News Moonves: CBS All Access And Star Trek: Discovery Doing Very Well

[AutoAdmin]

A new news article has been published at TrekToday:

During the CBS Corporation Fourth Quarter 2017 Earnings Release Teleconference, Leslie Moonves, Chairman and CEO, spoke about the success of CBS All...

Continue reading...

 

[Rahul]

https://trekmovie.com/2018/02/15/cb...y-is-runaway-success-more-viacom-merger-buzz/

Showtime and CBS All Access have about 5 mio. viewers together, which are "split about 50:50". So, we can assume CBS All Access has about 2.5 mio. subscribers right now. That is... less subscribers than ENT season 4 had viewers. BUT! Those are paying significantly more money (subscription fee PLUS being subjected to advertisement).

So while total viewership of DIS is less than any Trek show ever had before, CBS gets a lot more bang for the buck. It has definitely less viewers than ENT had when it got cancelled, but it's probably also very easily much more profitable right now. One final comparison in pure audience figures, to rub salt in everybodys wounds: The Orville on FOX has an average of 4.2 mio. viewers currently.

 

[guyute03]

Good. Now make more shows. Make more movies. Remaster DS9 & Voyager.

 

[DaveyNY]

With all the 'different ways' to view TV shows in this age of the Internetz, I think it's safe to assume that DISCOVERY probably has a lot more eyes watching it, than can be officially counted.

I personally would be one of those folks.
(so fuke Moon-face and his disdain of Sci-Fi)
<shrug>

 

[Lord Garth]

As long as CBS is satisfied and the show gets renewed, I don't care how many or how few people watch. CBS can care about it. This isn't high school. I don't give a shit about "everyone else is doing it!" or whatever "everyone else!" watches.

If the show ends prematurely, that's however many seasons it was that I got to enjoy. Hopefully we get several seasons. But if not, that's fine too.

Mad Men usually only had two million viewers but it ran seven seasons. However many people watch doesn't effect my enjoyment. And it seems the threshold for the number of viewers now is a lot lower to get renewed.

I think Moonves might be embellishing a little but, under 2010s standards, DSC is probably still doing well enough for its purposes.

 

[OpenMaw]

LG, the viewing numbers against how much the show costs to make is usually the basic equation at play. Who are we reaching, are we going to be able to sell enough merch, dvd, digital download, etc to recoup and pay for the show... If a show isn't meeting that mark, or is just too close to the bar, it'll usually get the axe. It's not some kind of a social thing.

 

[cylkoth]

https://trekmovie.com/2018/02/15/cb...y-is-runaway-success-more-viacom-merger-buzz/

Showtime and CBS All Access have about 5 mio. viewers together, which are "split about 50:50". So, we can assume CBS All Access has about 2.5 mio. subscribers right now. That is... less subscribers than ENT season 4 had viewers. BUT! Those are paying significantly more money (subscription fee PLUS being subjected to advertisement).

So while total viewership of DIS is less than any Trek show ever had before, CBS gets a lot more bang for the buck. It has definitely less viewers than ENT had when it got cancelled, but it's probably also very easily much more profitable right now. One final comparison in pure audience figures, to rub salt in everybodys wounds: The Orville on FOX has an average of 4.2 mio. viewers currently.

Those subscriber figures are of course, for the US only. While US (legal) viewership is limited to the 2.5 subscriber base, let's not leave out the show's availability on Netflix's International services. Which reaches over 50 million.
Its safe to assume that DISC's total viewership is alot higher than whatever percentage of Trek fans that watch on All Access. No need to try and ratings shame it by bringing up The Orville.

 

[Wowbagger]

Its safe to assume that DISC's total viewership is alot higher than whatever percentage of Trek fans that watch on All Access.

It's also safe to assume that ENT's total viewership was a lot higher than its totals on UPN, since it was airing simultaneously in the U.K., Germany, Israel, and... Australia? I wasn't super clear on this even at the time, and it's been 15 years, but hopefully memory serves.

Same conclusion, though: DISC's viewership is by far the lowest in Trek history.

 

[Vger23]

It's also safe to assume that ENT's total viewership was a lot higher than its totals on UPN, since it was airing simultaneously in the U.K., Germany, Israel, and... Australia? I wasn't super clear on this even at the time, and it's been 15 years, but hopefully memory serves.

Same conclusion, though: DISC's viewership is by far the lowest in Trek history.

Well, it's a streaming show on a new platform. That's 100% to be expected.

And, to Lord Garth's point, doesn't really matter. All that matters is that CBS views the series as essential to growing/maintaining subscribership.,.which is undeniably true at this point.

Totally different business model.

 

[Wowbagger]

For those interested, here's the full transcript of the call: https://seekingalpha.com/article/41...-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single

 

[DaveyNY]

For those interested, here's the full transcript of the call: https://seekingalpha.com/article/41...-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single

Which you can't fully read unless you register with the site.

 

[Wowbagger]

Putting this together with other numbers we have about CBS AA sub growth, it appears that the premiere of The Good Fight raised CBS AA monthly growth from a little under 50,000 subs/month to about 100,000 subs/month. Star Trek Discovery continued that trend exactly, netting about 100,000 subs/month for CBS AA during its first-season run.

This suggests that there are about 250,000 people who signed up for CBS AA just for Discovery (50,000 subs/month * 5 months). If we assume for the sake of a ballpark estimate that CBS got $10/month/subscription (either through the premium plan or the basic plan + third-party ad revenue), then Discovery brought in a total of... $7,500,000 for CBS AA?

That can't be right, can it? That wouldn't even cover the costs of production on a single episode. Somebody check my math. (10 * 50000 * 5 + 10 * 50000 * 4 + 10 * 50000 * 3 + 10 * 50000 * 2 + 10 * 50000 * 1). Even if we assume double or triple the number of viewers, the show is still losing money like gangbusters.

I know the Netflix deal helped, but I was under the impression it was only $50 million, and Discovery's budget is certainly over $100 million for the season. So am I missing a beat here, or is Discovery intended as a giant loss leader for CBSAA?

 

[DaveyNY]

Based on the numbers given, wouldn't the total be closer to $150 Million for a five month period?
(without the Netflix money)

$10.00 x (100k+200k+300k+400k+500k) = total for 5 months of just DISCOVERY viewers?
(assuming that all the viewers went for the more expensive option)

 

[STR]

Based on the numbers given, wouldn't the total be closer to $150 Million for a five month period?
(without the Netflix money)

$10.00 x (100k+200k+300k+400k+500k) = total for 5 months of just DISCOVERY viewers?
(assuming that all the viewers went for the more expensive option)

$10.00 x (100k+200k+300k+400k+500k) = $1M + 2M + 3M + 4M + 5M = $15 million

That's also not quite the formula. Assuming nobody dropped the service...

10 * 100k * 5mo + 10*200k*4 + 10*300k*30, etc. Which grosses $35 million.

Those subscriber numbers don't jive with the statement that CBSAA has about (or more) than 2 million viewers, BTW. It likely grew at a faster rate. E.g. 150k, 300k,450k,600k,750k = 2.25M = $52.5M gross.

 

[Wowbagger]

$10.00 x (100k+200k+300k+400k+500k) = $1M + 2M + 3M + 4M + 5M = $15 million

Since CBS AA was adding 50,000 subscribers a month before it started its original programming, and then started adding 100,000 subscribers a month after, I gave Discovery "credit" for only 50,000 of them, since I assume the other 50,000 signed up for other reasons (based on the fact that the service was getting 50,000 subs/month with no original programming).

So my result was exactly half of this: $10.00 x (50k+100k+150k+200k+250k) = $0.5M + 1M + 1.5M + 2M + 2.5M = $7.5 million

That's also not quite the formula. Assuming nobody dropped the service...

10 * 100k * 5mo + 10*200k*4 + 10*300k*30, etc. Which grosses $35 million.

Isn't this double-counting? Consider the first batch of people, who signed up in October and then paid for five months of the service. You've got every dollar they spent accounted for in the "(10 * 100k * 5mo)" term. So in the next term, where are you getting 200k from? CBS AA only added about 100k subscribers in November.

Those subscriber numbers don't jive with the statement that CBSAA has about (or more) than 2 million viewers, BTW. It likely grew at a faster rate.

No, 100,000 subs/month during Discovery's run is roughly correct. This is the one thing in this equation we can actually be certain of, thanks to CBS's previous statements to press:

Oct 2014 - 0 subscribers (at launch)
Jul 2016 - ~1 million subscribers (source)
Feb 2017 - 1.3 (?) million subscribers (source)
Sep 2017 - 2 million subscribers (source)
Feb 2018 - 2.5 million subscribers (source)

EDIT: It's worth adding that they are meeting or exceeding their stated goals for CBSAA, so Discovery seems to be meeting internal expectations just fine, even if it is technically losing money hand over fist.

 

[T'Bonz]

Which you can't fully read unless you register with the site.

Which was irritating as fuck as I went to go to page three while writing up the article and got hit with the mandatory register-wall.

I won't tell you what I registered with...but it wasn't polite.

 

[Cyrus]

I didn't bother reading all the different spins the users here are posting. It doesn't matter if it has more or less viewers that ENT did or Orville has.Those are not apples to apples comparisons. CBS is clearly happy with the show and that is all that matters at this point.

 

[Ovation]

CBS is clearly happy with the show and that is all that matters at this point.

Exactly.

 

[Vger23]

I didn't bother reading all the different spins the users here are posting. It doesn't matter if it has more or less viewers that ENT did or Orville has.Those are not apples to apples comparisons. CBS is clearly happy with the show and that is all that matters at this point.

It certainly matters to people who feel the need to rationalize their own opinions though.

No matter what positive information is posted about the show from news sources, there's always a few people who pop up to tell you about why that information isn't really positive.

High rottentomatoes.com reviews episode by episode? Nope. Not really. Paid for and inaccurate and reasons.

High interest based on people discussing it online? Nope. Meaningless measure. People hate DSC and are talking about hating it. And stuff.

CBS is pleased? No way! Show has less viewers than the Super Bowl aftershow had in New England. CBS liars!!! Literally nobody watches. Worst show ever.

Saw the same thing in 2009. It's fun watching everyone do mental gymnastics.

 

[Blooded]

EDIT: It's worth adding that they are meeting or exceeding their stated goals for CBSAA, so Discovery seems to be meeting internal expectations just fine, even if it is technically losing money hand over fist.

Regardless of the maths being used in this thread, some of which looks way off, the fact is that Discovery is absolutely profitable for CBS. The Netflix money covered the production costs. Anything made off their actual subscribers is just extra money for CBS to use how they please (and marketing etc)