• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Axanar found 100K to cut from their budget....

I'd be interested in reading it myself. There's no mention of any plans to make it public at this point.
AFAIK, Axanar had the "early 2016" filming schedule locked in for at least half a year, perhaps more.

If memory serves, Axanar made their previous financials public. Curious to see if they make this one as well. Or if they don't, what reasons they not doing so.

No.
Alec Peters said:

Why would we? What vested interest does a non-donor have in our finances? Our fiduciary obligation is to our donors, not the general public.
If a potential donor wanted to see it I would be happy to provide.
Alec

His response, to this simple question is precisely why I can't get over my issues with this production. It's the non stop defensiveness is a hard pill to swallow anymore
 
If memory serves, Axanar made their previous financials public. Curious to see if they make this one as well. Or if they don't, what reasons they not doing so.

No.
Alec Peters said:

Why would we? What vested interest does a non-donor have in our finances? Our fiduciary obligation is to our donors, not the general public.
If a potential donor wanted to see it I would be happy to provide.
Alec

His response, to this simple question is precisely why I can't get over my issues with this production. It's the non stop defensiveness is a hard pill to swallow anymore

Potential donors? How odd. The entire viewership (er, "general public") is comprised of nothing but potential donors.
 
Meh. The donors have the internet, so unless there is some legal mumbo-jumbo protecting the document from dissemination, I imagine if you REALLY wanted to see it, you could.

I'm curious what the legal situation would be if someone did post it, and whether Axanar could have it pulled?

(ps: if it does *cough* appear somewhere, someone please PM me. I'm such a details geek I even read the last budget breakdown Ax had made available on their website :))
 
Meh. The donors have the internet, so unless there is some legal mumbo-jumbo protecting the document from dissemination, I imagine if you REALLY wanted to see it, you could.

I'm curious what the legal situation would be if someone did post it, and whether Axanar could have it pulled?

(ps: if it does *cough* appear somewhere, someone please PM me. I'm such a details geek I even read the last budget breakdown Ax had made available on their website :))

I have not bothered to download it, but if you know some donor who has, just have them e-mail it to you.
 
If memory serves, Axanar made their previous financials public. Curious to see if they make this one as well. Or if they don't, what reasons they not doing so.

No.
Alec Peters said:

Why would we? What vested interest does a non-donor have in our finances? Our fiduciary obligation is to our donors, not the general public.
If a potential donor wanted to see it I would be happy to provide.
Alec

His response, to this simple question is precisely why I can't get over my issues with this production. It's the non stop defensiveness is a hard pill to swallow anymore
I really don't think it's that big of a deal.
 

His response, to this simple question is precisely why I can't get over my issues with this production. It's the non stop defensiveness is a hard pill to swallow anymore

Potential donors? How odd. The entire viewership (er, "general public") is comprised of nothing but potential donors.

This was my thinking as well. Especially given how the last Kickstarter didn't seem t live up to what Peters was expecting, you'd think he'd be all for promoting and welcoming in as many new potential donors as possible.
 
Alec Peters said:
Why would we? What vested interest does a non-donor have in our finances? Our fiduciary obligation is to our donors, not the general public.

I don't think that's an unreasonable response. Having said that, if choosing to keep this stuff close to the vest has a negative effect on future fund raising one imagines that he may want to take another look at the decision.
 
Alec Peters said:
Why would we? What vested interest does a non-donor have in our finances? Our fiduciary obligation is to our donors, not the general public.

I don't think that's an unreasonable response. Having said that, if choosing to keep this stuff close to the vest has a negative effect on future fund raising one imagines that he may want to take another look at the decision.

It's not that they are only releasing the info to donors... That's fine. It's the wording of the response, and continues to sort of demonstrate Alec's defensive, and confrontational style when responding to anyone, be it here, on Facebook, or oh his own blog.

The question was a reasonable question, and the response to me, suggests that Alec didn't think it was, and responded accordingly.
 
Well I think we've established already that Peters isn't exactly suited toward any kind of meaningful work in public relations, especially for the projects he himself works on or plans to appear in.

That being said, the elephant in the room is hard to ignore. Much has been made - fairly and unfairly - surrounding questions about the financing of this film and how and where the money is being spent. If anything, Peters' retort seems more like a soft "Fuck you" to anyone who didn't donate yet who had the temerity to question the way things were being done.

Your mileage may vary of course.
 
Well look, if you don't have skin in the game why are you so interested in "the way things were being done?" Other than the possible satisfaction of watching a car wreck...which is, granted, human nature for a lot of us.

I expect that if the annual report doesn't cut the mustard we're pretty likely to hear about it from some disgruntled investor or another.
 
Well look, if you don't have skin in the game why are you so interested in "the way things were being done?" Other than the possible satisfaction of watching a car wreck...which is, granted, human nature for a lot of us.

I expect that if the annual report doesn't cut the mustard we're pretty likely to hear about it from some disgruntled investor or another.
That's certainly part of it, also I'm just curious. I like to know this stuff.
 
I'm rather disheartened that the Axanar people don't feel welcome here anymore. For whatever reason, that makes me rather sad, as I enjoyed reading and responding to the project's thread.
 
I'm rather disheartened that the Axanar people don't feel welcome here anymore. For whatever reason, that makes me rather sad, as I enjoyed reading and responding to the project's thread.

I think they have a virtual compound on facebook where the faithful hang out?
 
I'm rather disheartened that the Axanar people don't feel welcome here anymore. For whatever reason, that makes me rather sad, as I enjoyed reading and responding to the project's thread.

I think they have a virtual compound on facebook where the faithful hang out?

They do indeed: https://www.facebook.com/groups/axanarfansgroup/

As for the annual report, my original curiosity is satisfied. I just wanted to know if they would follow suite with releasing it publicly like the last one. If they didn't, what their reasoning is. Got an answer on both.

At this point the real proof in the Rokeg blood pie will be the actual film.
 
There are what, 3 standing TOS sets across the studio, I think? Kingsland GA, Ticonderoga NY, and Tulsa... I get Alec won't be calling on Vic to use the STC sets in GA... okay, but that leaves two others.... why the monumental delay....

I'm sure there were a lot of reasons, logistical, political, etc...

But one incompatibility as far as sets goes is Axanar wants to retcon the idea of the TOS (or pre-TOS) universe to use LCARS rather than tactile buttons. They came out rather late in the game to tell us that the look of TOS, as beloved and nostalgic as it is to so many, is broken and needs fixing. This is diametrically opposed to the approach of Vic and James Cawley to recreate TOS in minute detail.
 
I dunno... maybe just make the film already?

There are what, 3 standing TOS sets across the studio, I think? Kingsland GA, Ticonderoga NY, and Tulsa... I get Alec won't be calling on Vic to use the STC sets in GA... okay, but that leaves two others.... why the monumental delay.... And yes, a year and a half, with two fundraisers, is a monumental delay, when according to the first kickstarter, Perk Fulfillment (DVDs and Blue Rays) was supposed to be 7 months ago...

Starbase Studios is in Oklahoma City, OK (Not Tulsa).

There are more TOS bridge-only (or even partial bridge) sets scattered around in various places.

Starfleet Studios intends to build yet another TOS bridge in Iowa before building a VOY-style transporter room and bridge.

Now, a VOY-style set would be a real addition to ST fan filmdom. I would LOVE TO see that!

I admit I expressed my disappointment that they were starting with a TOS bridge set. I probably should have just congratulated them.

I'm rather disheartened that the Axanar people don't feel welcome here anymore.

Have Alec Peter and Robert Burnett actually said this?

Alec was banned. He can't say anything here.
 
But one incompatibility as far as sets goes is Axanar wants to retcon the idea of the TOS (or pre-TOS) universe to use LCARS rather than tactile buttons. They came out rather late in the game to tell us that the look of TOS, as beloved and nostalgic as it is to so many, is broken and needs fixing. This is diametrically opposed to the approach of Vic and James Cawley to recreate TOS in minute detail.

I don't know if they're going LCARS exactly. They've shown some concepts of their control panels and they look very tactile, but the displays have been replaced with stuff that is a little bit more visually relatable.

Still, the point either way is that it would require extensive refitting of the bridge that they would end up using and some of that might even require irreparable changes.

Plus we're not even getting into how they might light the sets differently, and thus require different things in the design of the sets. That's one area I think some of the other fan series are going about it wrong, where they have really modern looking visual effects, but they hold very closely to a 1960s lighting for the TOS sets. With Axanar they may intend a more film-like cinematography.

I'm rather disheartened that the Axanar people don't feel welcome here anymore.

Have Alec Peter and Robert Burnett actually said this?

Yeah, as Barbreader said, Alec Peters was banned, and Terry doesn't seem to feel his presence was welcome here anymore.
 
Is Robert Meyer Burnett a member here?

I love watching him on 'Collider Heroes' which he is a frequent guest.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwUw1qkERyQ[/yt]

Collider Heroes

:bolian:
 
There are what, 3 standing TOS sets across the studio, I think? Kingsland GA, Ticonderoga NY, and Tulsa... I get Alec won't be calling on Vic to use the STC sets in GA... okay, but that leaves two others.... why the monumental delay....

I'm sure there were a lot of reasons, logistical, political, etc...

But one incompatibility as far as sets goes is Axanar wants to retcon the idea of the TOS (or pre-TOS) universe to use LCARS rather than tactile buttons. They came out rather late in the game to tell us that the look of TOS, as beloved and nostalgic as it is to so many, is broken and needs fixing. This is diametrically opposed to the approach of Vic and James Cawley to recreate TOS in minute detail.

Actually, Alec answered this in the Annual Report. He basically said, that the Prelude Director, Christian Gossett, said, that the New Voyages Sets were too small to shoot Axanar on... I would copy and paste it, but the Annual Report won't allow me to copy the text....
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top