How to get Star Trek and Sci fi shows back on TV

[MacLeod]

If a foreign broadcaster stupped up 50% of the production cost, they would no doubt want a cut of the merchandising rights for that show. They would also want exclusive rights to air it in that country.

So for example if BSkyB did a co-production they would want exclusive UK rights, which means a channel like CBS Action couldn't air it ever without Sky's approval.

 

[EmoBorg]

If a foreign broadcaster stupped up 50% of the production cost, they would no doubt want a cut of the merchandising rights for that show. They would also want exclusive rights to air it in that country.

So for example if BSkyB did a co-production they would want exclusive UK rights, which means a channel like CBS Action couldn't air it ever without Sky's approval.

CBS could grant certain exclusive rights to British and Aussie Broadcasters, perhaps within their countries, for helping produce the star trek series But it could still retain the right to sell the show to other broadcasters in other countries.

CBS has no plans to produce a Star Trek show for the conceivable future. Various reasons are given but the financial cost of producing a sci fi show is perhaps the main reason. If they could solve that problem by going into a joint production, they could be willing to grant certain rights to other broadcasters involved in the joint production in return for a reduction in production cost for CBS.

I mean CBS legally owns the rights to the Star Trek TV franchise but it is not doing anything with it except making money from distributing the older star trek shows.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I mean CBS legally owns the rights to the Star Trek TV franchise but it is not doing anything with it except making money from distributing the older star trek shows.

Which could indeed be their long-term plan for Trek. It's what they're doing with all of the other TV properties they own that are no longer in production.

TNG and DS9 were the result of people (at what was formerly Paramount Television) that were pushing for new shows for first-run syndication. VOY and ENT were created solely for the now defunct UPN network. With one outlet nearly dead and the other one long since dead, there really isn't presently a burning need for CBS to invest in a new Trek series, IMO. Or at the least, there's no one currently at CBS that seems to be rallying for one like Mel Harris did for TNG and Brandon Tartikoff did for DS9.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

They don't need anyone with clout, they'd be more interested in someone who can deliver a show on time and within their ideal budget (something that a formerly unknown producer named Rick Berman was able to do very well.

Thats pretty much what I meant by clout, maybe credibility would have been better. A show runner who has made money lately.

The cost of producing Star Trek is not the holdup. It's the cost vs projected revenues. CBS would spend big if it had a reason to believe the revenues would be even bigger, and even then it would have to beat that cop show they could do instead.

Foreign markets aren't going to solve this problem because any money CBS could make from space opera, they could make even more with a cop show. Take all those co production schemes you guys are thinking of, and just insert a CSI knockoff in there instead. Why wouldn't that work for CBS even better? CSI being the supposedly most popular TV series in the world and all. Or, maybe they should try their hand at a telenovela style soap.

The main problem is that nobody at CBS is championing a new show. When that changes, we 'll get a new show. Till then, everyone is content to spend their time on other things. There are plenty of other, easier ways for CBS to make money.

 

[MacLeod]

If a foreign broadcaster stupped up 50% of the production cost, they would no doubt want a cut of the merchandising rights for that show. They would also want exclusive rights to air it in that country.

So for example if BSkyB did a co-production they would want exclusive UK rights, which means a channel like CBS Action couldn't air it ever without Sky's approval.

CBS could grant certain exclusive rights to British and Aussie Broadcasters, perhaps within their countries, for helping produce the star trek series But it could still retain the right to sell the show to other broadcasters in other countries.

Yes but a foreign co-financer could say we want a slice of the international sales.

After all if I were an UK TV executive, I might perhaps cough up the price I would be charged for the rights to air it. Once I start to get a large percentage over that I would be wanting a cut of the profits from other sales.

 

[C.E. Evans]

They don't need anyone with clout, they'd be more interested in someone who can deliver a show on time and within their ideal budget (something that a formerly unknown producer named Rick Berman was able to do very well.

Thats pretty much what I meant by clout, maybe credibility would have been better. A show runner who has made money lately.

The cost of producing Star Trek is not the holdup. It's the cost vs projected revenues. CBS would spend big if it had a reason to believe the revenues would be even bigger, and even then it would have to beat that cop show they could do instead.

Foreign markets aren't going to solve this problem because any money CBS could make from space opera, they could make even more with a cop show. Take all those co production schemes you guys are thinking of, and just insert a CSI knockoff in there instead. Why wouldn't that work for CBS even better? CSI being the supposedly most popular TV series in the world and all. Or, maybe they should try their hand at a telenovela style soap.

The main problem is that nobody at CBS is championing a new show. When that changes, we 'll get a new show. Till then, everyone is content to spend their time on other things. There are plenty of other, easier ways for CBS to make money.

Agreed. Pretty much it in a nutshell.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Its obvious that CBS does lose something in international co productions because if they didn't, why would they ever finance a series any other way? Yet they do. Most likely they give up two big things - money and control - in exchange for spreading the risk. Corporations are loathe to give up money and control, and to avoid risk is easy. Just do nothing.

Corporations are more likely to take risks when they are desperate and being conservative isn't working for them. Or, if they have a culture that rewards risk. Neither describes CBS.

 

[EmoBorg]

Its obvious that CBS does lose something in international co productions because if they didn't, why would they ever finance a series any other way? Yet they do. Most likely they give up two big things - money and control - in exchange for spreading the risk. Corporations are loathe to give up money and control, and to avoid risk is easy. Just do nothing.

Corporations are more likely to take risks when they are desperate and being conservative isn't working for them. Or, if they have a culture that rewards risk. Neither describes CBS.

So CBS will not consider producing a new star trek series for reasons like financial cost of sci fi shows and there is no CBS executive or anyone in a high place currently in CBS who will push for a new Star Trek Series.

CBS will not consider joint productions in fear of losing money from Distributions of the new show.

So while CBS is sitting on the Star Trek TV Franchise and doing nothing about it for the time being, Can we hope that other broadcasters might engage in new joint productions of new space based Sci fi shows.

i mean look at Farscape. It was an interesting show and it was co produced by Hallmark productions, the Jim Henson company and the Nine Network (Australia).

Could we hope for future joint productions ,by TV companies from different countries, for space based sci fi TV shows.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

There are space based shows being planned, not many but they exist - Robert Hewitt Wolfe's Defender for SyFy and a space war series on Starz. No idea how the financing is working. Next time I see a news story about those, I'll see if it's mentioned. Those are certainly more of a risk than any known brand name.

Farscape is not a good example to cite because it was never a stunning success, and I doubt anyone would take that risk today. Certainly not SyFy. They seem happy to do fantasy tinged cop shows, which is a much less risky proposition.

 

[EmoBorg]

Farscape is not a good example to cite because it was never a stunning success

Well Farscape did last for 4 seasons and it did get a miniseries to tie up loose ends after the show was cancelled.
It lasted longer than SGU and Firefly. It was relatively successful.

 

[BillJ]

A trip to Mars or some stunning discovery in space that would get the general public thinking about it again.

 

[EmoBorg]

A trip to Mars or some stunning discovery in space that would get the general public thinking about it again.

A stunning Discovery in space will do it. An evidence of a long dead alien civilization perhaps or even the discovery of living organisms in our solar system will certainly spark renewed interest in sci fi.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

CBS launching its own channels internationally.

Part of the plan is to use these channels to show their immense back catalog of shows, including Star Trek. So there ya go, they can make a new series and have their own CBS baded channels worldwide to show them on, after building up an audience with the reruns.

If that really is the plan, to build CBS as a global TV brand and bolster that brand with famous TV names such as Star Trek, then that would be a good reason to make the next series closer in content and tone to the others rather than do something completely different for Showtime. It still begs the question of what American channel would be right for a traditional Star Trek show. Netflix maybe.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The CBS deal with Chellomedia really amounts to an international second-run syndication deal for their library of older properties and some still currently in production reality shows. It should not be looked at as a home for a potential new Star Trek series, except for its reruns.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

CBS is continually producing new shows that, once they air in America, become older shows. Why wouldn't they continue to cycle all their shows into the "rerun circuit" overseas as a natural part of their life cycle? In the case of a new Star Trek series, they might be able to get better deals showing it on other channels but that doesn't preclude also showing it on their own branded channel.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Actualy, that's my point. The deal with Chellomedia is for CBS reruns, so the reruns of any new potential Star Trek series will likely air there after their debut in the US. Much smaller networks (like Retro TV) have been selling their branded blocks of classic TV shows to both individual local and nationwide cable channels for years now.

With Chellomedia, CBS doesn't have to peddle their reruns to individual overseas markets. They can get more than 80 all at once.

 

[MacLeod]

Actualy, that's my point. The deal with Chellomedia is for CBS reruns, so the reruns of any new potential Star Trek series will likely air there after their debut in the US. Much smaller networks (like Retro TV) have been selling their branded blocks of classic TV shows to both individual local and nationwide cable channels for years now.

With Chellomedia, CBS doesn't have to peddle their reruns to individual overseas markets. They can get more than 80 all at once.

To be called a re-run it actually has to have first run. So for example CBS has several branded channels in the UK. So if for example if a new Star Trek show aired on CBS Action, that would be considered a first run for the UK. If it first aired on say Sky One and then on CBS Action it would be called a network premiere by CBS Action, being shown on the same channel after it had already run once would be cosnidered a re-run.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Actualy, that's my point. The deal with Chellomedia is for CBS reruns, so the reruns of any new potential Star Trek series will likely air there after their debut in the US. Much smaller networks (like Retro TV) have been selling their branded blocks of classic TV shows to both individual local and nationwide cable channels for years now.

With Chellomedia, CBS doesn't have to peddle their reruns to individual overseas markets. They can get more than 80 all at once.

To be called a re-run it actually has to have first run. So for example CBS has several branded channels in the UK. So if for example if a new Star Trek show aired on CBS Action, that would be considered a first run for the UK. If it first aired on say Sky One and then on CBS Action it would be called a network premiere by CBS Action, being shown on the same channel after it had already run once would be cosnidered a re-run.

It'd be a rerun as far as CBS is concerned, because it would have aired in the US first. It's no different from how the original Star Trek series went from NBC to second-run syndication or how reruns of the classic Doctor Who series were later aired on PBS stations after their initial run on the BBC (although there was one rare time when a Doctor Who story aired on PBS before it did on the BBC).

 

[MacLeod]

So you really think they would advertise it as "Now a re-run of ..... " and not as "And now the UK premiere of ......"

 

[C.E. Evans]

Doesn't matter what kind of spin a UK channel wants to put on it. It'll still be considered a rerun (or a rebroadcast) as far as CBS and the terms of the deal are concerned. Most shows are made in the US with rebroadcast rights in mind.