most likely to synch well with the space opera format - you have a niche audience and subscription revenue to help pay the freight, but not the expectation of high-toned content like on premium cable. However, what you might call "sub-premium cable" - Starz - might go for Star Trek as an attempt to pull even with HBO and Showtime with a known brand name that the bigger premium outlets might disdain as too mainstream.