Oversaturated streaming market set to push Star Trek fans to piracy

Hailing frequencies open… Forums Science Fiction Star Trek Oversaturated streaming market set to push Star Trek fans to piracy

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #27431
    ZLoth
    Moderator
    • Online

    From Neowin:

    Oversaturated streaming market set to push Star Trek fans to piracy

    An official Star Trek Twitter account has stated that season four of Star Trek: Discovery, which was due to arrive on Netflix on Friday for international audiences, has now been pushed back to early 2022 due to Netflix losing global rights to the show to Paramount. To be clear, those in the United States and Canada will be able to start watching the show on Thursday but international audiences will have to wait if they plan to watch the show legally.

    FULL ARTICLE HERE


    “All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can’t get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer.” —IBM Manual, 1925

    #27441
    ZLoth
    Moderator
    • Online

    From Ars Technica:

    Star Trek: Discovery is tearing the streaming world apart
    Season 4 boldly goes where no multibillion-dollar franchise has gone before, angers fans.

    Dan Leckie has been a Star Trek fan since he pressed play on a VHS tape of the original TV show during Christmas of 1991. Leckie, from Aberdeen, Scotland, was instantly hooked on the sci-fi series and its subsequent iterations and regularly attends conventions to meet up with fellow fans. But on November 16 he noticed something weird: Netflix had stopped promoting the first three seasons of Star Trek: Discovery—and previews of season four, due to launch on November 18, had also vanished.

    What Leckie had spotted would soon become a point of outrage for Star Trek fans the world over: Netflix had lost the rights to the fourth season of Discovery outside of the US, and the previous seasons, too. They would now appear on Paramount+, the streaming service formerly known as CBS All Access and owned by ViacomCBS—but not until 2022, and even then, not everywhere. (In the US, Star Trek: Discovery has always streamed exclusively on Paramount+/CBS All Access.) And Star Trek is just the beginning. What’s bad news for Discovery fans now is yet another glimpse of the increasingly muddled future of streaming.

    FULL ARTICLE HERE


    “All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can’t get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer.” —IBM Manual, 1925

    #27452
    Earl
    Keymaster
    • Offline

    Paramount has already shifted Discovery season 4 to Pluto TV in its overseas markets that don’t already have Paramount Plus…but other than that, the article does have a valid point. I’ll cut and paste something I wrote elsewhere about this:

    This is about dinosaurs from the broadcast age. Over-the-air signals and cable used to carry a show only so far, and definitely not across oceans. That enabled something like, for example, early Paramount TV shopping the original Star Trek around in the UK until the BBC bought it (and, in fact, started showing it two weeks after Patrick Troughton’s last Doctor Who episode in Who’s time slot). Now the BBC can say they’re the only place in the UK to watch Star Trek, a privilege for which they naturally had to pay Paramount’s syndication arm, which makes Paramount money. The internet makes that kind of regional thinking an absolute joke. The internet reaches everywhere. Hell, a lot of the rest of the world has faster internet speeds than the U.S., so it’s not like Paramount/Viacom has to pay to lay out more fiber lines for everyone. But you have executives up and down the food chain who were raised and weaned on that broadcast/syndication/licensing model, and so that’s what they keep doing because it’s what’s always made them money. Think of it as the entertainment industry equivalent of trying to keep everyone on fossil fuels.

    It’s now been over a quarter of a century (!!) since Paramount and Warner Bros., having watched their syndicated offerings be relegated to off-hours on the schedules of Fox stations, decided “hey, we can do what Fox did too! Let’s start networks!” But who remembers United Paramount Network and the WB network now? Aside from the DNA that each passed on to the CW, everything those “fifth networks” set out to achieve has ended up on the scrap heap of history with the Du Mont network. (Google it.) All they really accomplished was losing their parent companies close to half a billion dollars each, and they killed the North American market for original syndicated action/drama programming. And here we have everyone trying to silo their own content again, and it will end the same way. Not every streaming service will survive. There will be a shakeout, and it may have already begun – Disney stock price just took a hit because they had to tell their investors that Disney Plus had gotten eight million fewer subscribers than their third quarter prediction. And yet you would’ve thought that if anyone could instantly win the streaming game, it’d be Disney. So… there may be too many streaming services to keep track of now, but the window for that many competitors to thrive is a very narrow one, and may already be slamming shut. Will we wind up back in the days of everything being on a studio-agnostic service like Netflix circa five years ago? Dunno. But there will be fewer players on the board.

    Here’s a very calm, level headed analysis, if you’ve got the time to watch/listen for a few minutes:


    #27457
    ZLoth
    Moderator
    • Online

    When you have so many streaming services that you need a service such as ReelGood and JustWatch just to figure out which service has which series and movie, maybe that’s a problem.

    If I recall correctly, Fox Network started it’s primetime programming in April, 1987, but it was a NFL power play in late 1993, as documented in this article, that put Fox on the map. At a time of cost-cutting across the three networks, Rupert Murdoch was willing to pay more than $100 million more per year than CBS for the rights to broadcast NFC games which were in more valuable markets than the AFC games, including the Chicago Bears, Philadelphia Eagles, San Francisco 49ers, Dallas Cowboys, and the team now known as Washington Team Football. A good chunk of the CBS On-Air talent, including football legend John Madden, moved over to Fox as well. Was it a loss leader for Fox? Yes, but it was designed to promote the rest of Fox’s programming.

    Around the same time, we had both UPN and the WB starting up. UPN attempted the same thing as Fox by launching it’s programming around the key Star Trek franchise, and as everyone recalls, only Star Trek: Voyager was renewed beyond the premiere season. The WB had no such tentpole productions, although more of it’s lineup survived the premiere season.

    Flash forward to the present, and as they say, success breeds imitation. Netflix, which began as a DVD disc rental service, is very successful at not only streaming existing content, but also creating original content as well. This frightens the studios, so why should they share the revenue when they can utilize their existing properties and create their own content as well. But, I think there is one item that everyone is forgetting: The valuable aggregate demographic data provided from the viewers of the service. This includes know how long between new content is available and when you first watched it, how many times you watched the program, which portions of the program you watched, you replayed, and you skipped, how much of the first viewing did you watch, what days and time you watched, and so on. After multiple programs, do you like a particular actor, actress, director, genre, or age range. From your IP address, we can get a generalized area of where you are, and the demographics of that area. And, if it’s a subscription service, you are most likely utilizing a credit card which, in turn, provides a precise location and marketing data. This is data that Nelson would droll over. From one aspect, they may not care about one viewers data, but a few thousand is a good sample size. From another aspect, they can tailor the marketing material to you.

    Wouldn’t Nelson love to have and provide that level of granularity?


    “All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can’t get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer.” —IBM Manual, 1925

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.