Thanks for screwing Star Trek, CBS...

[Amaris]

You're not missing much -- they were crappy as hell. Not even worth the $15 they originally cost. (There's a reason the toys sold like shit originally.)

I think I have a spare knocking around in a box somewhere if you really want one, though. I don't know what condition it's in but I'd be happy to send it to you.

Aw, that is so sweet of you.
Yes, please! And if you need anything pony related that I have, let me know.

Alright. Let me dig through my boxes and see what I've got.

And if you need anything pony related...

Sure. Complete creative control of the franchise so I can undo the horrible damage McCarthy, Vogel and presumably Goldner are wreaking, please.

That may be beyond one man's control.

 

[Phily B]

The reality of the situation is that Trek '09 didn't pull in worldwide numbers like they were expecting

What numbers were they were expecting?

The domestic numbers were probably better than expected and the foreign numbers were disappointing but not unusual for a Trek movie which probably had very little hype in many territories. I think the main goal of the current Trek is improved OS (about 200m) and getting close to 300m domestic.

 

[Beyerstein]

I don't see why TOS merchandise and JJ Abrams Trek merchandise can't both co-exist.

why did JJ want them to stop TOS merchandise?

 

[Mr_Homn]

Cue someone bleating "That's fine. I'd rather have no Star Trek on TV at all than something cooked up by Abrams and those Transformers writers of his!"

how transparent.

you could have at least waited until someone took the bait.

 

[Amaris]

Cue someone bleating "That's fine. I'd rather have no Star Trek on TV at all than something cooked up by Abrams and those Transformers writers of his!"

how transparent.

you could have at least waited until someone took the bait.

He didn't need to. It's inevitable.

 

[Devon]

I don't see why TOS merchandise and JJ Abrams Trek merchandise can't both co-exist.

why did JJ want them to stop TOS merchandise?

In the article, it says that there was market confusion between Old and New. Bad Robot's Trek IS the current Trek and they were wanting to doing some very ambitious things. They can't get help with that if CBS is more concerned with devoting their resources to Harry Mudd Beach Towels and "The Motion Picture/Final Frontier" Blu-Ray sets and the sort.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the NuTimeline novels that were announced for 2010 and then fell through or the Round 2 Models agreement that fell through?

 

[Beyerstein]

It still doesn't make sense to me

The article makes it sound like Bad Robot's Trek is via paramount winch is still Viacom and not CBS which controls the tv.

What does Merchandise from the old shows have to do with a lack of merchandise from Nu Trek?

William Shatner Kirk bobble heads stooped Bad Robot from doing a new Trek show for CBS? is that what it's saying??

 

[C.E. Evans]

The article is somewhat misleading.

Essentially (since 2006), CBS owns Trek in all its entirety but gave Paramount a license to make Star Trek movies. Bad Robot wanted to do other stuff with Star Trek, but it went through the wrong channel--it tried to do it with Paramount, who doesn't have a license from CBS to do that other stuff.

Working with both CBS and Paramount is a bad idea because you are dealing with two different companies with two different ideas of what they want to do with Trek. There is a history of bad blood between CBS and Viacom (the parent company of Paramount). The two once operated under the same umbrella, but were split off from one another because they tended to be competitors and they still are to this day.

 

[Relayer1]

Maybe a series that's 12 to 15 episodes per season. HBO knows how to make money and wouldn't shy away from it in talks with Paramount for films and Bad Robot the prodcution company. CBS is trying to get away with nickle and diming the franchise.

I was wondering why there were no toys/merchandise for Into Darkness like there was for ST 2009. Now i know and im disappointed.

No one wants them. The figures were cluttering up local Pound shops for ages.

I wouldn't care if Abrams left if Moore would return.

I think most fans of DS9 would like to see Moore back !

 

[Commishsleer]

How many more years do those dingbats think they can hawk tchotchkes with Shatner's mug on them to the tune of 20 million dollars a year? Contrary to the notion some folks have that TOS Is Forever, the generation that makes up the dependable core group of consumers for that stuff is dwindling...and beginning to die.

Hey I'm still going strong here :cough: :cough:

And I am trying to buy something with Shatner's mug on it if it ever gets out of pre-order so there

 

[TrekGuide.com]

As long as CBS owns the Star Trek property, any television series on premium cable to bear the brand name will be on Showtime -- a subsidiary of CBS -- not HBO.

I believe "Stargate SG-1" was originally on Showtime (full-frontal nudity and all), so there is precedent for a sci-fi series on premium cable (although Showtime gave up on "Stargate" after a couple seasons).

I think a Captain Riker mini-series would be cool, set in the time that Spock and Nero left. Being in two different universes, there's no reason Trek could not continue independently on both TV and movies.

 

[Flake]

Without CBS there would be no TNG in HD because Bad Robot & Paramount will have probably axed it.

When TNG HD and DS9/VOY HD are finished then I hope CBS sell up to Paramount or vice versa. Its silly to have two companies fighting over bits and pieces of the franchise.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Without CBS there would be no TNG in HD because Bad Robot & Paramount will have probably axed it.

It's more of a case that Bad Robot & Paramount has no rights to TNG in HD period.

When TNG HD and DS9/VOY HD are finished then I hope CBS sell up to Paramount or vice versa. Its silly to have two companies fighting over bits and pieces of the franchise.

CBS isn't going to sell Trek to anyone. They're making a ton of money off it without having to invest hardly anything in it at all. It's worth to them is mainly as a licensable property. In that regard, it's currently doing fine as is. Trekkies may not like it, but from where CBS is sitting, things are great just as they are.

 

[R. Star]

And people rip into me on the Future of Trek threads when I say that a new TV show isn't gonna happen with CBS at the helm.

They're like the little kid who'd rather break a toy than share it with someone else.

 

[Flake]

Without CBS there would be no TNG in HD because Bad Robot & Paramount will have probably axed it.

It's more of a case that Bad Robot & Paramount has no rights to TNG in HD period.

When TNG HD and DS9/VOY HD are finished then I hope CBS sell up to Paramount or vice versa. Its silly to have two companies fighting over bits and pieces of the franchise.

CBS isn't going to sell Trek to anyone. They're making a ton of money off it without having to invest hardly anything in it at all. It's worth to them is mainly as a licensable property. In that regard, it's currently doing fine as is. Trekkies may not like it, but from where CBS is sitting, things are great just as they are.

Fair point on TNG, I didn't think that through.

We are only talking about $20m though. If Bad Robot and Paramount had such grand plans for a multi platform super franchise why not offer $20m a year to 'rent' the rights off of CBS and then go for it?

I think this is all untrue or not the full story.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

you could have at least waited until someone took the bait.

Why? Am I violating the spirit of some "Give A Moron A Break Day" that no one told me about?

Without CBS there would be no TNG in HD because Bad Robot & Paramount will have probably axed it.

When TNG HD and DS9/VOY HD are finished then I hope CBS sell up to Paramount or vice versa. Its silly to have two companies fighting over bits and pieces of the franchise.

I "officially" (heh, always love the casual misuse of that word) no longer give a fuck what CBS does with its money-printing format reissues of old stuff.

 

[The Wormhole]

Pretty eye-opening article, really. Abrams and his Cohorts really are arrogant fucks if they thought they could request all Prime Trek merchandise to be suspended just to service their Trek. Yes, Prime Trek's heyday is behind it, but the merchandise must still turn a decent profit if they're still willing to churn it out all the time. I know TOS especially, is still a decent seller. Indeed, according to Pocket Books TOS novels set during the TV series run are the best selling Trek novels. There are only three Trek caledars, and Abramsverse one, the Ships of the Line series, and a TOS calendar. I wonder if this kind of bullshit actually palyed a part in the attempted cancellation of the Ships of the Line calendars earlier in the year?

As long as CBS owns the Star Trek property, any television series on premium cable to bear the brand name will be on Showtime -- a subsidiary of CBS -- not HBO.

I believe "Stargate SG-1" was originally on Showtime (full-frontal nudity and all), so there is precedent for a sci-fi series on premium cable (although Showtime gave up on "Stargate" after a couple seasons).

SG-1 was on Showtime for its first five seasons, though there was only nudity in the pilot episode. And even that was at Showtime's insistance. Indeed, when the pilot was re-released on a special edition DVD a few years back, the nudity was removed.

 

[EJD1984]

Hasn't there been some recent talk that Paramount is looking into restarting it's television division?

If they do, hopefully Trek can be wrestled away from CBS, and put back completely under the Paramount umbrella.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Without CBS there would be no TNG in HD because Bad Robot & Paramount will have probably axed it.

It's more of a case that Bad Robot & Paramount has no rights to TNG in HD period.

When TNG HD and DS9/VOY HD are finished then I hope CBS sell up to Paramount or vice versa. Its silly to have two companies fighting over bits and pieces of the franchise.

CBS isn't going to sell Trek to anyone. They're making a ton of money off it without having to invest hardly anything in it at all. It's worth to them is mainly as a licensable property. In that regard, it's currently doing fine as is. Trekkies may not like it, but from where CBS is sitting, things are great just as they are.

Fair point on TNG, I didn't think that through.

We are only talking about $20m though. If Bad Robot and Paramount had such grand plans for a multi platform super franchise why not offer $20m a year to 'rent' the rights off of CBS and then go for it?

I think this is all untrue or not the full story.

The article does paint CBS as being the bad guy when it's really just a case that Bad Robot wanted to do something with a property they didn't own.

Hasn't there been some recent talk that Paramount is looking into restarting it's television division?

If they do, hopefully Trek can be wrestled away from CBS, and put back completely under the Paramount umbrella.

Paramount can't wrest away something they don't own.

And any restarted Paramount television division will likely feature only properties Paramount actually owns outright (which automatically excludes Trek--they're only borrowing it from CBS).

 

[KirkusOveractus]

To take Bad Robot's side on this, theirs is the only Star Trek that's living and viable. Personally, I'd rather see something to support the new movies coming out than the token space in a Toys R Us half heartedly donated to put TOS Trek mugs shaped like Nimoy's head, salt from Shatner's butt and pepper from his chair and aisles and aisles and aisles and aisles of Star Wars shit.