Dedends on what they figure the Return on Investment is.
[Oh and as for: "Is $50 mil to remaster fourteen seasons of Trek really that much worse than $40 mil to make less than half of one new season of something that's so unlike Star Trek.." <--- Welcome to how A GREAT MANY TOS fans felt in 1987 when TNG premiered... My point: This isn't the first time the Star Trek Franchise has adopted itself to the current presentation and manner of entertainment . Gee - The current modern form of 'Star Trek' is different from the form of it you fell in love with 30+ years ago in 1987...yeah, welcome to the world of someone who loved what Star trek was in 1966; but didn't care for what it had become when returned to TV in 1987.]
1987-1994 TNG has effectively run its course. They've sold it in syndication and sold it both in DVD and Blu-Ray. There are not many who will rebuy and rebuy the same content in a different wrapper.
Star Trek Discovery (however you might view it is brand new.
- Yes, right now it's exclusively on a streaming platform but nothing prevents them years down the line from selling it to whatever internet/cable/over the air TV stations that exist in later years.
- The ST: D Blu rays are selling well.
Bottom line: Overall ST: D offers them a better ROI per dollar spent then another re-release of TNG in yet another format. That's why they're doing what they're doing - Money spent v. Profit returned.
That's true but they still spent money on both shows in hopes to return a profit. And while some people would not repurchase without good reason, diehards still would due to the wealth of interviews and documentaries. that are far above and beyond the DVD releases. But such a number is still comparatively small.
I wonder when the actual STD purchase numbers will come out. "Selling well" can mean anything and there are arguments all over the internet proving that. Never mind the blu-ray set costing $30 means, that at $8 mil per episode, are they really selling enough copies?
The
potential for better ROI is there if new fans think it's
that good. The only fact is that TNG didn't sell as well as expected for initial sales and most people were whining about the cost, despite the sales price being half that of the DVDs in 2002 and in 2002 there was no restoration work done, and other relevant factors. One can infer DS9 and VOY have lesser initial purchases as well since they were more niche even when they debuted, assuming those who bought the blu-rays were hardcore fans and would buy all things
Trek and not all who watched DS9 and VOY were. If enough people bought at a higher price, would the work be done?
I fell in love with
Trek before 1987 too -- and it took me a while to appreciate 1987's revival, retcons, alterations to show's premise, and so on... and the callbacks (e.g. pointless models and dialogue lifts/rehashes) still seem silly (pointless and superficial narrative distractions, of which many still don't add up in the in-universe narrative) at times, but it's easier to look at the stories as whole stories and see the premise and ideas without the distractions of "Hey, we're so cool that we're making new Star Trek, we put this model of the original shuttlecraft into this conference room, nudge nudge wink!" (aka "Haven", the countless episodes with the original 1701 in season 1 - apart from the main briefing room behind the bridge - are even more pointless. And why would the 1701 show up in Utopia Planetia's lab when that's like putting a model of an Edsel inside the lab of a Mustang...)
That's not "desperation", that's common business sense.
