Ok. What is the chance of a Picard spinoff?

[Sci]

There is no evidence the Star Trek Universe isn't financially sustainable.

I mean, there might be.

The thing of it is, almost six years into its lifespan now if you count the days when it was called CBS All-Access, Paramount+ still has never turned a profit.

Now, that's not necessarily evidence that the "Star Trek Universe" concept of having three or more shows in constant production and new episodes almost every week of the year is not financially viable per se. Because, after all, none of the single-studio streamers have turned a profit. And all of them were run with the plan to operate on a deficit for the first few years while they built up a large enough back catalog to entice year-round subscribers.

All the single-studio streamers are now coming under pressure from Wall Street to start cutting costs and turning a profit before their initial plans called for them to stop deficit spending. But that doesn't mean the plan would have worked if they'd stuck to it either.

The question is whether or not that business model is viable, period.

I have always suspected that the entire concept of a single-studio streamer never really made financial sense. To make a comparison, back in the '90s, you didn't go out to the single-studio VHS rental stores. You didn't go to the Paramount Home Video Rental Store for a copy of Forrest Gump and then to the Disney Home Video Rental Store for a copy of The Lion King and then to the 20th Century Fox Home Video Rental Store for a copy of The Empire Strikes Back. You went to Blockbuster or Family Video or Hollywood Video or whatever, and they had copies of all three -- because the value came from having a wide variety of content from a wide variety of studio. I think that's ultimately why Netflix and Hulu are going to be more financially viable than Paramount+ or Disney+ or whatever.

But.

That again doesn't mean that the idea of year-round Star Trek content is not financially viable. If Paramount+ folds, it's entirely possible that Paramount could cut a deal to continue year-round Star Trek production to be carried on Netflix or Hulu instead. And I suspect that that might be more financially viable for Paramount than trying to do it on their own streamer.

 

[SG-17]

Paramount doesn't have many active IPs to begin with, so the chances of them scaling back Star Trek is unlikely.

Yeah, it's pretty much just Nickelodeon, that cowboy stuff, and Star Trek.

 

[Citiprime]

Yeah, it's pretty much just Nickelodeon, that cowboy stuff, and Star Trek.

And Paramount's rights to Yellowstone and its spinoffs is a complicated mess. From what I've read, they don't have clear access/title to it, so that's why some of the shows are on Peacock.

 

[locborg]

Would changeling Shaw have thrown himself in front of the Borg?

Spoiler: Picard spoilers

I guess so, phasers on kill don’t seem to actually kill them, you’ll need the vaporize mode to get rid off a changeling. Changeling Shaw could have planned this move way ahead.

Also i think we never saw what happened to the red masked changeling. Maybe he took over for Shaw, after they boarded the Titan. The real Shaw is still
trapped in a cloaked and hidden biostasis chamber, still on board the Titan, i mean Titan-A… i mean Enterprise-G.

 

[Omegaphallic]

Yeah, it's pretty much just Nickelodeon, that cowboy stuff, and Star Trek.

They also an 8 episode D&D show, Fatal Attraction show, and a True Lies show coming, but yeah Star Trek is the key Paramount franchise the way Star Wars is for Disney, and apparently Star Trek is entering Phase 2.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

The thing of it is, almost six years into its lifespan now if you count the days when it was called CBS All-Access, Paramount+ still has never turned a profit.

I'm not sure that can be meaningfully measured. The bottom line might look red, but it might reflect the cost of expansion and development rather than lack of subscribers. All the stages and sets, special effects, the virtual screen that allows actors to interact with visuals, not to mention new pilots--cost more uo front, but will be gravy in the future.

 

[Dar70]

Well whatever happens. Perhaps Trek needs a REAL break after SNW. It's been running almost non stop since TNG and 4 movies before that.(1979-1986) The longest break was 4 years between Enterprise and the 2009 film. If they are not making a profit on their steaming there is no way they are gonna continue churning out shows with the Budgets they have been on. That's probably why we are gonna get a boring 32nd century academy show. Lol
Still I wish Trek would take a true break. Its become saturated again. With 10 seasons (by 2024) in a 6 year period not including the cartoons. Most of it not very good IMO. (With Pic3 and SNW1 the best of the lot)

Then reboot it from scratch with limited series. Same basic story and a proper telling from the early days of Starfleet all the way to wherever they want to go with it. I will be close to dead by that point and not be alive long enough to care anymore.

I am content with Picard Season 3 being the last of Trek I really care about. If they do a legacy series that would be icing on the cake but I would not expect it to last much beyond 50 episodes.

But I don't know. The steaming services are so piece meal right now. They are all having issues turning a profit. Soon sharing is gonna be completely off the boards as well.

 

[gvn2fly]

DISCO spawned SNW, a Starfleet Academy show, and a Section 31 movie. Plus it ushered in an era with 5 TV shows overlapping. Six if you count Orville. And it was never as big a hit as S3 Picard.

Why would we count a non Star Trek show? Should we count in The Expanse being picked up by Prime too?

 

[gvn2fly]

And Paramount's rights to Yellowstone and its spinoffs is a complicated mess. From what I've read, they don't have clear access/title to it, so that's why some of the shows are on Peacock.

Paramount sold the streaming rights to yellowstone to NBC before that show got really big. It is using Paramount + for the yellowstone spinoffs so they can have a piece of that yellowstone pie.

 

[gvn2fly]

Keep in mind how often the S31 show has been officially announced by CBS,

Zero times? A section 31 show was never officially announced by CBS.

 

[gvn2fly]

Kurtzman's comments yesterday make me think Legacy, in some form, is coming. This feedback took them by surprise.

What did he say?

 

[Racefuel]

What did he say?

He and Matalas are working on story ideas, getting things figured out before making a pitch to Paramount

 

[Racefuel]

Zero times? A section 31 show was never officially announced by CBS.

I thought so too, but I was wrong. They did officially announce a Section 31 show in 2019

 

[Danja]

I have always suspected that the entire concept of a single-studio streamer never really made financial sense. To make a comparison, back in the '90s, you didn't go out to the single-studio VHS rental stores. You didn't go to the Paramount Home Video Rental Store for a copy of Forrest Gump and then to the Disney Home Video Rental Store for a copy of The Lion King and then to the 20th Century Fox Home Video Rental Store for a copy of The Empire Strikes Back. You went to Blockbuster or Family Video or Hollywood Video or whatever, and they had copies of all three -- because the value came from having a wide variety of content from a wide variety of studio. I think that's ultimately why Netflix and Hulu are going to be more financially viable than Paramount+ or Disney+ or whatever.

Blockbuster and Hollywood Video went bankrupt

That again doesn't mean that the idea of year-round Star Trek content is not financially viable. If Paramount+ folds, it's entirely possible that Paramount could cut a deal to continue year-round Star Trek production to be carried on Netflix or Hulu instead. And I suspect that that might be more financially viable for Paramount than trying to do it on their own streamer.

Netflix was an aggregator (For the longest time, they carried Disco and Picard).

P+ was tired of having to pay someone else to carry THEIR own stuff.

 

[gvn2fly]

I thought so too, but I was wrong. They did officially announce a Section 31 show in 2019

I think it was announced (or stated from other sources) that it was in development. Kurtzman has talked about it as well. But I don't recall it being announced as being picked up as an actual show but maybe I'm wrong.

 

[gvn2fly]

He and Matalas are working on story ideas, getting things figured out before making a pitch to Paramount

Oh that sounds promising (all up to P+ though). Where did you read this?

 

[Racefuel]

Oh that sounds promising (all up to P+ though). Where did you read this?

TrekMovie

 

[gvn2fly]

Thanks.

 

[Phily B]

Not for a while, but I'd say good. I think there is a possibility once they've got the S31 movie (which I think is a bad idea) and SFA (another bad idea) in motion. I think it is possible we get one more season of SNW and then we might get ST Legacy depending on how it is doing. But we don't know the behind the scenes stuff, so it is all entirely guess work.

My feeling is Discovery isn't particularly popular, but then they're making two spin offs in a movie and a series...

 

[Omegaphallic]

And Paramount's rights to Yellowstone and its spinoffs is a complicated mess. From what I've read, they don't have clear access/title to it, so that's why some of the shows are on Peacock.