Star Trek: Discovery (Paramount+)

[Covert Rain]

The problem with this is that it will signal a death knell to this current golden age of television. There won't nearly be as much money, so quality AND quantity will diminish.



Sounds like you don't really watch a lot of television, so you're plan doesn't sound so bad. But from the perspective of a network, it's a non-starter.

I watch plenty of TV. I have a hard time keeping up with my DVR. The problem is there are 200+ channels of mostly garbage on TV. Most people don't watch the majority of channels they currently get. It's the golden age but not because there is abundance of quality programming. It's a golden age for networks forcing huge bundles on providers who pass that on to the consumer. The real golden age for consumers is coming when we can actually pay for only what we watch and watch that content on any device we desire.

 

[Stout]

I watch plenty of TV. I have a hard time keeping up with my DVR. The problem is there are 200+ channels of mostly garbage on TV. Most people don't watch the majority of channels they currently get. It's the golden age but not because there is abundance of quality programming. It's a golden age for networks forcing huge bundles on providers who pass that on to the consumer. The real golden age for consumers is coming when we can actually pay for only what we watch and watch that content on any device we desire.

I have to completely disagree. There's more quality TV on right now, IMO, than at any other time in history. All running at the same time in history, that is.

As far as paying for only what we watch, it will never happen for the kind of prices you and I will want. We'll never, ever be able to just cherry pick our specific shows and, especially, sporting events, for a low, reasonable price, to watch as soon as they're available. Never. It would destroy the entire industry, that kind of pricing and selection, and so won't happen. Will it get more reasonably priced? Yes, as the industry morphs into the future and the platforms change, I think it will. Not to the extent we'd like it to, though.

 

[oaken1]

I have to completely disagree. There's more quality TV on right now, IMO, than at any other time in history. All running at the same time in history, that is.

As far as paying for only what we watch, it will never happen for the kind of prices you and I will want. We'll never, ever be able to just cherry pick our specific shows and, especially, sporting events, for a low, reasonable price, to watch as soon as they're available. Never. It would destroy the entire industry, that kind of pricing and selection, and so won't happen. Will it get more reasonably priced? Yes, as the industry morphs into the future and the platforms change, I think it will. Not to the extent we'd like it to, though.

so,...your saying I wont be able to click "watch Game of Thrones"...and be charged a quarter for that episode?

 

[Stout]

so,...your saying I wont be able to click "watch Game of Thrones"...and be charged a quarter for that episode?

Haha yeah, I don't think that'll come to pass

 

[puckhead]

so,...your saying I wont be able to click "watch Game of Thrones"...and be charged a quarter for that episode?

Have you seen how much comic books are lately? Two bits might buy you one page these days.

 

[Covert Rain]

I have to completely disagree. There's more quality TV on right now, IMO, than at any other time in history. All running at the same time in history, that is.

As far as paying for only what we watch, it will never happen for the kind of prices you and I will want. We'll never, ever be able to just cherry pick our specific shows and, especially, sporting events, for a low, reasonable price, to watch as soon as they're available. Never. It would destroy the entire industry, that kind of pricing and selection, and so won't happen. Will it get more reasonably priced? Yes, as the industry morphs into the future and the platforms change, I think it will. Not to the extent we'd like it to, though.

That is not what I mean. What I am saying is that if you look at ALL the channels out there 200+ stations...most of it is crap. Sure there are a bunch of quality shows on television but the % of good shows to bad is not even close when you take into consideration all the stations out there right now and every program each of those stations has on.

People are sick of packages of stations they don't watch and shouldn't have to pay for channels they don't care about. SlingTV has it's issues but to me that is more reasonable "packaging" for only $20 bucks. I wish all the networks would jump on board with that model. I think the reason some networks are jumping on SlingTV is because they don't want a la carte and this is a compromise in some ways verse going truly a la carte.

If cord cutters keep growing in numbers the industry is going to change. It has no choice. What model we end up with....that will be interesting. Personally if they gave me no more than say a handful of "packaged" channels and I could pick and chose the rest, I would be happy with that.

 

[puckhead]

That is not what I mean. What I am saying is that if you look at ALL the channels out there 200+ stations...most of it is crap. Sure there are a bunch of quality shows on television but the % of good shows to bad is not even close when you take into consideration all the stations out there right now and every program each of those stations has on.

People are sick of packages of stations they don't watch and shouldn't have to pay for channels they don't care about. SlingTV has it's issues but to me that is more reasonable "packaging" for only $20 bucks. I wish all the networks would jump on board with that model. I think the reason some networks are jumping on SlingTV is because they don't want a la carte and this is a compromise in some ways verse going truly a la carte.

If chord cutters keep growing in numbers the industry is going to change. It has no choice. What model we end up with....that will be interesting. Personally if they gave me no more than say a handful of "packaged" channels and I could pick and chose the rest, I would be happy with that.

:BIM:

A cord is (1) a string or rope, (2) an electrical cable, (3) a measure of wood equal to 128 cubic feet, (4) a ribbed fabric (short for corduroy) or pants made from the fabric, and (5) one of several types of cords found within the bodies of animals (e.g., the spinal cord and the umbilical cord). Chord is usually a musical term (though it is sometimes used metaphorically) denoting any combination of three or more pitches played at the same time, and it also has a few rare uses in geometry and science.

http://grammarist.com/spelling/cord-chord/

 

[Covert Rain]

:BIM:

A cord is (1) a string or rope, (2) an electrical cable, (3) a measure of wood equal to 128 cubic feet, (4) a ribbed fabric (short for corduroy) or pants made from the fabric, and (5) one of several types of cords found within the bodies of animals (e.g., the spinal cord and the umbilical cord). Chord is usually a musical term (though it is sometimes used metaphorically) denoting any combination of three or more pitches played at the same time, and it also has a few rare uses in geometry and science.

http://grammarist.com/spelling/cord-chord/

LOL. Thank you grammar police and damn auto correct (that's my story and I sticking to it). Fixed it.

 

[puckhead]

LOL. Thank you grammar police and damn auto correct. Fixed it.

Now who do you want to punch in the face?

 

[Covert Rain]

Now who do you want to punch in the face?

Sorry, you are so 5th tier and not on the same level as The Donald or Ted Cruz.

 

[puckhead]

Those guys are legit in that department.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[oaken1]

looks like the marketing plan may have shifted...it appears as if it will start out on cbs then follow on the streaming site.

 

[AzStevenCal]

looks like the marketing plan may have shifted...it appears as if it will start out on cbs then follow on the streaming site.

I think that was the model they originally announced for U.S. viewing.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

I think that was the model they originally announced for U.S. viewing.

 

[Stout]

They originally announced the pilot would air on CBS, but that the rest of the show would be exclusive to their streaming service. The above comments have confused the issue. Has this changed?

 

[Covert Rain]

They originally announced the pilot would air on CBS, but that the rest of the show would be exclusive to their streaming service. The above comments have confused the issue. Has this changed?

I don't think anything has changed. The above still says "premiering" on CBS. If you want to continue watching the show...subscribe.

 

[Stout]

I don't think anything has changed. The above still says "premiering" on CBS. If you want to continue watching the show...subscribe.

I saw that later in an article, yeah. Welp, that'll be a pass for me, then.

 

[Covert Rain]

I saw that later in an article, yeah. Welp, that'll be a pass for me, then.

What is hilarious is they would have to completely hit it out of the park for this marketing ploy to be effective. I mean the "free" debut would have to be so good that people flock to the subscriptions.

I hope it doesn't happen. It will set a very very bad precedent. Basically, networks will jump on this bandwagon and force you to subscribe for "premiere" programming. Before you know it, all that will be available for free is reruns of cops, news and infomercials.

 

[Stout]

What is hilarious is they would have to completely hit it out of the park for this marketing ploy to be effective. I mean the "free" debut would have to be so good that people flock to the subscriptions.

I hope it doesn't happen. It will set a very very bad precedent. Basically, networks will jump on this bandwagon and force you to subscribe fore "premiere" programming. Before you know it, all that will be available for free is reruns of cops, news and infomercials.

+1

 

[AzStevenCal]

The Star Trek fans I know won't hesitate to sign up for CBS All Access to get their Trek fix. I'm not sure there's a more committed fanbase than that of the diehard Trekkies. The show won't have to be perfect to keep them hooked either although it has to respect the Star Trek mythology or that will drive them away even if the show is decent. I'm not saying this approach will work, just that it will bring in most of the long-time Star Trek fans.

Does anyone know, do they have commercials on CBS All Access too? I know I'm growing tired of having to pay for TV streaming services only to be inundated by commercials there too. Amazon Prime adopted this approach recently too and it has me thinking about dumping them in the near future. I'd already abandoned Hulu Plus for the same reason. Seriously, how many times can they expect us to watch the same exact commercial over and over throughout a binge watch?

 

[Covert Rain]

The Star Trek fans I know won't hesitate to sign up for CBS All Access to get their Trek fix. I'm not sure there's a more committed fanbase than that of the diehard Trekkies. The show won't have to be perfect to keep them hooked either although it has to respect the Star Trek mythology or that will drive them away even if the show is decent. I'm not saying this approach will work, just that it will bring in most of the long-time Star Trek fans.

They were going to need to bring in more than just longtime Trek fans if the show was going to stay on regular network TV. I bet because it's on CBS access there will be much less pressure ratings wise. Long time Trek fans alone can't sustain the franchise any longer which is the reason for the rebooted movies. Since this is a streaming show though, I would imagine classic fans and even a fraction of some of the next generation fans that liked the new movies might just be enough. Like you said it probably needs to be good. It will be an interesting experiment but I don't know a bunch of people running to get access just for this show. I have thought about it but I have a hard time adding on to my bill just for one show.

 

[AzStevenCal]

They were going to need to bring in more than just longtime Trek fans if the show was going to stay on regular network TV. I bet because it's on CBS access there will be much less pressure ratings wise. Long time Trek fans alone can't sustain the franchise any longer which is the reason for the rebooted movies. Since this is a streaming show though, I would imagine classic fans and even a fraction of some of the next generation fans that liked the new movies might just be enough. Like you said it probably needs to be good. It will be an interesting experiment but I don't know a bunch of people running to get access just for this show. I have thought about it but I have a hard time adding on to my bill just for one show.

I agree which is why I said it will draw the Trek fans but the approach might still fail. I'll watch the pilot and if I think I'll like the series, I'll probably sign up for all access. Truth is, I like almost nothing on TV these days so I'm a little desperate. I know for most posters here, there are a lot of great programs running now but none of them really work for us and they haven't for a few years now. We're so desperate for our kind of viewing that we've been watching classic 50's to 70's shows (mostly game and variety types) on YouTube most nights.

 

[Stout]

I agree which is why I said it will draw the Trek fans but the approach might still fail. I'll watch the pilot and if I think I'll like the series, I'll probably sign up for all access. Truth is, I like almost nothing on TV these days so I'm a little desperate. I know for most posters here, there are a lot of great programs running now but none of them really work for us and they haven't for a few years now. We're so desperate for our kind of viewing that we've been watching classic 50's to 70's shows (mostly game and variety types) on YouTube most nights.

I think I'm the opposite of you and yours. I mean, I liked the older shows, but I was craving something different. I didn't even realize what it was until we started getting an influx of hour-long shows of all varieties with overarching plot lines. And you're right--nowadays, there's a ton of this more modern stuff on. Yeah, I can understand why TV isn't working for you and yours. As much as I enjoy it, I wish there was still the content you liked out there too.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I think I'm the opposite of you and yours. I mean, I liked the older shows, but I was craving something different. I didn't even realize what it was until we started getting an influx of hour-long shows of all varieties with overarching plot lines. And you're right--nowadays, there's a ton of this more modern stuff on. Yeah, I can understand why TV isn't working for you and yours. As much as I enjoy it, I wish there was still the content you liked out there too.

Actually, I love the overarching plot lines. But I do prefer white hats and black hats, happy endings with nothing but clear skies on the horizon. And I'm tired of heroes that have few redeeming qualities. And I'm really tired of "hero" shows where they end up the target all the time. I want to watch them save the day for other people, not have to save themselves over and again.

I enjoy the occasional Dexter or Breaking Bad but when the lineup seems to be all or mostly all along the lines of Mr Robot, Game of Thrones, Walking Dead variety, it's just too much for me. And the few shows that aren't dark or depressing are aimed at a teen girl audience. It seems gone forever are the days of the Mentalist, Psyche, Gilmore Girls, Buffy TVS, Firefly, Human Target, (early) Grey's Anatomy, Boston Legal, Stargate SG-1, Veronica Mars, Lie to Me, Closer, Space: Above and Beyond, Jericho, Roswell, Angel, Wiseguy and so on. Oh well, maybe I've just given in to getting old.