That's what I am saying. CBS and Viacom seem to have completely different strategies when it comes to streaming, either CBS/Viacom can try to be a major player in the streaming wars or they can be a third party that sells its content to other platforms, they cannot do both these things, they have to pick one or the other.
Will CBS All Access Remain Viable in the Streaming Wars?
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
That's what I am saying. CBS and Viacom seem to have completely different strategies when it comes to streaming, either CBS/Viacom can try to be a major player in the streaming wars or they can be a third party that sells its content to other platforms, they cannot do both these things, they have to pick one or the other.
Who says it is on shaky ground? CBS is demonstrating their resolve by putting up money. If they thought it was a loss then they would slowly discontinue it in favor of the Viacom model.
CBS is a notoriously conservative company, slow to change until they have evaluated all of their options. And, right now, all the options are not on the table, between what current licensing deals are going on (Netflix, HBO), and the merger with Viacom.
I think I'll wait and see before wringing my hands over something I really cannot control.
CBS shelves it for a bit then explores it on a new network. No problem. Even when ENT ended it wasn't long before we had more Trek.
And, worst case? Star Trek doesn't have new TV content. And, as much as I love Trek, there is more than sufficient Trek to keep me entertained for the rest of my life. So, I'm not all that worried.
They can do whatever they want based on what they find makes them the most profit. and if it is most profitable for them to stream their own content in the US and be a major player there, and sell thier content to the highest bidder for international distribution, then I don't see anything wrong with that.
Yup. We pay $12 a month and there's plenty of new content.
Because CBS doesn't own The Big Bang Theory, Warner Brothers does. CBS had first run rights to the show.
Exactly. CBS seems pretty OK with AA at this point because they keep putting money in to it.
I was going to make this exact point - that Viacom seems more focused on leasing their content and being a third-party provider. And since the new ViacomCBS leadership seems like it'll lean more towards the Viacom way, I'm not sure how much juice they'll pump into CBS All Access. I'm sure they'll keep CBS AA around and keep it functional, but considering the lack content CBS AA has in comparison the the other streaming offerings (even with the potential of Nickelodeon & Paramount Network being added on there after the merger), and considering how many streaming options there are now or upcoming, and seems like the window to expand CBS AA beyond it's current state has passed.
Speaking of which, it's just been announced that Nickelodeon (owned by Viacom) has just partnered with Netflix to produce new animated features and shows.
Come on, man, your new buddy's streaming service was right there!
Likely, this negotiation had been in the works for a while, so they may not have felt that AA was a viable platform at the time.
I'm in the wait and see in the streaming wars thing. At this point, the market is brand new, lots of players are entering the fray and adding more content. So, I don't think AA has missed the boat, not if Disney and Apple are just now jumping in.
I can see why it would want to go this route.
I can also speculate what would happen if they aired Discovery on network TV; restrictions and over-the shoulder-looking and a harder time getting things passed.
And then there's the risk of unstable ratings. First a major jump in ratings for the first few episodes, then a possible massive dropout later, and then switching airing days etc., if interest fades .
With the streaming service, they get a steady, targeted viewership.
But to be honest, I have no idea what's happening on Discovery now. No access to it now, and the "must see" factor isn't there. So it feels like its fanbase and appeal is happening in its own little bubble.
Being on a subscription service makes it feel kind of isolated. Maybe the must see factor would return if I could watch more of the show. But with it being isolated, and some of the negativity you hear about its style, it feels like a far off show somewhere.
It's a popular show for the streaming service, but I wonder if it being isolated is a good thing.
I can also speculate what would happen if they aired Discovery on network TV; restrictions and over-the shoulder-looking and a harder time getting things passed.
And then there's the risk of unstable ratings. First a major jump in ratings for the first few episodes, then a possible massive dropout later, and then switching airing days etc., if interest fades .
With the streaming service, they get a steady, targeted viewership.
But to be honest, I have no idea what's happening on Discovery now. No access to it now, and the "must see" factor isn't there. So it feels like its fanbase and appeal is happening in its own little bubble.
Being on a subscription service makes it feel kind of isolated. Maybe the must see factor would return if I could watch more of the show. But with it being isolated, and some of the negativity you hear about its style, it feels like a far off show somewhere.
It's a popular show for the streaming service, but I wonder if it being isolated is a good thing.
Except CBS and Viacom were discussing a merger at the same time Viacom was crafting this deal with Netflix. It does not seem like Viacom has much faith in CBS All Access, if they are unwilling to put all their content on there to make it more competitive, it seems like CBS/Viacom is not bringing their A-game to CBS All Access.
At this point, maybe CBS All Access should be shuttered and Star Trek sold to Netflix or Amazon or another player. With HBO Max, Peacock, and Disney+ entering the streaming wars, sooner or later, CBS will have to go big or go home. CBS's library, Good Fight, Star Trek and the Twilight Zone is not good enough on its own to be competitive, IMO.
Streaming is the way of the future, Network and cable TV is slowly dying, Star Trek's future is in streaming. There is no point in putting Star Trek a format that is on its way out.
The big question is, IMO, should Star Trek remain on CBS All Access or should CBS give up on that and sell Star Trek to Amazon or Netflix or some other player. I just do not think CBS/Viacom is taking the steps needed to make CBS All Access a really big player in the streaming market.
Last edited:
Way too early in the game to make such dire predictions. As I stated, I will be willing to wait and see.
Also, I'll let CBS make their business decisions. If they are willing to put money into it then fine by me. Thus far, they have demonstrated such a willingness to invest in to this platform.
But does not seem like Viacom is willing to throw in with CBS All Access, which I think is a problem in the long term if CBS and Viacom are supposed to be one company soon, they should have one strategy for streaming, not 2.
If CBS All Access is CBS' golden child, why isn't the Showtime stuff on it?
You can say CBS is putting money into this service, but will they put the same money Warner Brothers will put into HBO Max, Disney will put into Disney+ and NBC Univeral will put into Peacock, not mention Netflix, Apple, Amazon, etc. The market is going to get real crowded soon.
You can say its too early to say who will win, but ultimately its pretty easy to see that the players with the strongest content libraries will be the winners and I think CBS All Access and Apple TV seem like the weakest players, I do not think its too early say, the stronger the library the better that service's chances of thriving are. These weaker players will have to change their game quickly or lose, CBS's stuffy conservativism is a luxury it cannot afford anymore because these other players are willing to throw everything and the kitchen sink at their streaming services, is CBS will to match that bet?
Its 2 sided coin, I suppose you can say that CBS would be more willing to invest in Star Trek if they are using it pump up their service, but I bet most fans would rather Star Trek be part of one the more popular streaming services that have a wider array of content then CBS All Access, rather than CBS asking fans to pay for another streaming service, which I think does not offer much in terms of exciting new content besides new Star Trek, IMO.
Perhaps. Perhaps not. It depends on how they structure it.
Don't know. Don't really care. They are investing in Star Trek, which is the closest I can muster caring about a corporation's internal dealings.
I don't know what they will do. That's kind of my mind. The market is a new playing field, which means there is still room for growth, changes and transitions.
Sorry if I sound flippant, but after watching smart phones go from a luxury to nearly ubiquitous, terabyte hardrives increasingly affordable, I really don't dare guess what the market might do,
Well, this fan would prefer CBS AA as it is, so I will just disagree. I don't care about popular streaming services, and I don't utilize them.
But, regardless, time alone will tell and my input to CBS thus far has not changed much.
I don't even know why anyone would have so many streaming services to begin with. The only ones I have are CBS, Crunchyroll, and AppleTV + (which I have free for a year). CBS is the only one I pay for out of those three. I don't use Netflix anymore because I don't really like any of their original content outside of Castlevania, which is between seasons currently. And any existing content that I'd watch on Netflix, like past Trek shows, Frasier, and The Twilight Zone (original) are on CBS anyway. One of my friends subscribes to almost all the streaming services. I don't know where one even gets the time to watch all of that. But, that's just me.
I was recently watching an interview with a former NBC executive who was the mastermind behind NBC's old Must See TV campaign from the 90s. He mentioned that the strategy going into that was not to promote the network. He didn't feel people watched networks anymore; but, instead watched the shows. So all emphasis was put on promoting the shows, individually, rather than the network the shows were broadcast on. I found to be very interesting because, in a way, I feel like that's how we approach streaming. If there were no new Star Trek series or Twilight Zone on CBS All Access, I would not have it. I choose my streaming platform based upon what's on there.
I was recently watching an interview with a former NBC executive who was the mastermind behind NBC's old Must See TV campaign from the 90s. He mentioned that the strategy going into that was not to promote the network. He didn't feel people watched networks anymore; but, instead watched the shows. So all emphasis was put on promoting the shows, individually, rather than the network the shows were broadcast on. I found to be very interesting because, in a way, I feel like that's how we approach streaming. If there were no new Star Trek series or Twilight Zone on CBS All Access, I would not have it. I choose my streaming platform based upon what's on there.
Yup. Viability is not as strictly tied to overall platform or network performance anymore. And if CBS AA starts to slide, and it probably will, CBS will adjust. Or not. Either way, it's not as dire as "winning the streaming wars" makes it sound.
But I do not think you represent the majority of consumers of streaming services, who want more, not less for their money when it comes to streaming services. People want the best bang for their buck and I do not think CBS All Access does that, not without the Viacom and Showtime content, IMO.
It's not a big deal for me, I live Canada where Star Trek streams on a Service called Crave TV, which I think has a superior library of content compared to CBS All Access, due to having Showtime and HBO Content on it too (though new HBO content and movies cost extra on that service, which kinda ripoff).
But if I lived in the US, I do not think CBS All Access would be worth it, compared to other streaming services out there, at least not in its current form. Its got to beef up pretty quickly now and not just rely on Star Trek, IMO.
Except if I lived in the US, I do not think Star Trek on its own would make CBS All Access more attractive then other services.
Let's say I have a limited streaming budget, CBS All Access has Star Trek, okay. But let's say there is way more content on Netflix that I like over CBS All Access (they got that Dark Crystal Show, Stranger Things, Ozark, Bojack Horseman, Castlevania, etc). What if I had a kid and that kid really liked Spongebob and Viacom just sold the rights to that show to Netflix.
CBS All Access cannot survive on one franchise, even one as great Star Trek. They need more than just Star Trek in terms of new content.
I certainly would not get Disney+ just for the Mandalorians.
Last edited:
I disagree, but that's no surprise. I subscribed based upon single shows I want to watch. I don't need a full archive to access because I do not have time to watch it all. I don't care about Showtime or HBO because none of their content interests me.
No, I doubt I represent any majority and I doubt I could get a majority consensus on anything streaming related. That's why I am highly skeptical at making categorical declarations in this new market. There are simply too many variables, too many different styles of streaming, to think that there is one all-consuming pattern in the majority.
I think shows will drive platforms, not libraries.
And, I might be wrong. That's OK. What's the worst that happens? CBS AA fails? The horror.
Good thing I don't work for CBS, I guess...ETA: To add a little bit of real world experience to this mix. I use to work in sporting goods retail management. Part of my job was managing and running the footwear department. One year, Under Armour decided to make shoes. Prior to that, Under Armour had pretty much had heat gear and cold gear, and small assortment of accessories.
Care to guess how many models of shoes Under Armour started off with? 3. 3 Men's Models. Then they branched and added two Women's models. That's a total of 5 shoes, vs. their competitors (Nike, Asics, New Balance) who easily had ten models in our store per gender.
Now go look at Under Amour's shoe line. It extends to multiple sports, hiking, tactical wear, kids, and cleats. It got a lot bigger.
It just didn't start big.
Last edited:
I disagree, but that's no surprise. I subscribed based upon single shows I want to watch. I don't need a full archive to access because I do not have time to watch it all. I don't care about Showtime or HBO because none of their content interests me.
No, I doubt I represent any majority and I doubt I could get a majority consensus on anything streaming related. That's why I am highly skeptical at making categorical declarations in this new market. There are simply too many variables, too many different styles of streaming, to think that there is one all-consuming pattern in the majority.
I think shows will drive platforms, not libraries.
And, I might be wrong. That's OK. What's the worst that happens? CBS AA fails? The horror.
I do not work for CBS either or anyone, I just want the most bang for my buck regarding my streaming choices, I would want to pay for fewer services, not more, which is why I think Star Trek hosted a more popular platform may be better in the long run, IMO.
Just because I do not work for CBS does not I can't like Star Trek and want this franchise to thrive (that is the point of this type of message board) and I rather not see it stifle because CBS was not willing to put its A-game into the streaming service hosting Star Trek. Just because I don't work for CBS means I want to see Star Trek fail because CBS could not adapt to the streaming wars and I think a lot of people rather Star Trek be on say Netflix over another streaming service. Eventually, these streaming services will be more expensive than cable, so lot of people have to choose which service they want to keep and ultimately the one with the most content will win, IMO.
Last edited:
I thought the point of this message board was to discuss Star Trek...? Its success or failure as such has no impact on my ability to discuss it.
I personally think this is taking the wrong approach. People are far more willing to be selective and choosy about content and do not possess the brand or network loyalty anymore. CBS is taking a more conservative approach and that may work. Or not. I don't know. We don't have all the information to make these decisions. And if Star Trek fails then so be it.
I was editing my post when you posted so I'll share some real world examples of why I think CBS will be OK:
To add a little bit of real world experience to this mix. I use to work in sporting goods retail management. Part of my job was managing and running the footwear department. One year, Under Armour decided to make shoes. Prior to that, Under Armour had pretty much had heat gear and cold gear, and small assortment of accessories.
Care to guess how many models of shoes Under Armour started off with? 3. 3 Men's Models. Then they branched and added two Women's models. That's a total of 5 shoes, vs. their competitors (Nike, Asics, New Balance) who easily had ten models in our store per gender.
Now go look at Under Amour's shoe line. It extends to multiple sports, hiking, tactical wear, kids, and cleats. It got a lot bigger.
It just didn't start big.
Similar threads
