What channel should a new Trek TV series be on?

[AviTrek]

Ya, I've never thought USA was a good fit, but with CBS producing for USA and TNT it shows they are willing to produce for basic cable channels owned by other companies. That includes FX with USA and TNT(technically SyFy too, but we'll ignore them for now).

In terms of TNT, I've preferred their stuff over FX. I'm not sure you can blame TNT for the schmaltz as much as Spielberg, and TNT just likes Spielberg. But I'd be happy to see a new Trek show on FX or TNT.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I associate FX with grittier stuff like Sons of Anarchy and Archer - shows that I'd never dream of seeing on broadcast. Falling Skies seems like it could be on broadcast in terms of content (whether it could get survival level ratings is another matter). TNT shows like Hawthorne, Franklin & Bash and Leverage seem either broadcasty or somewhere inbetween broadcast and cable.

 

[Thomas.B]

It should air on CBS. That would be best.
I don't care much for the CW. Where would they put a Trek series? "Stay tune after Hellcats for Star Trek," just doesn't sound right.
None of the cable outlets sounds like a good option. It would be worth considering a deal with TBS for running first run episodes because TBS is on almost all cable channel lineups.
Showtime? No thanks. With Netflix, I consider premium channels like HBO and Showtime a waste of money.

 

[AviTrek]

Thomas, please read through all 15 pages and you will find posts explaining the pros/cons of all the options. But TBS really makes no sense whatsoever. TBS is purely focused on comedies. If Turner(TBS's owner) wants a drama, it goes on TNT not TBS. Also, TBS, TNT, FX, USA, and SyFy are all equally common in cable packages. There is no advantage to airing on TBS over one of the others.

In terms of Showtime, I tend to agree with you that I'd rather have Netflix when it comes to movies. However, that is why all the premium channels are investing in first run TV series now. When judged on movies, Netflix destroys them. However, if you want to see a TV show when it comes out your only option is to subscribe. It sucks for us to have to pay for the channel, but that's why HBO/Showtime can afford to spend what they do on their shows.

 

[Thomas.B]

Thomas, please read through all 15 pages and you will find posts explaining the pros/cons of all the options.

The original post posed a question. I just answered what I would prefer and gave my reasons. It isn't that deep of a topic that I felt like I had to read 15 pages of comments, mostly by people who are just giving views based on their opinions too.

 

[Thomas.B]

It's always nice to come to a new board and be greeted by an asshole, btw.

 

[AviTrek]

Thomas, please read through all 15 pages and you will find posts explaining the pros/cons of all the options.

The original post posed a question. I just answered what I would prefer and gave my reasons. It isn't that deep of a topic that I felt like I had to read 15 pages of comments, mostly by people who are just giving views based on their opinions too.

The original post asked what channel would be most realistic. Your answer showed a fundamental lack of understanding what certain networks even show.

It's always nice when a newbie shows up and thinks he's smart enough to ignore everything that has happened before him.

 

[Lindley]

It's always nice to come to a new board and be greeted by an asshole, btw.

Warning for flaming.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

CW deal with Netflix and implications

From the news this week of the CW & Netflix:

The basic deal is that if a scripted series (drama or comedy . . .though for now, on The CW, that means drama) airs on The CW, Netflix automatically acquires it.

Here's the Deal
First off: the pact. Netflix can begin showing episodes of all CW scripted shows (not unscripted ones) beginning the September after the season in which that episode aired. So, any episodes airing now will become available in Sept. 2012.

The deal is exclusive for SVOD [streaming video-on-demand], though there is a carve-out for the parties to still sell their shows to, for instance, a cable outlet.

For now, the deal affects shows produced over the next four years . . . though it actually runs longer than that, because Netflix keeps the rights for four years after each series -- current or future -- ends its CW run.

if The CW were to suddenly hit a massive home run by, say, CBS, ABC, NBC or Fox standards, Netflix would be getting an absolute steal at those prices. That, of course, is a new problem CW execs would be thrilled to have. And on top of that, the studios still have the rights to sell The CW shows on other platforms.

Analysis: Why the Billion-Dollar CW-Netflix Deal Should Catch Your Attention
Backend deal for relatively low-rated network saw CBS and WB get on same page about Netflix and create de facto annuity for CW for years to come
Broadcasting & Cable, 10/13/2011

So that pretty much sums it up that there will be no Trek series on CW in the next 4 years.
CBS would not let Netflix have the Trek TV series property at a steal for 4+ years.

So either no TV series in the next 4 years to be broadcast or definitely not on CW channel.

 

[Jetfire]

Why? It isn't like the last Trek series was a hit. And since Netflix is carrying older Trek series...this would help a new one alot. Plus this deal opens the door for CW to take more chance since they want to change up their programming.

"This deal works across multiple levels for us," said Mark Pedowitz, President, The CW. "Not only will we be able to recruit new viewers for our shows through the powerful reach of Netflix, but it also makes The CW an even more attractive option to the creative community."
http://www.ksitetv.com/9002/the-cw-signs-a-streaming-deal-with-netflix/

You also assume because the movie was a success that a TV series would be as well. This deal with Netflix at least gives any new series some hope...Trek or not.