They are collecting money from every book sale. They are collecting money from all merchandising that's out there. They are currently working on remastering TNG which they will then sell into syndication, streaming, and DVD/Blu Ray. Finally, they may be collecting money from Paramount for the new movies. That's hardly doing nothing with the property. They are making money where they see opportunity, and avoiding other options that they see as money losing ventures. Seems to make sense to me(and most likely the CBS shareholders).
New ST to be pitched to CBS set in post STNG era/timeline
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
They are collecting money from every book sale. They are collecting money from all merchandising that's out there. They are currently working on remastering TNG which they will then sell into syndication, streaming, and DVD/Blu Ray. Finally, they may be collecting money from Paramount for the new movies. That's hardly doing nothing with the property. They are making money where they see opportunity, and avoiding other options that they see as money losing ventures. Seems to make sense to me(and most likely the CBS shareholders).
I agree. Hey, you haven't ridden your bike in a while so I'm just going to take it.
That would be mine, too. It'd be cool to see that era get some new stories.
This is where I start thinking: hmm... maybe I really don't need it anymore --> I sell it to you if you like. Or hmm... he's right ---> I rent it out to you for some time. Or hm... he's right, and he seems a good guy where it's either in good hands or he'll bring it back as soon as he doesn't need it any more--> Yeah, take it.
Of course they are. When Viacom split into two companies and Paramount and CBS were split, Paramount got the film properties and CBS got the TV properties. Since Star Trek is originally and primarily a television franchise, CBS got ownership of it. Paramount retained a license to the movie rights because of their long history making Trek films, but that means they pay CBS for the right to use the property, the same way Pocket Books pays for the license to publish Star Trek novels. That's why Paramount went ahead with making a new Trek film at a time when conventional wisdom was that the franchise should lie fallow for a time: because if Paramount didn't put a Trek movie into production within 18 months of the corporate split, then the license would expire and the movie rights would revert to CBS. Because CBS owns all of Star Trek, even the parts of it that are produced by other companies (like the movies, books, comics, games, toys, etc.). Nobody, not even Paramount, has the right to make and market a Star Trek product without paying a share of the profits to CBS.
They're doing plenty with it - they're licensing the hell out of it, have a feature film in the works, a new MMO, etc.
The point is - right now they feel they have enough stuff to make a profit with and are doing just that (720+ hours of television episodes over 21 TV seasons - 18 of which ran consecutively from 1987 - 2005.
Just because they do not want to spoend money on yet another new TV production doesn't mean they aren't levereging what's already been produced. They are.
A corporation is highly unlikely to give anything away, but they could license it to someone they can trust to make money and not devalue the brand.
But not everyone can be trusted not to devalue the brand, according to how CBS defines value. And that may be the problem. Nobody with credibility has convinced them to let them take a swipe at utilizing the brand on TV. It's better to just sit on a brand rather than allow it to be devalued through mismanagement.
We've already seen the damage that can do. CBS doesn't want to have to dig itself out of a hole the way Abrams had to dig out of the hole the movies had gotten themselves into. Better to just start fresh someday, when someone presents a plan to CBS that the suits agree could work.
Has anyone with credibility even tried to convince CBS to let them play with their brand? They'd have to get past the reception desk first.
Even if CBS were not getting a piece of the pie in dollar terms, they are getting free value from the brand- and awareness-building that JJ Abrams is doing. I'm sure CBS understands that's equivalent to money that they can tap into if someone comes up with a workable plan for TV (and if there's a workable plan to be had for TV - there's no guarantee that such a plan is even theoretically possible).
Let me extend the analogy by pointing out that the bike-owner would be foolish to even take money for renting the bike to you if they think you're just going to ride it off a cliff.
As a globally-recognized brand, Star Trek is not a bike. It's more like a vintage Harley - a vehicle whose replacement value is far, far higher than the rental value. You can't buy another vintage Harley just like you can't buy another brand of Star Trek's cachet, and you'd be a fool to just let anyone take it out for a ride.
Similar threads
- Poll
