Yes, I realized that.
Discovery 8/10 info dump thread...
- Thread starter Overgeeked
- Start date
Good. I was afraid I wasn't clear.
I just know that corporations making money is often ridiculed so I often get sarcastic about.
I guess I should have spelled it out more clearly. Creating a "water cooler" show will in itself generate revenue. The big hit TV series of recent years became part of "the public conversation", which led to a lot of people feeling they had to watch a show about dragons, or drug dealers, or zombies, which they would otherwise have had no interest in. That's where the big money lies.
Assuming that you're talking about Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, and The Walking Dead, none of those were on a streaming service, all were on cable, and two were on basic cable. The significance there is that many, if not the the overwhelming majority, of new viewers didn't have to alter their viewing method to tune into any of those.
I don't disagree that CBS would simply love it if Discovery were to achieve the same level of popularity as any of those shows. Probably a better point of comparison would be Orange is the New Black. Do people sign up for Netflix primarily to get access to that show? Maybe. I guess some do, but how many?
I can't help but suspect that it's wishful thinking that CBS All Access will catch on just because a new Star Trek show's on it.
Oops, my mistake. You're exactly right: weekly - not monthly. So you really only need subscribe for two months if they run consecutive weeks..
I understand this sarcasm about how CorporalCaptain phrased an objective post. I expect that reasonable people appreciate good services and expect companies to make a profit to be able to employ people and continue the service. But the "terrible" sentiment originates from the perception of greed beyond a reasonable profit, and specious excuses for doing it. I don't mean CBS specifically, though it could apply, but companies generally who generate bad faith.
Yep.
Last edited:
The problem is in their assumption that they're somehow going to expand the viewership. They're likely not. It's not all Star Trek fans plus many millions more new viewers... it's existing Star Trek fans, minus all those who will not sign up for the streaming service just for Trek.
Just look at the numbers for the reboot films. They started strong with 2009, got a bump with STID, but the latest one is on track for the ass to fall out of the movie franchise. Chances are, STID was peak Trek viewership in the theater, and that's mostly because of Benedict Cumberbatch.
This is the first new series since 2005. But not only do people have to pay extra just to watch it, they have to sign up for a new streaming service and are forced to watch commercials. Unless they pay even more to avoid them. Sigh. Of the giant pool of Star Trek fans, only some of those are going to sign up. They're shrinking the viewership, not growing it.
I don't even know if the intent is to "bring in new viewers" so much as it is to use the current core Trek fan-base to establish their new service. At the risk of generalizing, most of CBS's fan base tends to be older, conservative-leaning whites--not typically very tech savvy. They're playing to the assumption that "the Trekkie nerds know how to use all the gizmos."
Problem being, none of the rest of their programming is really a match for people subscribing because of Star Trek. Makes me wonder why they didn't move Supergirl to All Access instead of the CW?
Which means the vast majority will be paying for the service just to watch Star Trek, and that really skews the [relative] value. I think they know that.
It just seems to me that companies and corporations who seek profit are generally considered unreasonable in their desire to make profit. It may sound reasonable to some, but there is a cognitive dissonance between wanting an inexpensive product and wanting companies to make a product.
Corporations making profit seems to be a very negative term in contemporary society. Hence my sarcasm.
I'm not sure about that. There are audiences that are more interested in the next big thing and CBS may try to advertise it as that as part of the "All New All Access." Undoubtedly, there is a marketing strategy in the works that will become more apparent as January approaches.
Streaming services are still an emerging market and time alone will tell whose strategy will work out.
Most people deride corporations because the only thing that matters to them is making profit. Even if their making profit is directly responsible for the death of their customers, like the cigarette industry, or random people, like the gun industry. Profits are fine, but corporations only do what's legally required, no more. And they hide behind the law and shrug their shoulders. It's one thing to be a corporate shill, it's another to actively go out of your way to actively harm people for money. Most people rightfully don't like that. To say nothing of fair wages, wage theft, lack of benefits, etc. So yeah, most people are down on ruthless corporations that are wielding more and more political power and being less and less veiled in their sheer greed and disregard for people. There's nothing wrong with profit per se, it's when that becomes the only thing of importance and everything else, including people, are treated as a means to earn profits that we start to too closely resemble Ferengi. Sorry, but I'd much rather be in the Federation.
Yes. Overgeeked has gotten specific where I was quite general, but we're saying the same thing. I appreciate honorable companies that put their customers first while making sure their profits are balanced to enable them to continue to treat their employees kindly and put their customers first. The Johnson & Johnson response to the 1982 Tylenol murders is an example of a company acting responsibly. Enron is an example of a company acting irresponsibly. Both are companies that needed profits while differentiating themselves by how they behave.
The level of success of All Access depends on how people perceive CBS's behavior and treatment of its customers, and its response to complaints.
The level of success of All Access depends on how people perceive CBS's behavior and treatment of its customers, and its response to complaints.
Last edited:
Similar threads
