CBS Confirms STAR TREK 2017 Episodes To Arrive Weekly

[Christopher]

I imagine CBS is relying on the fact that All Access will have a large number of current and past shows to offer, so people who sign on for ST will stick around for the other stuff. Including the previous Trek shows, of course.

And if some people sign on just for ST and then leave, no matter, since there are plenty of other TV watchers with other interests and priorities. Still a lot of CSI fans out there, for instance.

 

[rahullak]

I'm sure they will just ignore the "issue". Most fans won't want to wait 3 months to watch the show. They'll subscribe when it comes out and pay for 3-4 months until the season ends. Sure some fans will wait and binge watch once the show is done, but not enough to justify pissing off other subscribers. Honestly, I suspect the weekly debut has more to do with international markets that may air weekly and less to do with a desire by CBS to force people to pay for multiple months.

Fans don't have to wait 3 months to watch the show. The waiting is to watch re-runs. Fans will watch the show when it airs probably paying whatever it costs (maybe even $20), because fans have an interest in making sure Trek stays alive. But what about the casual TV skimmer who has heard of Trek, maybe watched some episodes, has some interest. He's gonna want to pay minimum quid, binge-watch and get it over with. I think there are more of these people than the true fans. And as I understand it, Trek is just a way to get more people on CBSAA and stay there.

And as for the international markets, shows almost never air at the same time as they are aired in the US. It takes at least a few months for shows to start airing, at least here in India. So it's not a justification to say that CBS airs its shows weekly so that international audiences are in sync. They're mostly out of sync anyway.

It takes a few seconds to subscribe and then unsubscribe. If it's gonna save me a few tens of dollars, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Having said that, I like the weekly episodes better. Throws my days out of whack with binge-watching.

 

[Christopher]

And as I understand it, Trek is just a way to get more people on CBSAA and stay there.

Exactly. Which was their plan with Phase II back when they intended to launch a "fourth network" in the late '70s, and their plan with Voyager as the anchor for UPN. Star Trek was the hook to get people onboard, but it was just one of the shows they planned to offer. (Although it's worth noting that UPN didn't survive long after it stopped having Star Trek in its lineup.)

 

[AviTrek]

Fans don't have to wait 3 months to watch the show. The waiting is to watch re-runs. Fans will watch the show when it airs probably paying whatever it costs (maybe even $20), because fans have an interest in making sure Trek stays alive. But what about the casual TV skimmer who has heard of Trek, maybe watched some episodes, has some interest. He's gonna want to pay minimum quid, binge-watch and get it over with. I think there are more of these people than the true fans. And as I understand it, Trek is just a way to get more people on CBSAA and stay there.

And as for the international markets, shows almost never air at the same time as they are aired in the US. It takes at least a few months for shows to start airing, at least here in India. So it's not a justification to say that CBS airs its shows weekly so that international audiences are in sync. They're mostly out of sync anyway.

It takes a few seconds to subscribe and then unsubscribe. If it's gonna save me a few tens of dollars, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Having said that, I like the weekly episodes better. Throws my days out of whack with binge-watching.

The casual viewer isn't going to think about how to watch Star Trek and minimize cost. That's already too much effort and thought. That viewer just won't bother to watch. The only viewer putting that much effort into watching and minimizing costs will be hard core fans.

In terms of international markets, Netflix shows debut at the same time globally. I believe the same applies to Amazon shows. Star Trek running on CBSAA is much more likely to follow a streaming distribution pattern than a broadcast pattern.

 

[Christopher]

The casual viewer isn't going to think about how to watch Star Trek and minimize cost. That's already too much effort and thought. That viewer just won't bother to watch. The only viewer putting that much effort into watching and minimizing costs will be hard core fans.

Again, though, ST '17 is just going to be one show on a streaming service that offers dozens of shows. It's a major hook for the service, but it's not the whole ball game, any more than House of Cards or the Marvel shows are the only things Netflix offers. There are sure to be plenty of people who subscribe to CBS All Access for reasons that have nothing to do with Star Trek, or only partly to do with it.

 

[EnderAKH]

In that way it's the HBO model. HBO doesn't care about ratings, they don't care about how much or if you watch a show, they care about "Does the fact that this show is on the network make you subscribe." So they will have lots of great content, as long as that content can be shown to bring in some subscribers. Star Trek will bring in some subscribers, streaming recently aired broadcast episodes will bring in subscribers, their back catalog will bring in some subscribers, future shows they launch just for the service will bring in some subscribers. Their goal is to eventually have enough various content that you will stay even between when Star Trek is released.

 

[rahullak]

The casual viewer isn't going to think about how to watch Star Trek and minimize cost. That's already too much effort and thought. That viewer just won't bother to watch. The only viewer putting that much effort into watching and minimizing costs will be hard core fans.

I'm inclined to think that it doesn't take much effort and thought to decide to binge-watch a show, a few clicks to subscribe, watch the show and then unsubscribe.

In terms of international markets, Netflix shows debut at the same time globally. I believe the same applies to Amazon shows. Star Trek running on CBSAA is much more likely to follow a streaming distribution pattern than a broadcast pattern.

Assuming that's true, why would it matter to CBSAA to have the shows airing weekly if international markets are getting the same thing that the US market does?

 

[AviTrek]

I'm inclined to think that it doesn't take much effort and thought to decide to binge-watch a show, a few clicks to subscribe, watch the show and then unsubscribe.

It's not a lot of effort, especially for people who are commenting on a Star Trek message board, but this audience is highly skewed. The average viewer still doesn't have a DVR or streaming service and just watches what's on TV. Then there are viewers that subscribe to Netflix or something else and watch stuff there, but aren't thinking beyond that. To be aware of a new show, seek out the service, and then plan you're viewing to watch it while minimizing cost is a ton more thought than most TV viewers put into their TV watching. Sure the people on this board read news about upcoming shows and seek them out, but they're not the majority. My parents are Star Trek fans and didn't even know the show was happening until I told them. They'd never heard of CBSAA. CBS will work to build awareness closer to air date, but my parents aren't going to plan a month of their TV viewing to watch Star Trek at minimal cost. They're much more typical of the average TV viewer who will provide most of the revenue.

Assuming that's true, why would it matter to CBSAA to have the shows airing weekly if international markets are getting the same thing that the US market does?

Because CBS doesn't know where the show will air internationally yet. It may be sold to broadcast networks in some countries, and then even if the show premieres at the same time it won't be able to show all episodes immediately. And if CBS wants the option of selling to broadcast networks, then they will likely get a higher fee if the show is airing at the same time instead of having everything at once in the US and airing weekly in another market.

 

[Christopher]

The average viewer still doesn't have a DVR or streaming service and just watches what's on TV.

Yeah, and when networks like HBO started, the average viewer still didn't have cable. Every change has to start somewhere. Saying "It's not done this way now" does not prove that it never will.

My parents are Star Trek fans and didn't even know the show was happening until I told them.

I'm sure you could say the same about any new show that hasn't even begun casting or production yet. The number of people who follow industry news that early is always going to be small compared to the eventual viewing audience that only learns about a new show from the promos and coverage in the weeks before its premiere. Obviously there will be a lot more promotion for this show once there's actually something to promote, like cast members and production footage and, eventually, completed episodes.

 

[AviTrek]

Yeah, and when networks like HBO started, the average viewer still didn't have cable. Every change has to start somewhere. Saying "It's not done this way now" does not prove that it never will.




I'm sure you could say the same about any new show that hasn't even begun casting or production yet. The number of people who follow industry news that early is always going to be small compared to the eventual viewing audience that only learns about a new show from the promos and coverage in the weeks before its premiere. Obviously there will be a lot more promotion for this show once there's actually something to promote, like cast members and production footage and, eventually, completed episodes.

I agree on all fronts. My main point was two differentiate the average viewer from rahullak. rahullak may think about waiting for the show to end, then subscribing for a month to binge watch and save two months of fees, but the average viewer doesn't think that far ahead. They will watch if they're subscribing already, or subscribe if they want to watch. They're not going to try and plan their viewing pattern around saving 2 months of fees. And the number of people who will do that are too small for CBS to justify creating special rules about watching old episodes to force 3 months of revenue out of them.

 

[EnderAKH]

The average viewer still doesn't have a DVR or streaming service and just watches what's on TV.

Well that's just not true. My parents live in a small town in Oklahoma and have a DVR. According to this research firm, 76% of households use a DVR, Netflix, or VOD to watch TV. Frankly, I literally don't know anyone who doesn't have a DVR, and I can't think of anyone who doesn't have Netflix. And that includes my parents and my wife's parents.
76% OF US HOUSEHOLDS HAVE A DVR, NETFLIX, OR USE ON-DEMAND

 

[Shalashaska]

Casual viewers will just pirate it. Look at Game of Thrones.

This show will be fine anyway. Star Trek is a big deal and fans are thirsty for a new series. $6 a month is nothing, and if the show gets the critics on its side as I think it will, the fans who weren't already throwing their money at the screen when it was first announced (AKA, 50% of fandom) will be open to trying the service out for a month or two.

I also think the promotion behind the pilot, which will air on the CBS television network alongside All-Access, will be a major influence on how their All-Access experiment works. If it's built up as a big TV event and enough people hear about it and watch it, a lot of those people who wouldn't know a thing about their streaming service will now be informed and open to trying it out. I can see a lot of money and hard work being put into it. Its effect could ripple on throughout the whole run of the series.

 

[Terok Nor]

I'm fine with this. I wonder if we'll get 13 episode seasons or 20+ episodes a season.

 

[JD]

I have to wonder if the weekly release for the new series is just because that's how CBS has always done things. Amazon and Netflix were never broadcast networks, so they had no attachment to the way they do things, while CBS is still primarily a TV network.

 

[Christopher]

^It probably works better for a longer season. With an all-at-once release, you have to have the whole season completed before any of it gets released, and it's easier to do that with 13 episodes than 22 or 24.

 

[M-Red]

Very pleased. This is what I was hoping for because imo it makes the viewing experience more enjoyable and it allows the fandom to interact on a weekly basis and reinforce interest in the series.

Another good decision.

 

[cultcross]

And as for the international markets, shows almost never air at the same time as they are aired in the US. It takes at least a few months for shows to start airing, at least here in India. So it's not a justification to say that CBS airs its shows weekly so that international audiences are in sync. They're mostly out of sync anyway

That's really not that true anymore. Most big US properties air soon after their initial release in the UK - Game of Thrones for example is same day. And streaming service release dates for new episodes of things like Better Call Saul or OITNB tend to be synched. Granted, I imagine the situation isn't as good in India, but some international distribution is near synchronous.

Casual viewers will just pirate it. Look at Game of Thrones.

Part of Game of Thrones problem, IMHO, is an adherence to an outdated model in respect of DVD release. At least here, DVDs are a 8 month wait, and their eventual release immediately predates the next season's airdate. These days, that's too long. You need to have your episodes available soon after airing, on streaming or DVD or both. Having no easy legal way to get them encourages piracy.

 

[rahullak]

I agree on all fronts. My main point was two differentiate the average viewer from rahullak. rahullak may think about waiting for the show to end, then subscribing for a month to binge watch and save two months of fees, but the average viewer doesn't think that far ahead. They will watch if they're subscribing already, or subscribe if they want to watch. They're not going to try and plan their viewing pattern around saving 2 months of fees. And the number of people who will do that are too small for CBS to justify creating special rules about watching old episodes to force 3 months of revenue out of them.

Why would they not? After all, they're casual TV viewers who are just curious about the new show. They don't want to have to get yet another streaming service (for a few months) just to watch the new show. They're not so gung-ho about watching the episodes as-they-air. And the segment probably has scruples about piracy. Three months was just a figure I came up with. It could be a different number. I think there's more of these people than fans, especially given the jostle for their attention from so many good shows from other networks.

 

[Christopher]

Why would they not? After all, they're casual TV viewers who are just curious about the new show. They don't want to have to get yet another streaming service (for a few months) just to watch the new show.

Which is why the service has dozens of shows to offer, not just one. They're banking on people being lured in by Trek and sticking around for all the other stuff.

 

[Shikarnov]

Why would you have to keep the service for all nine months? Just unsubscribe when they are showing new episodes.

I think this can be solved with a simple contact... $x per month for y months with an early termination fee. There's no need to force viewers to consume content in some prescribed way just to manipulate the bottom line.

Indeed. That is embracing the future, because the future is looking like it's gonna be a bunch of different streaming services rather than one big thing.

I disagree; it's trying to reshape the future in the form of the past. Being forced to subscribe to a service -- and pay for 100 pieces of content you don't want only to watch the one or two that you really want -- is the same old model. That's their endgame. And when their services reach whatever threshold they're aiming for, they'll stop licensing content to other vendors. Not just Netflix; but probably also Amazon, Apple, and other a la carte options.

It'll be just like buying cable all over again -- and every bit as expensive and inflexible; just the way they like it.