“Jean-Luc Picard is back”: will new Picard show eclipse Discovery?

[Nerys Myk]

I still can't wrap my head around packaging a show representing diversity to a targeted paying market. The non Access or Netflix crowd, well you lot that used to be the given Trek audience, pay up or shut up. You'd think diversity would be a message to get out to even poorer people.

However as you say it's what sells, it's a product.

Rich people like diversity too.

 

[fireproof78]

Netflix never considered Daredevil as a flagship to start a streaming series, House of Cards was. And even that series had a chance to crawl and then walk before the company fully launch another stream of original series by the company. Convention is to allow a new series to grow, and not chop its knees from under it, and then launch another show which will carry the same surname. The Netflix Marvel series was sold as a package, I doubt this was the case at CBS because they would have mentioned it while promoting Discovery.

This is shaping up to be another civil war between Trekfans (Deep Space Nine vs. Voyager) after TNG went off the air. It doesn't show a lot of confidence in the Studio for Discovery when they trump up another series based upon a Trek Legend. Whatever some people are claiming most viewers love DISCO, CBS-- based on their rapid purging-- is implying this is not true. They're breaking the purse to dip into that old well again to something that was widely considered was successful. fireproof78, come on, it's not as if CBS granted a spin-off for DISCO, for whatever it's worth--it appears CBS is going back to the future.

Convention was but doesn't meant that the business model has not changed. That's the point. CBS is taking a risk, but one that they seem to feel is appropriate for where they want to go.

CBS may simply be looking expansion of the market, appealing to more of a market share. Why not try several different time periods at once? This isn't going back to the 90s model with spin offs. There appears to be a different line of thought on this one.

CBS is demonstrating confidence in the Star Trek brand. That's good enough for me.

 

[Refuge]

Rich people like diversity too.

They feed of it

 

[jaime]

I still can't wrap my head around packaging a show representing diversity to a targeted paying market. The non Access or Netflix crowd, well you lot that used to be the given Trek audience, pay up or shut up. You'd think diversity would be a message to get out to even poorer people.

However as you say it's what sells, it's a product.

Selling a message to those who already believe in it is the symptom of this age. XD

 

[Refuge]

Selling a message to those who already believe in it is the symptom of this age. XD

Oh I have theories on that! (Decides to sit on her hands rather than derail the thread with her societal wisdom )

 

[BillJ]

Rich people like diversity too.

Portfolio diversity is very important to rich people.

 

[Arpy]

Oh I have theories on that! (Decides to sit on her hands rather than derail the thread with her societal wisdom )

I'm actually curious?

 

[Arpy]

Portfolio diversity is very important to rich people.

As opposed to no diversity which appeals to awful people both rich and poor? But no, I see your point. More of a bad thing is better than less.

 

[fireproof78]

Selling a message to those who already believe in it is the symptom of this age. XD

Largely because having an actual discussion often turns in to personal attacks and turning the other side in to "the other" rather than an actual person with a different POV.

 

[Greg Cox]

In fact, it's arguably better to have more than one show, because it makes people feel like they're getting more value for their money (it's the same subscription either way) and it makes it less tempting for people to subscribe for a minimum period of time, binge and then immediately unsubscribe.

Right. And many times have we seen Trek fans complain that they can't justify subscribing to CBS AA for just one Trek show?

Okay then, here come more Trek shows to make it more worth your while. Which means more viewers for DISCO as well. It's a win-win.

 

[Spider]

If CBSAA subscribers fall off during the off season for Discovery, what better way to prevent that than showing another Star Trek show in that time period?

 

[fireproof78]

Right. And many times have we seen Trek fans complain that they can't justify subscribing to CBS AA for just one Trek show?

Okay then, here come more Trek shows to make it more worth your while. Which means more viewers for DISCO as well. It's a win-win.

Well, they'll complain about that too.

 

[Doc Mugatu]

I'm not a Discovery fan, but your wrong here. The Picard series is an acknowledgement that Discovery is a success and CBS wants to extend that success by bringing in more shows that will appeal to those viewers.

Not necessarily. The Picard series could also be an admission that they need something with more name recognition to create buzz and excitement in hopes of getting and maintaining more mainstream interest in their streaming service. CBS, I feel, is an example of a company that would be better served by trying to buy, merge or sell to Netflix or Hulu or other established player in the streaming world. CBS, Warner Bros/DC, Netflix and Hulu are going to get slammed HARD when Disney starts up their service with all that beloved content they will be an instant juggernaut (even Netflix will be losing their SW and Marvel rights as well as Disney negotiating with Turner to buy back their SW rights). 2019 reveal all I think.

 

[fireproof78]

Not necessarily. The Picard series could also be an admission that they need something with more name recognition to create buzz and excitement in hopes of getting and maintaining more mainstream interest in their streaming service. CBS, I feel, is an example of a company that would be better served by trying to buy, merge or sell to Netflix or Hulu or other established player in the streaming world. CBS, Warner Bros/DC, Netflix and Hulu are going to get slammed HARD when Disney starts up their service with all that beloved content they will be an instant juggernaut (even Netflix will be losing their SW and Marvel rights as well as Disney negotiating with Turner to buy back their SW rights). 2019 reveal all I think.

CBS is not generally a company to throw money at something they don't think is successful. Hence the constant complaints I see that they are the company of NCIS and the police procedurals. CBS is cautious with their money, and if DSC had been a failure, Star Trek would be shelved.

 

[Nerys Myk]

CBS has a ton of content at their finger tips. TV shows and movies. They aren't exactly hurting in that area.

 

[Doc Mugatu]

If CBSAA subscribers fall off during the off season for Discovery, what better way to prevent that than showing another Star Trek show in that time period?

People naturally hold things to a higher standard and are more discerning when they are paying for it directly. They may get involved with one set of characters but not those of the next series. There is more of a gamble because with each new show is a new risk. Now I happen to think that is potentially a good thing. In theory it keeps folks motivated. Where it could go wrong is how in tune are the decision-makers with the paying audience? Are they paying them heed or are they doubling down on bad choices? Time will tell.

 

[fireproof78]

CBS has a ton of content at their finger tips. TV shows and movies. They aren't exactly hurting in that area.

No. More of a perception.

 

[fireproof78]

People naturally hold things to a higher standard and are more discerning when they are paying for it directly. They may get involved with one set of characters but not those of the next series. There is more of a gamble because with each new show is a new risk. Now I happen to think that is potentially a good thing. In theory it keeps folks motivated. Where it could go wrong is how in tune are the decision-makers with the paying audience? Are they paying them heed or are they doubling down on bad choices? Time will tell.

Welcome to business.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Where it could go wrong is how in tune are the decision-makers with the paying audience?

They'll look at ratings and revenue. That's their primary tune in. Not people whining on the internet.

 

[Doc Mugatu]

CBS is not generally a company to throw money at something they don't think is successful. Hence the constant complaints I see that they are the company of NCIS and the police procedurals. CBS is cautious with their money, and if DSC had been a failure, Star Trek would be shelved.

They are a startup in the streaming service business. They have launched in not the best of times (again Disney on the horizon). It's not so much a money thing as a growth thing and how much they are able to sustain. Again, "failure" in what sense? It can fail in one but succeed in another. Like TOS in helping sell RCA sell color TVs that helped keep them alive when on the ratings bubble (source: Solow & Justman). No matter which side someone is on in like STD the issues are not so black & white. I will say actions speak louder than words so as long as CBS is still investing that's good. Then again, they can always change their minds. If Picard does not perform as expected they could change everything for the worse.