What are the chances a major network (CBS)would run a ST show in a prime time slot? I would think any new series would favor syndication like TNG?
New Singer / Fuller Series?
- Thread starter dulcimer47
- Start date
The chance of a new series airing in syndication is close to the number of first run syndication series airing right now. IE 0.
If a new series is released in the 2010s, it'll be cable for sure. Unless CBS is feeling really experimental and feels like airing it directly on their channel on a Saturday or something.
If it's released around 2020 or later, I'm guessing streaming. Plus the Abrams' trilogy would be finished and what channel to have series on would be a non-issue.
I'm 100% convinced streaming is the wave of the future and it's already replacing syndication. I've lost count of how many series I've discovered or rediscovered thanks to streaming. It's giving old shows a second (or third) life, including the Star Trek series.
... assuming this thread isn't pruned, you enjoy reading through archives, and you're reading this in 2020 or later: Hello from 2012. I hope I didn't make a fool out of myself with the previous paragraph.
If it's released around 2020 or later, I'm guessing streaming. Plus the Abrams' trilogy would be finished and what channel to have series on would be a non-issue.
I'm 100% convinced streaming is the wave of the future and it's already replacing syndication. I've lost count of how many series I've discovered or rediscovered thanks to streaming. It's giving old shows a second (or third) life, including the Star Trek series.
... assuming this thread isn't pruned, you enjoy reading through archives, and you're reading this in 2020 or later: Hello from 2012. I hope I didn't make a fool out of myself with the previous paragraph.
I think TNT or AMC could gain and keep 4-6 Million viewers for A new Trek Series, as they do with Walking Dead and Falling Skies. This may mean Season 1 will be able to show us little more in the way of sets than the Bridge and corridors and Caves/Rock Quarries, but, that's OK, as long as the writing is there. Once they get the first Season under their belt, they could build more sets in Season 2. this could actually work to the show's advantage if they hint at things and leave them a mystery, because they can't afford the budget dollars to reveal them in Season 1
One thing that could possibly cause a renewed interest in first-run syndication is the growing number of digital cable channels. Many of them are spinoffs of local channels not really showing any network programming, but reruns of older TV shows and movies (exactly like independent stations did). Most of these channels are locally available free for those with a digital antenna, but also on local cable digital tier packages.
Shows being made for streaming (Netflix, Yahoo, etc) are still rare and the financial model is unproven, even without the added burden of a large SFX budget.
That strikes me as the most likely route to getting Star Trek back on TV.
Why? What makes syndication so special that it's the only option. Just read the rest of this thread(to say nothing of the other threads in Future of Trek), there are people pushing every option from CBS, to TNT, to Showtime, to online streaming. Just because syndication is dead doesn't mean there is no way to bring Star Trek back to TV. The show just has to be geared for the eventual network it will air on.
Most of those stations don't broadcast in HD because they are subchannels and don't have the bandwidth. And they also have very little market penetration. I would think broadcast syndication is more likely than sub-channel syndication. But a first-run cable deal is much more likely than both.
The thing about syndication is that it's really reverted back to the way it was prior to TNG--dominated by reruns of shows that previously aired on a network. If anything, the '90s was a fluke when there was a comparative surge of first-run scripted shows in syndication. These days, you'll find reruns of House or 30 Rock in timeslots once occupied by Star Trek shows 15 years ago...
Why? What makes syndication so special that it's the only option. Just read the rest of this thread(to say nothing of the other threads in Future of Trek), there are people pushing every option from CBS, to TNT, to Showtime, to online streaming. Just because syndication is dead doesn't mean there is no way to bring Star Trek back to TV. The show just has to be geared for the eventual network it will air on.
I think their growing inclusion in cable digital tiers (which are increasingly available in HD) could solve that first issue. As far as market penetration, I think that subchannels could become more prominent and available as extensions of local stations in the next 5-10 years.
Money.
The economics of modern television don't favor an investment in an expensive TV series that returns the kind of numbers in important demos that Star Trek would be expected to.
If Star Trek can't return numbers in the important demos then it doesn't matter how it's sold, since no network/station will buy it. Syndication sales tend to be even lower than cable sales, so why would CBS sell a show into syndication when it can sell the show for more money to TNT?
The virtue of the kind of syndication deal that Paramount did in the '80s and '90s was that they sold more than half the advertising time directly; that money was theirs (local stations got five minutes; Paramount got seven). When a studio produces a show for a network they provide the episodes in exchange for a license fee which is, in practice, not nearly what it costs to produce the show. The network sells the advertising minutes; if the show does very well, they can charge a lot (and if it does less well than they promise the sponsors, then they owe the sponsors money back - this is why networks cut shows quickly when their ratings start to tank). Studios hope to make a profit on shows they sell to networks by eventual back-end or re-run syndication, which requires a certain number of episodes to be practical (hence their concern with a show running a certain number of years).
Supposedly one reason Paramount chose syndication over an earlier-discussed network deal with FOX was that the network would not guarantee them an order of at least a full season. Paramount was not willing to spend the amount of money necessary to launch the series unless they had at least that much financial commitment from a partner.
^The key phrase there is "back in the '80s and '90s." The first-run syndication market that existed then is totally dead now. The rise of The WB and UPN gobbled up formerly independent stations so there were fewer primetime markets left for first-run, and the proliferation of other forms of entertainment eroded the audience for TV in general. The only first-run syndicated drama we've had in years was Legend of the Seeker a few seasons back, and that only lasted two seasons and hasn't been followed up on.
Besides the "Walking Dead", Enterprise's ratings for all four seasons are in line with the top 15 shows on Cable during the week of feb 6th:
Cable top 15
RankShow name
1.Walking Dead
2.Jersey Shore
3.Pawn Stars
4.Gold Rush
*Pawn Stars
*WWE Raw
7.The Lion King
*Swamp People
9.WWE Raw
10.NCIS
11.Teen Mom 2
*2012 Grammy Red Carpet
13.NCIS
14.Big Bang Theory
*Big Bang Theory
*Bering Sea Gold
*NCIS
I would like to think a Star Trek show could beat out the Jersey Shore
Cable top 15
Network
Day, time
Viewers in millions
Day, time
Viewers in millions
AMC
Sun., 9
8.1
Sun., 9
8.1
MTV
Thu., 10
5.4
Thu., 10
5.4
History
Mon., 10:30
5.2
Mon., 10:30
5.2
DISC
Fri., 9
4.8
Fri., 9
4.8
History
Mon., 10
4.8
Mon., 10
4.8
USA
Mon., 9
4.8
Mon., 9
4.8
Disney
Sat., 7:30
4.7
Sat., 7:30
4.7
History
Thu., 9
4.7
Thu., 9
4.7
USA
Mon., 10
4.4
Mon., 10
4.4
USA
Wed., 9
4.2
Wed., 9
4.2
MTV
Tue., 10
4.1
Tue., 10
4.1
E!
Sun., 6
4.1
Sun., 6
4.1
USA
Wed., 8
3.7
Wed., 8
3.7
TBS
Tue., 10
3.5
Tue., 10
3.5
TBS
Tue., 9:30
3.5
Tue., 9:30
3.5
DISC
Fri., 10:01
3.5
Fri., 10:01
3.5
USA
Mon., 8
3.5
Mon., 8
3.5
I would like to think a Star Trek show could beat out the Jersey Shore
Not according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Star_Trek:_Enterprise_episodes. ENT's ratings dropped steadily over its four year run. Until the last two episodes, each episode of ENT season four had fewer viewers than the least ranked show on your chart there, often much fewer.
Beyond that, the relevant question is how much it costs to produce an hour of most of those shows as compared to how much it cost to produce an hour of Enterprise. The ratings numbers are meaningless by themselves.
That would be why the qualifier is in my very first sentence, yeah.
That would be why the qualifier is in my very first sentence, yeah.
I like your optimism, but I'm far from sure about that.
I've noticed The Walking Dead's ratings as well, but it doesn't look like that show has as large a budget as Star Trek would require. I'm not sure there's a show on today that would serve as a good comparison. Maybe Smash, at a reported $3.5 million per episode, which makes its 8 million viewers none too large, even on desperate NBC. Could Star Trek get 8 million, even under the best circumstances?
True. I did look at this info before posting. I think the average Enterprise rating could compete with the last 10 shows on this list. It should be easy for a well written Trek show to have 4.8 million viewers weekly. No matter what station it is on. Not for nothing, I thought Enterprise was just gettting good when it was cancelled.
Does CBS make a large profit off the reruns, syndication, streaming contracts, DVD, and Blu-ray sales of old Trek shows? And if so why not pay now for a show that gets 3 to 5 million veiwers now and makes a small profit. In order to make a larger long term profit from the above mention sources?
Last edited:
Why make a small profit when you can make a big one off doing Yet Another Cop Show?
Similar threads
