• 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!

Discovery 8/10 info dump thread...

The commercial thing is not remotely a deal-breaker for me. I've watched STAR TREK with commercials for fifty years now and somehow survived. I get that this is some newfangled "streaming" thing that runs on a different business model, but I can't get worked up about a few commercials. It's not exactly a matter of principle.

It's a new STAR TREK show. Of course I'm going to watch . . .even with commercials.
You only mention commercials - not specifically the mixture of commercials within a subscription service, except as a light allusion to the streaming business model. And I have to assume that $6 per month is not a big deal for you. It is for some. While they might be okay with commercials if it is a free service, and they might sacrifice their budget for Star Trek, they're not about to make that sacrifice AND get commercials too. Either way, paying to see commercials is an abomination to me, and a budget item, but I suspect the philosophical objection is a nit to anyone with enough money to not care; it's Star Trek!
 
You only mention commercials - not specifically the mixture of commercials within a subscription service, except as a light allusion to the streaming business model. And I have to assume that $6 per month is not a big deal for you. It is for some. While they might be okay with commercials if it is a free service, and they might sacrifice their budget for Star Trek, they're not about to make that sacrifice AND get commercials too. Either way, paying to see commercials is an abomination to me, and a budget item, but I suspect the philosophical objection is a nit to anyone with enough money to not care; it's Star Trek!

I'm not rich, far from it. But I have no issue really with the commercials, 12 minutes seems excessive, but this is a TV network doing streaming. I will have to sacrifice something else to spend that $6 a month on Star Trek. Where I'm stumbling at, is the seven day availability window for each episode and the fact that I see no apps for any devices that I use at this point.
 
The quotes offered in this article indicate that the five trailing episodes of the current season will be available. If I'm understanding it correctly.

http://trekcore.com/blog/2016/02/cb...cs-considering-ad-free-option-for-super-fans/

"Those users pay $5.99 a month for the five trailing episodes within a current season of a show and a deep catalog of full seasons of our 24 current series and other things like local live streaming and a lower ad load."
 
I have no problem with Star Trek being on a streaming service. It's actually a big positive, it allows for more creative freedom. The episodes aren't required to have en exact lenght of 42 minutes without ads but can be as long as they need, and longer story-arcs are more appreciated.

What I do have a problem with is Trek as being the flagship show launch a new television(?) network. Smells like UPN. It's a recipe for executive meddling, especially when they realise Trekkies aren't exactly the kind of people that watch the other CBS-shows and vice-versa. That's an open invitation for execs to put notes down to the creative people on how to make the show more accessible and produce more lead-ins to other shows. Remember when Voyager was forced to be more accessible for wrestling fans because they were aired back-to-back? Yeah...
 
Where I'm stumbling at, is the seven day availability window for each episode...
Wow, that's news to me. Kelso's source says five episodes, but it's still short. And commercials too. I know why - they don't want people subscribing at the end of the season to binge, paying $6 for a whole season. So they want at least $48 (come in at week 6, view the previous five, and hang on until episode 13. So how much for the DVDs to avoid All Access?

The article quotes "All Access was designed around those super-fans" to justify the charges because superfans consume more. That's hardly a broad fanbase to support a business. And it sounds like a corrupt politician's doublespeak to me to justify higher prices with consumption when advertising rates can be raised with higher consumptions. Also, "deep content" is what Netflix does commercial-free. Pffft!

I have no problem with Star Trek being on a streaming service.
Nor does anyone else I've read. It's about the commercials, and now about episode availability, but there was zero on-demand replay availability on broadcast TV like UPN. Streaming wins.
 
I loath commercials with every fiber of my being. lol

I haven't watched one (unless I wanted to) since the invention of the DVR so would absolutely prefer a commercial free option.

CBS will offer us a chance to PAY MORE for the series without commercials. At that point in time, folks like you and me and gonna have to make a decision.
 
Either way, paying to see commercials is an abomination to me, and a budget item, but I suspect the philosophical objection is a nit to anyone with enough money to not care; it's Star Trek!

I don't see the big issue, personally. People pay for satellite or cable TV and get commercials. For the prices those packages charge, why is it fine for one and not the other?
 
Doesn't Hulu already do the same thing?

I don't have Hulu, but I've heard that is an issue. I'm cableless, all my content is DVDs, Amazon, and Netflix. And an HD antenna for my TV for football season.
 
I'm supposed to pay for a premium service and then pay more to NOT watch commercials on this premium service?

:guffaw::guffaw::guffaw::guffaw::guffaw:
That doesn't really answer the question. All these other services charge a premium, and have ads. This service charges a premium, and has ads.

Multiple emoticons don't help craft a delineation between the two that makes one acceptable and one not.
 
That doesn't really answer the question. All these other services charge a premium, and have ads. This service charges a premium, and has ads.

Multiple emoticons don't help craft a delineation between the two that makes one acceptable and one not.

Amazon prime doesn't have me watch commercials. When I purchase TV and movies from Amazon if they are not prime, they don't have commercials. Netflix doesn't have commercials. I don't do commercials. Now, you can say this "extra service" (which doesn't exist yet) is like having Amazon Prime AND still ending up buying TV and movies from them (paying twice, if you will). But it's not the same.
 
I don't see the big issue, personally. People pay for satellite or cable TV and get commercials. For the prices those packages charge, why is it fine for one and not the other?
Why do you think more and more people are "cutting the cord" every day? CBS is just showing just how remarkably obtuse the network channels are as they can't even fathom people not loving commercials and totally enjoying having their shows cut up into a billion little pieces full of obnoxious advertisements.
 
Remember when Voyager was forced to be more accessible for wrestling fans because they were aired back-to-back? Yeah...

I had more fun watching The People's Champ deliver Rock Bottoms and Stone Cold stunning Vince McMahon at that point.

I must be getting old and senile, actually, because I swear I remember Seven Days(A show time has all but forgotten) preceding Voyager on Wednesday nights.
 
I must be getting old and senile, actually, because I swear I remember Seven Days(A show time has all but forgotten) preceding Voyager on Wednesday nights.

It did for a while. I usually recorded Voyager, when I remembered, so I don't remember much of what was going on with the rest of UPN.
 
I had more fun watching The People's Champ deliver Rock Bottoms and Stone Cold stunning Vince McMahon at that point.

I must be getting old and senile, actually, because I swear I remember Seven Days(A show time has all but forgotten) preceding Voyager on Wednesday nights.

I have not forgotten Seven Days. They had one episode, a typical groundhog story if you will about repeating time, that was done very well. A ton of scifi shows use that plot trick, but I thought the Seven Days one was really good.
 
CBS will offer us a chance to PAY MORE for the series without commercials. At that point in time, folks like you and me and gonna have to make a decision.
My decision is already made. I will NOT subscribe to any option other than free with commercials or a single flat rate for everyone to avoid commercials.
I don't see the big issue, personally. People pay for satellite or cable TV and get commercials. For the prices those packages charge, why is it fine for one and not the other?
I don't subscribe to satellite or cable TV. Amazon Prime is my only subscription to anything, mostly for shipping so the content is a bonus. I don't waste heartbeats of my life on commercials; every 30 seconds of commercials is 30 fewer heartbeats of my allotment in life. If this philosophy results in missing Star Trek or anything I'd like to see, well, it's a worthy price; I'll probably find something more productive to do with my time than give it to another company in exchange for their profit. Commercials are like a reverse Portrait of Dorian Gray, sucking the life out of me to give to someone else.
I'm supposed to pay for a premium service and then pay more to NOT watch commercials on this premium service?

:guffaw::guffaw::guffaw::guffaw::guffaw:
I don't remember if we've ever tangled on opinion, but you're my favorite person right now.
I don't have Hulu, but I've heard that is an issue. I'm cableless, all my content is DVDs, Amazon, and Netflix. And an HD antenna for my TV for football season.
Very close to my situation: cableless, DVDs, and Amazon (no Netflix). Commercials are like cigarettes; every one brings you closer to death. What a waste of a lifetime.
That doesn't really answer the question. All these other services charge a premium, and have ads. This service charges a premium, and has ads.
Amazon prime doesn't have me watch commercials. When I purchase TV and movies from Amazon if they are not prime, they don't have commercials. Netflix doesn't have commercials. I don't do commercials. Now, you can say this "extra service" (which doesn't exist yet) is like having Amazon Prime AND still ending up buying TV and movies from them (paying twice, if you will). But it's not the same.
Right.
Cost. Cable is outlandishly expensive now, and other options exist that didn't exist before. People leaving, aren't leaving over commercials. Unless I watch something live, I never watch the commercials, I zip right past them.
The streaming subscription services are so fractured and ephemeral in their content due to contractual whack-a-mole that the cumulative costs to get what you want when you want it can approach or exceed cable. Yuck. I've said before that there needs to be a consolidation or a consortium analogous to the Blu-ray Disc Association for the purpose of creating a single account for the billing of a single rate which provides access to a bundle of cooperating services.

Also as above, I do not subscribe to commercials. As such, there is no opportunity for me to "leave," but the outcome is the same. I don't own a recorder like Tivo, so no zipping. I don't have to since I avoid the situation entirely. I do own a Roku which lets me stream on demand, but again, I don't watch or subscribe to anything with commercials. I buy prerecorded media.
 
Last edited:
I like commercials. Let's me refill my drink and get ice cream.

This is the 21st Century. You can pause the stream and go get drink and ice cream at your leisure and come back to it later.

If you're on a PC watching something, you can pause the thing, go do something else in another tab or window, and come right back to where you were hours later! :D


It is silly to have commercials when you're paying for the service. Netflix and Amazon do it right. CBS better take a cue from the Borg and adapt. Quickly. :)
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top