Ok. What is the chance of a Picard spinoff?

[FederationHistorian]

Now, they're trashing SNW ("Nurse Chapel done gone woke! Why is Spock eating bacon? He's supposed to be Jewish!" )

There's a there is a thread on Twitter devoted to the Spock-eating-bacon controversy (FTR: Leonard Nimoy was Jewish. Spock the character was not.)

There's just no pleasing some people.

I think they are alluding to Amanda Grayson being Jewish (at least in beta canon). And think Spock must have been raised in the Jewish tradition.

Even though Star Trek doesn’t deal with aliens adopting Earth religion and has barely dealt with humans adopting alien religions.

It's just not that important to Star Trek.

 

[The Wormhole]

With the news that Paramount and Warner Bros are in talks of merging, the chances of a Picard spinoff have become less than zero. But then so has the chance of Section 31 or Starfleet Academy ever seeing the light of day.

 

[James Cole]

Look, even if WBD does buy Paramount, it would likely take ~18 months to close.

S31 is happening, but spent almost 4 years as vaporware (complete with a mini-room) until it dropped down from a series to a streaming movie.

SFA still doesn't make sense without external funding from another streamer or being produced on a shoestring budget.

Legacy wise? Neutral or slightly beneficial as an acquisition would shuffle through the suits.

 

[fireproof78]

SFA still doesn't make sense without external funding from another streamer or being produced on a shoestring budget.

Sure it does.

Reuse assets, bring in younger cast so cheaper, do 3 seasons and move on.

Makes as much sense as Legacy, save that it's cheaper.

 

[Danja]

Warner may not even WANT everything.

I've read that they're most interested in Paramount's local CBS stations (The CW is too small for Warner's liking).

Paramount Global is an enormous sprawling company. Let's not press the panic button.

 

[Tuskin38]

The FTC may even step in because those would be a very big mergers.

 

[Danja]

Look, even if WBD does buy Paramount, it would likely take ~18 months to close.

Warner has its own debt issues stemming from ITS acquisition by Discovery Networks.

Why would a heavily-indebted Warner take on a heavily-indebted Paramount?

 

[Lord Garth]

Because people are making such a big deal out of this, I'm predicting very little will change on the Star Trek front. The real changes won't start happening until Alex Kurtzman's contract is up in 2027, at the earliest. That might sound too boring and unsensational for people who want blood, "If it bleeds, it leads!" as I was taught when I took a Newspaper Journalism course when I was in college, but I think nothing seismic will happen.

 

[Campe]

I think nothing seismic will happen in 2024 but if this merger occurs, I imagine we won’t get any new series announcements for next year either.

2025? All bets are off.

 

[Danja]

I think nothing seismic will happen in 2024 but if this merger occurs, I imagine we won’t get any new series announcements for next year either.

2025? All bets are off.

No one is expecting Paramount to stop doing business until the merger is completed.

 

[Campe]

No one is expecting Paramount to stop doing business until the merger is completed.

I do mergers and acquisitions for a regional healthcare company. I have been involved in over 150 acquisitions since I’ve worked here. More often than not, we ask that companies be smart in regards to any business decisions made during the diligence process.

Like most streaming services, Paramount+ is not doing well at the moment and more than likely, if this acquisition is in process and Star Trek is part of the deal, they’ll need to consider what they’re doing. Over the two and a half years, Paramount’s stock has plummeted from $48 to $15. Thats downright terrible. I’m not someone who says that what Paramount is doing with Star Trek is ruining Paramount. But I will say that in the midst of the acquisition (if the talk is true), while yes, business must continue, taking unnecessary risks is something that needs to be curbed.

 

[Lord Garth]

SFA still doesn't make sense without external funding from another streamer or being produced on a shoestring budget.

Bolded the relevant part. I think this is why. They still want to pad out the year with Star Trek, even if it's not 52 weeks. They cancelled Discovery and have a cheaper replacement in the form of Starfleet Academy. So, it probably will have a (much) lower budget.

Legacy wise? Neutral or slightly beneficial as an acquisition would shuffle through the suits.

Since Legacy, if it's greenlit, would functionally be a replacement for Picard, then -- using the logic I applied to SFA -- I think it would also be lower budget. Though, without having to afford the TNG Cast, I think the difference won't be that noticeable, if at all.

 

[FederationHistorian]

Look, even if WBD does buy Paramount, it would likely take ~18 months to close

Okay…imagine 18 months from now, June 2025.

DIS will be completely finished.

SNW S3 finished airing, with the possibility of an SNW S4 in the air.

LD S5 finished airing, with the possibility of an LD S6 being made and released later that summer.

S31 streaming event has aired.

SFA S1 will likely have aired by this point.

PRO S2 will have aired on Netflix at some point, with a potential S3 and S4 in the air.

News about Legacy will have come out by this point.


Only SNW, LD, SFA and PRO will be around. And its likely that they either are finishing their runs or are about to finish them by 2025.

This is not even taking into account another streaming movie made for P+, likely the 5th TNG movie.

The glut of content won't be there, but there will still be Star Trek airing in the meantime.

 

[Danja]

I do mergers and acquisitions for a regional healthcare company. I have been involved in over 150 acquisitions since I’ve worked here. More often than not, we ask that companies be smart in regards to any business decisions made during the diligence process.

Like most streaming services, Paramount+ is not doing well at the moment and more than likely, if this acquisition is in process and Star Trek is part of the deal, they’ll need to consider what they’re doing. Over the two and a half years, Paramount’s stock has plummeted from $48 to $15. Thats downright terrible. I’m not someone who says that what Paramount is doing with Star Trek is ruining Paramount. But I will say that in the midst of the acquisition (if the talk is true), while yes, business must continue, taking unnecessary risks is something that needs to be curbed.

As I said earlier, Paramount is a sprawling conglomerate. There's a ton of legacy assets they can offload (their local CBS affiliates, BET, MTV, VH1, etc.) without causing too much pain.

Right now, things are mostly hypothetical.

ETA: VH1 originally stood for Video Hits 1. They were playing Bruce Springsteen and Michael Jackson when their sister station MTV was playing Soundgarden, Smashing Pumpkins, and Tupac.

Yes, Paramount has held onto them for THAT long. They're now both known more for reality TV programming.

 

[Campe]

As I said earlier, Paramount is a sprawling conglomerate. There's a ton of legacy assets they can offload (their local CBS affiliates, BET, MTV, VH1, etc.) without causing too much pain.

Right now, things are mostly hypothetical.

All of that is true, yes.

 

[Danja]

All of that is true, yes.

This is to say nothing of their niche stations like MTV Tres or MTV Classic (you haven't lived until you've watched Married With Children dubbed in Spanish).

 

[James Cole]

Because people are making such a big deal out of this, I'm predicting very little will change on the Star Trek front. The real changes won't start happening until Alex Kurtzman's contract is up in 2027, at the earliest. That might sound too boring and unsensational for people who want blood, "If it bleeds, it leads!" as I was taught when I took a Newspaper Journalism course when I was in college, but I think nothing seismic will happen.

Haha someone is finally saying the quiet part out loud <G>. I just wasn't going to go there...

Bolded the relevant part. I think this is why. They still want to pad out the year with Star Trek, even if it's not 52 weeks. They cancelled Discovery and have a cheaper replacement in the form of Starfleet Academy. So, it probably will have a (much) lower budget.

Even the CW shows people attached to SFA previously worked on proved to be unsustainable once Warners and CBS decided to cut their losses. SFA probably needs a budget under $3 million an episode. Just how good are the Canadian production tax credits?

Since Legacy, if it's greenlit, would functionally be a replacement for Picard, then -- using the logic I applied to SFA -- I think it would also be lower budget. Though, without having to afford the TNG Cast, I think the difference won't be that noticeable, if at all.

NuTrek shows have been plagued with bloated overhead... the numerous no-show executive producers with sinecures, massive budget overruns and reshoots... On a 12 MONKEYS podcast (I'm paraphrasing from memory here) Terry Matalas talked about the budget they had to make work for 12M, and then being shocked how other series were much more loose with expenses. Granted, that could very well have been MACGVER and not PICARD... but needless to say he has a track record of doing a lot more with less. That would serve him well on Legacy... especially if they have less gatekeepers to pay off. I think he could make a very good show at $4-5 million an episode.

And I think it's safe to guess PS3 didn't really cost $100 million+ to make, and some of that must have been eaten up by cost overruns in the the prior two seasons.

 

[Danja]

NuTrek shows have been plagued with bloated overhead... the numerous no-show executive producers with sinecures, massive budget overruns and reshoots...

At one point, Disco and Picard each had about THIRTY producers per episode!

They've since trimmed the number of producers per episode back to around seven.

 

[Lord Garth]

Even the CW shows people attached to SFA previously worked on proved to be unsustainable once Warners and CBS decided to cut their losses. SFA probably needs a budget under $3 million an episode. Just how good are the Canadian production tax credits?

No idea. I could be totally wrong but, to be blunt, I don't think Starfleet Academy will go the full four years with one group of cadets all going from freshman to senior. I'd be surprised.

I think Star Trek in general messed up the chance it had to gain Zoomers. So, I think this won't get them as much of the youth audience as they were hoping for.

I can tell you that when I was in school, the last thing I wanted to do when I got home was watch about characters in school. Star Trek, among several other shows and movies, was my escape from that. I'm sure a lot of young people in the would-be audience would feel the same way. They want to get away from the lives they're stuck in, not be reminded of them. Especially a sci-fi or fantasy fan. What drew me to Star Trek over 30 years ago was that it was an escape. So much worse back then. Today, I can always just leave a job and get another one. I couldn't just leave my school and go to another one. Now, I can live where I want, I can go out when I want, I can live how I want. None of that happens when you're a kid, so escapism becomes even more important at that age.

This is the part where someone will mention Harry Potter and Hogwarts. But Hogwarts was no ordinary school and Harry, from what I remember, always saved the day. I don't think that really translates to SFA, but we'll see. If they take them off Academy grounds and put them on a ship, then it's just live-action Prodigy. Having it at the Academy would make it different enough. I don't know how interested it would keep me though, long-term. So, more likely than not, I'd eventually tune out after the novelty wears off.

 

[Danja]

I can tell you that when I was in school, the last thing I wanted to do when I got home was watch about characters in school. Star Trek, among several other shows and movies, was my escape from that. I'm sure a lot of young people in the would-be audience would feel the same way. They want to get away from the lives they're stuck in, not be reminded of them. Especially a sci-fi or fantasy fan. What drew me to Star Trek over 30 years ago was that it was an escape.

They could do what Beverly Hills 90210 did and make school an afterthought while focusing more on the cadets' personal lives.