Would it really matter if the next Trek series were on linear TV?

[Admiral Buzzkill]

what studios want in SF - product placement, viciousness, expansive plastic surgery. I'd pay to see Stephen Fry as a Klingon - they want me to pay to see Will Ferrell as Jim-Luke Packard. It ain't happening

Uh - wha? That's got nothing to do with the entertainment industry on this planet.

Quite true. Which is why the US film industry is an expensive irrelevancy - it can't tell stories & can't make profits

And you misread.

Everybody's out of step but Johnny.

 

[Kelso]

I'd find a way to watch it for free.

This.

 

[robtclements]

Everybody's out of step but Johnny.

Not really. I'm just part of the large block of one-time filmgoer that has been alienated by screen-stealing garbage like Saw VII 3D. Traditional story-telling with real acting is what i pay to see in the cinema; & i'm no longer getting that from US films (unless they're made by indies or corporate mavericks like Mark Cuban)

The collapse of Trek was reflective of Hollywood's retreat from the broader audience. Instead of being good counter-programming (always the franchise's strength), it tried to make itself as vapid as the programmes it was thought it was competing with; & lost the fan while not attracting the non-fan over to the cause. Yet the continuing - annoying, to the non-fan - circulation of the five shows & ten core pictures (i'm not counting the reboot) makes it clear that there's still an audience for tradition Trek scifi, if the studios could just get their heads out of the Rotten Tomatoes self-fulfilling prophecy

I can - & often will - send myself up; but i won't waste my money & time on third-rate entertainment

 

[Kelthaz]

Well if they did that than uTorrent would be getting some use.

Star Trek is a business, not a charity. I won't be donating my money to it in order for it to survive in the real world. If it isn't strong enough to stand on its on two feet as a TV show than it doesn't deserve to be a TV show.

 

[AviTrek]

Well if they did that than uTorrent would be getting some use.

Star Trek is a business, not a charity. I won't be donating my money to it in order for it to survive in the real world. If it isn't strong enough to stand on its on two feet as a TV show than it doesn't deserve to be a TV show.

No one said Star Trek is a charity. You effectively just said you would rather steal Star Trek and let it die than pay the business for the time/money it put into creating entertainment for you.

 

[Kelthaz]

No, I said I would be willing to pay what I already pay to watch other TV shows (cable). I won't pay extra for Star Trek.

 

[AviTrek]

If you don't want to pay for a pay-per-view show, then don't watch. Just because you pay for cable doesn't give you the right to steal shows not on cable.

Do you also download HBO shows(assuming you don't subscribe to HBO)? Or if you subscribe to HBO insert Showtime/Starz/another premium you don't pay for.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

I'd find a way to watch it for free.

Dennis please keep your piracy ideas to yourself.
It also violates TrekBBS Illegal Content rules.

This thread discusses if Trek were not on a linear TV channel how CBS Television would distribute and if you were willing to pay for Trek via download/streaming options. CBS Television would get a fee from you.

 

[BillJ]

I'd find a way to watch it for free.

Dennis please keep your piracy ideas to yourself.
It also violates TrekBBS Illegal Content rules.

This thread discusses if Trek were not on a linear TV channel how CBS Television would distribute and if you were willing to pay for Trek via download/streaming options. CBS Television would get a fee from you.

I'd steal it, I make no apologies.

Currently I have about twenty-five hundred dollars worth of Star Trek in Blu-Ray/DVD and pay one-hundred and sixty dollars a month for cable programming. 'Pay-per-View' Star Trek would be the last straw for me, Paramount has already wrung every last penny possible from the fan-base. Charging twice as much for DVD releases as other studio's for comparable material.

Enough is enough.

A micro-transaction strategy by Paramount in regards to Star Trek would guarantee it being shunted to obscurity.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

from a blog post last week:

In what I think will become the dominant trend, Mattel are creating their own programming and going public with it via Hulu.

Hudsun Media’s CEO Michael Rourke.

“What we are doing with Mattel and Genuine Ken is a complete game changer, ” said Rourke. We have created a wildly compelling, network-quality reality show that, for the first time, can be distributed directly to the viewer in a non-traditional but very effective way.”

8-episode online reality show, Genuine Ken: The Search for the Great American Boyfriend. The kicker, each episode is a full 22-minutes—the same length as a half-hour TV show

To be sure, a competition reality show with 20-something bachelors isn’t exactly kids fare. So just who is this series aimed at? “The series is targeted to grown-up girls and boys,” Mattel’s Michelle Chidoni informs us.

To host the show, the producers tapped rising fashion icon, and reality star, Whitney Port

Who Needs TV Networks?
November 4th, 2010
http://news.tubefilter.tv/2010/10/2...el-grabs-whitney-port-and-goes-right-to-hulu/
via

This is the kind of direct-to-Hulu (or Direct-to-Netflix or Direct-to-youtube) i'm talking about where a network may not be involved for broadcasting the show. Would the budget be there for Star Trek?

I have about twenty-five hundred dollars worth of <i>Star Trek</i> in Blu-Ray/DVD and pay one-hundred and sixty dollars a month for cable programming.

wow BillJ that is some Trek library. I assume you are talking <u>original</u> suggested retail price.<br />
<br />
$160./month for cable television is really a lot (if that does not include a monthly internet access fee).<br />
<br />
You may want to consider trying a month with Hulu (free), and a Netflix account if you are <u>not</u> a major sports fan. I'm only suggesting it. No need to flame me.<br />
also BillJ <see this thread:<br />
<b><a href="http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=47612" target="_blank">Is Netflix a Rip-off?</a></b><br />
<br />
Obviously live programs such as sports and news are not conducive to the Netflix, Hulu, iTunes Store options.

 

[BillJ]

Actually my cable bill is $240/month after you add in phone/internet. My $2500 spent on Star Trek is what I paid for them.

A lot of it is my own fault for liking Star Trek and supporting the property over the years. Like alot of other fans I'm to the point of not enjoying getting soaked.

Enjoy your Hulu right now... as soon as it begins to cut into network/cable viewership, you'll see caps on how much streaming you can do in a given month.

I actually already have Netflix and its' subpar collection of streaming material.

 

[BillJ]

This is the kind of direct-to-Hulu (or Direct-to-Netflix or Direct-to-youtube) i'm talking about where a network may not be involved for broadcasting the show. Would the budget be there for Star Trek?

I absolutely guarantee that the budget for this show is well below what a network spends on any reality show. So I doubt the budget would be there for any non-reality show (action, comedy or drama).

 

[AviTrek]

Actually my cable bill is $240/month after you add in phone/internet. My $2500 spent on Star Trek is what I paid for them.

A lot of it is my own fault for liking Star Trek and supporting the property over the years. Like alot of other fans I'm to the point of not enjoying getting soaked.

Enjoy your Hulu right now... as soon as it begins to cut into network/cable viewership, you'll see caps on how much streaming you can do in a given month.

I actually already have Netflix and its' subpar collection of streaming material.

Wow, where you getting Cable from that it's $160 for cable alone, and $240 in total? Most companies are offering triple plays for ~100. Throw in a DVR and some premium channels and I can see getting to $160 for all three. Where is your extra $80 going? Maybe it's time to investigate other cable alternatives instead of bashing CBS/Paramount for wanting to make money.

 

[BillJ]

Maybe it's time to investigate other cable alternatives instead of bashing CBS/Paramount for wanting to make money.

No one is bashing CBS/Paramount for wanting to make money, CBS/Paramount gets bashed for charging $130 for Star Trek season DVD box sets, when other companies are charging a third to one-half for comparable sets (with better feature sets).

No one likes to be gouged.

As for the cable... hey it's really the only game in town besides getting a dish and I have been very underwhelmed by their performance.

 

[AviTrek]

http://www.timewarnercable.com/cincinnati/

$94.85/month for triple play in Cincinnati Ohio.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

As for the cable... hey it's really the only game in town besides getting a dish

$94.85/month for triple play in Cincinnati Ohio.

that should be helpful to BillJ but he hasn't said how many premium channels and premium sports packages he had.
I would gather more than 1 at $160/month (cable TV only).

 

[BillJ]

http://www.timewarnercable.com/cincinnati/

$94.85/month for triple play in Cincinnati Ohio.

As for the cable... hey it's really the only game in town besides getting a dish

$94.85/month for triple play in Cincinnati Ohio.

that should be helpful to BillJ but he hasn't said how many premium channels and premium sports packages he had.
I would gather more than 1 at $160/month (cable TV only).

I feel honored that everyone is actually worried about what I pay...

I actually live in Northern Kentucky... which is about three minutes away from Cincinnati. And those deals you talk about AviTrek are for new subscribers (we see the same thing with our current provider Insight Communications, which we've had for nearly a decade).

And yes I do have more than just a basic cable package. When you have a family with six people with six diverse interests... you have to. Doesn't change the fact that cable goes up at an astronomical rate every year... just got an $18/month ding, without a change in my services. Thank god for deregulation.

 

[timelord1010]

I'd find a way to watch it for free.

I'd be willing to pay if I were allowed to download the episode.

$1 per episode isn't bad. I don't think I would go higher than $3 per episode.

At any rate, I'd like to see Trek back on a mainstream network before hoping for any schemes like these.

After thinking about it Paramount / CBS is charging roughly
$3.00 per episode for the DVD sets. I would not pay to just stream a show, I would pay maybe $1 to $3 for a download that I could save on my computer or a disc. What I would really like is direct to DVD at a price that is in the same range as other hour long TV shows.

 

[BillJ]

I'd find a way to watch it for free.

I'd be willing to pay if I were allowed to download the episode.

$1 per episode isn't bad. I don't think I would go higher than $3 per episode.

At any rate, I'd like to see Trek back on a mainstream network before hoping for any schemes like these.

After thinking about it Paramount / CBS is charging roughly
$3.00 per episode for the DVD sets. I would not pay to just stream a show, I would pay maybe $1 to $3 for a download that I could save on my computer or a disc. What I would really like is direct to DVD at a price that is in the same range as other hour long TV shows.

The problem there is that you're missing out on a massive amount of revenue by not doing a first run network/cable run. Revenue that would be needed to make the series financially viable.

 

[AviTrek]

I'd find a way to watch it for free.

I'd be willing to pay if I were allowed to download the episode.

$1 per episode isn't bad. I don't think I would go higher than $3 per episode.

At any rate, I'd like to see Trek back on a mainstream network before hoping for any schemes like these.

After thinking about it Paramount / CBS is charging roughly
$3.00 per episode for the DVD sets. I would not pay to just stream a show, I would pay maybe $1 to $3 for a download that I could save on my computer or a disc. What I would really like is direct to DVD at a price that is in the same range as other hour long TV shows.

WB sells its DTV animated movies for $20-$30 depending on the edition. Thats for a 70 minute animated movie.

MGM sold the SG1s DTVs for $15/$40 DVD/BD. That was 98 minutes of live action.

If Star Trek were to go DTV(which it won't), you need to expect it to be in a similar price range. That's the only way to even begin to justify the costs of producing it.