Any Plans for a "Reboot" or New Series?

[Temis the Vorta]

They'd be happy to invest millions in Star Trek on TV if they thought it would be a good investment. It's not like the movies and TV series would take money away from each other. If anything, each might give the other a PR boost (more from movies to TV than in the other direction).

 

[C.E. Evans]

They'd be happy to invest millions in Star Trek on TV if they thought it would be a good investment.

The operative phrase there being "a good investment." If they could get more out of it than they put in, they'd do it. But that's really what CBS is currently doing by not doing a new series right now. Only time will tell when CBS thinks the time is right to invest in a new Trek series.

It's not like the movies and TV series would take money away from each other.

Well, that's sort of the tricky area since CBS and Viacom went their separate ways. While Mr. Redstone gets paid from both companies regardless, the sharing of monies between CBS and Viacom likely isn't exactly what it was five years ago (Viacom--through Paramount--got more of the direct profits from Star Trek XI than CBS did, the reverse would likely be true if CBS did a new Trek TV series).

If anything, each might give the other a PR boost (more from movies to TV than in the other direction).

The other direction is presently what CBS is enjoying as a result of the new movies.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

CBS isn't getting any PR boost from the movies (unless they own all the Star Trek collateral too - how much revenue is there in Trek novels and toys anyway?)

 

[C.E. Evans]

CBS isn't getting any PR boost from the movies (unless they own all the Star Trek collateral too...)

They do. CBS inherently owns all of Trek and gets paid whenever an officially licensed Star Trek product is sold. Any increased sales of Star Trek merchandise as a result of Star Trek XI was more money for CBS.

( - how much revenue is there in Trek novels and toys anyway?)

Nowhere near as much as in Star Wars novels and toys, that's fa'sure, but it's more than chump change. During its peak in the '90s, rough estimates were around 250 million a year. These days, it's probably less but still nothing for CBS to turn its nose up at.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Something to keep in mind: The whole point of the last movie was to give Paramount their own Star Trek franchise to play with, without having to share with CBS. Based on that, I suspect that any new series would be a Prime Universe one, not JJverse.

As for when, don't hold your breath. With all the product already available, and the revenue they generate through syndication, DVD sales, etc., nobody's in a hurry to sink millions into development on a new series in the hope it'll be a hit, especially in light of the dismal reception the last two shows got. One day, maybe, but not any time soon.

Like I said elsewhere, when it happens, I see the pilot airing on CBS, with the series running on either CW or Showtime, probably the latter.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Something to keep in mind: The whole point of the last movie was to give Paramount their own Star Trek franchise to play with, without having to share with CBS. Based on that, I suspect that any new series would be a Prime Universe one, not JJverse.

What's your source on that?

 

[Captain Robert April]

Logic and gut instinct. Star Trek is a billion-dollar-a-year cash cow, and because of the nature of the split between CBS and Paramount Studios, they both had a claim (and vested interest) on that cow, so the legal eagles worked out their own Solomonesque solution and split the baby in two. CBS gets the TV part, Paramount gets the movie part.

The problem is that all the previous movies are directly tied to the television properties, making them CBS property as well and leaving Paramount with nothing of their own.

Hence, the reboot.

Now they've got their own alternate timeline to play around with and make as many explodapalooza movies as their little pea pickin' hearts desire, and they don't have to share with CBS any more than the licensing fee requires. Likewise, CBS can do whatever it wants with the established canon and doesn't have to so much as give the time of day to Paramount.

 

[bismarck_1892]

Now they've got their own alternate timeline to play around with and make as many explodapalooza movies as their little pea pickin' hearts desire, and they don't have to share with CBS any more than the licensing fee requires. Likewise, CBS can do whatever it wants with the established canon and doesn't have to so much as give the time of day to Paramount.

Interesting, but somehow I don't see both coexisting, one on TV the other in the theaters. We will have to wait and see. Hopefully, you are correct.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Logic and gut instinct. Star Trek is a billion-dollar-a-year cash cow, and because of the nature of the split between CBS and Paramount Studios, they both had a claim (and vested interest) on that cow, so the legal eagles worked out their own Solomonesque solution and split the baby in two. CBS gets the TV part, Paramount gets the movie part.

The problem is that all the previous movies are directly tied to the television properties, making them CBS property as well and leaving Paramount with nothing of their own.

Hence, the reboot.

Now they've got their own alternate timeline to play around with and make as many explodapalooza movies as their little pea pickin' hearts desire, and they don't have to share with CBS any more than the licensing fee requires. Likewise, CBS can do whatever it wants with the established canon and doesn't have to so much as give the time of day to Paramount.

Ah, so supposition not actual fact as you originally presented it.

 

[Distorted Humor]

I think CBS would have to buy/Set up a channel like "Spike TV" For another Trek series, heck, right now I would take ANY decent new SF series...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Logic and gut instinct. Star Trek is a billion-dollar-a-year cash cow, and because of the nature of the split between CBS and Paramount Studios, they both had a claim (and vested interest) on that cow, so the legal eagles worked out their own Solomonesque solution and split the baby in two. CBS gets the TV part, Paramount gets the movie part.

The problem is that all the previous movies are directly tied to the television properties, making them CBS property as well and leaving Paramount with nothing of their own.

Hence, the reboot.

Now they've got their own alternate timeline to play around with and make as many explodapalooza movies as their little pea pickin' hearts desire, and they don't have to share with CBS any more than the licensing fee requires. Likewise, CBS can do whatever it wants with the established canon and doesn't have to so much as give the time of day to Paramount.

Ah, so supposition not actual fact as you originally presented it.

Supposition not informed or supported by any knowledge or understanding of the contractual arrangements betweent CBS and Paramount, in fact.

"Gut instinct" is less than worthless in this connection, as is logic built on faulty premises that are derived from misinformation and/or constructed in ignorance.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Doesn't mean I'm wrong, smartypants.

 

[{ Emilia }]

Doesn't mean I'm wrong, smartypants.

Yeah, only means that you're just guessing.

Uhh... like all of us.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Doesn't mean I'm wrong, smartypants.

Nor does it mean you're right.

 

[Captain Robert April]

I recommend you take up heavy drinking.

To kill whatever it is that's crawled up your ass.

 

[BillJ]

The problem is that all the previous movies are directly tied to the television properties, making them CBS property as well and leaving Paramount with nothing of their own.

This still doesn't make sense, as they built the new movie directly off what came before.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Everything in the new movie is sufficiently different to qualify as a new product. The only thing Paramount would have to pay CBS for is the names that are registered trademarks (Captain James Kirk, Mr. Spock, U.S.S. Enterprise, etc.) and maybe not even that, depending on how that division of the franchise was drawn up.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Everything in the new movie is sufficiently different to qualify as a new product. The only thing Paramount would have to pay CBS for is the names that are registered trademarks (Captain James Kirk, Mr. Spock, U.S.S. Enterprise, etc.) and maybe not even that, depending on how that division of the franchise was drawn up.

What division of the franchise? You make in sound like a divorce settlement, by the way.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Everything in the new movie is sufficiently different to qualify as a new product. The only thing Paramount would have to pay CBS for is the names that are registered trademarks (Captain James Kirk, Mr. Spock, U.S.S. Enterprise, etc.) and maybe not even that, depending on how that division of the franchise was drawn up.

What division of the franchise? You make in sound like a divorce, settlement by the way.

In a real sense that's exactly what happened between CBS and Viacom in 2006, and it was a fairly messy divorce, IMO.

But in the end, CBS got all the properties that were formerly Paramount Television, while Viacom got Paramount Pictures (the movie studio). Paramount no longer really owns Star Trek, but they are allowed to continue making Trek movies under license from CBS. They have to pay to play, so to speak.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

I recommend you take up heavy drinking.

To kill whatever it is that's crawled up your ass.

Is that how you got your sunny disposition?