What do Trekkies want for Christmas? Well, a great sequel to this year’s Star Trek movie would be a good start. The follow up is 2 1/2 years away, but work on the script is likely start in earnest in January. Over the last few months TrekMovie has conducted a number of polls regarding the sequel, with some interesting results. See below to find out what the people are saying.
Polling Trekkies?
Star Trek fans are notoriously a finicky bunch, known to nitpick and debate over just about everything. So it is no surprise that there are few things where there is consensus, however our polling often has a majority or clear plurality for each question. That is not to say that the film makers should develop the sequel based on polling, as that way lies madness. However, it can at least be educational and perhaps informative as to what is working for the fanbase. Although the new Star Trek movie (and sequel) must work for a general audience, the core fanbase is still a big part of the Paramount bottom line. Polling on this site shows that most fans saw the film multiple times, with many brining friends, and a majority purchased (or plan to purchase) the DVD or Blu-ray.
NOTE: TrekMovie is the #1 Trek news site so visitors should be considered a representative cross-section of the core fanbase, however web polling is not scientific.
WHAT DO THE TREKKIES WANT IN THE SEQUEL
We have conducted many polls over the last few months dealing with the sequel. Below the findings from the various polls are broken down into various categories. The actual polling data is also available below the summaries.
The Basics: Star Trek Something Something in 2012 directed by Abrams
Although fans aren’t happy about it, they are accepting of the three year wait for the next Trek, but more than that and fans will get anxious, with only 31% saying ‘take as long as it needs’. As for the title, a clear majority (66%) seems to like Abrams suggestion of returning to the Title + subtitle (aka Star Trek: Something Something) like was done for the TNG era films. Only 19% of those polled liked my personal preference of having a Trek sounding name, but no actual ‘Star Trek’ in the title (like the Batman Begins sequel The Dark Knight). And even though he hasn’t decided yet, over three out of four fans want JJ Abrams back in the directors chair for the sequel.
Fans want JJ back for "Star Trek: Something Something"
The Cast & Characters: More McCoy, don’t need Shatner or Nimoy
When they sit down to write the script a big question Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman will have to wrestle with is which characters to include in the film and how much time to devote to each. When it comes to deciding who should have more screen time than they did in the first film, a majority of fans (56%) want to see more of Karl Urban’s irascible Dr. McCoy. The only other character worth noting for more time would be Scotty, who got 14% of the votes in our ‘more screen time’ poll.
In addition to the returning main crew, there will likely be some additional original series characters. In the past the writers noted that other TOS characters were in early drafts for the first film, who could also work their way into the sequel. Given a number of choices for possible original series female characters, fans were most interested in seeing Nurse Christine Chapel, originally played by Majel Barrett. She picked up the majority of votes, with Janice Rand a distant second at 16% and Barrett’s other character ‘Number One’ (seen only in "The Cage" and "The Menagerie") getting 11%. The rest of the choices of female TOS characters only grabbed single digits. As for an additional male character from the original series, the biggest vote getter was Gary Mitchell (Kirk’s best friend from "Where No Man Has Gone Before") who nabbed a third of the votes, but the second highest vote getter was ‘none’. So perhaps there is a bit of a feeling that there are enough familiar male faces in the crew already.
Of course one of the most talked about subjects with regards to the first Star Trek was the inclusion of Leonard Nimoy and the exclusion of William Shatner. Director JJ Abrams has said he is open to anything for the sequel. As for the actors, Nimoy has said he would read a script if he was asked, but he doesn’t expect to be involved. However, Shatner seems to again be lobbying for a ticket to the final frontier. But when fans were asked what guest star from previous Treks should be involved, the biggest vote getter was ‘none’ at 41%. Shatner came in second at 24% and TNG’s Patrick Stewart was the only other in double digits with 12%. Nimoy garnered just 8%. Reading between the lines and from comments, it may be said that fans would like some kind of guest star link to the past, but it really isn’t necessary in the sequel.
Trekkies want more Urban, not sure on Shatner
The plot: More Character, continuity and Klingons
The most basic question for the plot of the next film is the time setting. Only 11% of fans feel the sequel should take place immediately after the first film (like they did with Star Trek III and Star Trek IV). There isn’t a majority vote for how long of a gap, but 40% think within one year and 36% feel one to two years so basically fans want to see the movie kick off somewhere into the mission with the crew having a bit of experience under their belts. There has also been some talk about the next two sequels being closely linked together. This notion is popular, as Star Trek fans like continuity, but a majority (52%) feel that the link should be subtle, with a bit over a third feeling the next two films should be linked like a ‘two-parter’.
Another popular idea that has been discussed by the film makers is the notion of making the sequel a modern day allegory, which was often done in the original series in the 60s. But again, most fans also want some subtlety. While over three out of four fans like the idea of an allegory, 41% feel it should not be heavy handed. So no ‘message movie’. When looking at the mix of action, humor, sex appeal, sci-fi and character, fans want to see more character moments in the sequel. 41% would like to see a bump up in building the arcs for the heroes, with the second most popular answer being 29% saying the sequel should have the same mix as the first.
Another big debate for the Star Trek sequel is the matter of the villain. Although much of the talk has been about bringing back Khan, when asked specifically about the return of the genetically superior megalomaniac, 69% feel that Trek has been there and done that. In fact only 5% want to see Khan again as we know him with the rest feeling that if he is brought back it should be a different spin. However, if the film does end up with Khan, most agree that No Country For Old Men’s Javier Bardem would be an ideal or acceptable choice for the role.
So who should the villains in the sequel be? One word: Klingons. Given a broad choice of classic Star Trek villains (including Khan) half of the fans picked the Klingons. They are the big bad guys from the original series and Kirk’s greatest enemy in the show and the six TOS movies, so it makes sense. Coming in a very distant second would be to have a new race of villains, which garnered 10% and all others (Borg, Romulans, Cardassians, etc) could only muster single digits. As for the look of the Klingons three out of four were happy with the designs seen in the deleted scenes although a plurality (40%) would like to some little updates.
Who needs Khan when you can have Klingons for "Star Trek: Something Something"
Bottom Line
Even though Trek fans are a diverse group, there are some areas of consensus for the next Star Trek. Polls show that the first movie worked well with the vast majority of the installed base and they are ready for more (of course it still has its detractors). Fans are hoping that the Abrams team go deeper into the characters we love and bring in some more familiar faces. But in the end, fans want the team to stretch their legs and not just make this film series into a greatest hits album (hence the resistance to going back to Khan). It is going to be an interesting couple of years as we go through the whole process all over again with rumors, real news, ups, downs and all the stuff that makes Star Trek fun.
The fans are looking forward to getting to know the crew all over again
POLL DATA
(from https://trekmovie.com/about/index/pollsarchive/)
Top answer for each poll is bolded
Basics
Feel about Star Trek sequel in 2012?
* No! Cant wait! (30%)
* 2012 is OK, but no longer (39%)
* Take as long as needs (31%)
Star Trek sequel title?
* Star Trek + subtitle (like ‘Star Trek: First Contact’) (66%)
* Star Trek + verb (like ‘Batman Begins’) (14%)
* No ‘Star Trek’ in title (like ‘The Dark Knight’) (19%)
Preference for director of Star Trek sequel
* JJ Abrams (77%)
* Other director (23%)
Who should get more screen time in Star Trek sequel
* Kirk (7%)
* Spock (3%)
* McCoy (56%)
* Uhura (3%)
* Scotty (14%)
* Sulu (2%)
* Chekov (2%)
* Same mix as first (14%)
Guest Star in next STAR TREK movie?
* William Shatner (24%)
* Leonard Nimoy (8%)
* Other TOS actor (1%)
* Patrick Stewart (12%)
* Brent Spiner (5%)
* Other TNG actor (1%)
* A VOY/DS9/ENT actor (9%)
* No Star Trek guest stars (41%)
TOS era crew-woman to add for Star Trek sequel?
* Christine Chapel (52%)
* J.M. Colt (1%)
* Elizabeth Dehner (1%)
* M’Ress (4%)
* Marlena Moreau (1%)
* Number One (11%)
* Janice Rand (22%)
* Other (2%)
* none, enough crewmembers already (7%)
TOS era crewman to add for Star Trek sequel?
* Arex (9%)
* Ben Finney (2%)
* DeSalle (3%)
* Lee Kelso (0%)
* Kyle (10%)
* Gary Mitchell (32%)
* Dr. M’Benga (5%)
* Kevin Riley (10%)
* Other (7%)
* none, enough crewmembers already (21%)
Plot & Villain
How long after STAR TREK should the sequel be set?
* Immediately/shortly after final scene (11%)
* Within 1 year (40%)
* 1-2 years (36%)
* 3-5 years (10%)
* more than 5 years (2%)
Star Trek sequel as modern-day allegory?
* Great idea, worked for TOS (33%)
* OK, but not heavy handed (41%)
* No need, just a good story (26%)
Star Trek sequel should have
* More action/fights/space battles (13%)
* More character moments (41%)
* More sci-fi concepts/technology (14%)
* More humor (1%)
* More sexy scenes (2%)
* Keep same mix as first film (29%)
Should next two Star Trek films be linked?
* Yes – integrated like two parts (37%)
* Little bit – only subtle links (52%)
* No – totally stand alone (11%)
Khan in Star Trek sequel?
* Yes, he is the superior villain (6%)
* Maybe, but with a different spin (25%)
* No, been there, done that (twice) (69%)
(Javier Bardem as new Khan? (If Khan in sequel)
* Perfect (46%)
* He’ll do (33%)
* Prefer other actor (21%)
Villains for Star Trek sequel
* Klingons (49%)
* Romulans (3%)
* Khan & Genetic Augments (5%)
* Other TOS era villain (10%)
* Borg (6%)
* Cardassians (1%)
* Other TNG era villain (0%)
* Internal Federation villain (8%)
* New race villain (10%)
* Force of nature villain (9%)
Should deleted scene Klingon design be used for sequel?
* Love them, use design for next movie (32%)
* OK, but make some changes (40%)
* No, start over with new design (28%)
More McCoy, don’t need Shatner
merry xmas all
gotta have Khan in the sequel (imo) – right at the end Joker style with the botany bay – all set up for Trek 3
main villains – Klingons (star treks ‘joker’…i guess thatd make Khan Treks ‘Riddler’)
Hahaha #2.. Yeah maybe Khan should ally with some Klingon’s and the Borg decide to send Locutus back in time to join them all in hopes of assimilating Kirk… Then Q can show up and screw the whole thing over. Happy April Fools! Wait, forget all that. Wrong holiday…
Star Trek sequel as modern-day allegory?
* Great idea, worked for TOS (33%)
* OK, but not heavy handed (41%)
* No need, just a good story (26%)
I’m one of the 33%. I would like to point out that three-quarters of fans want an allegory, unlike the 2009 film. And that the ones that want it to be a I powerful allegory is more than the percentage that don’t want one at all. I hope the sequel is thought-provoking. I want to be entertained to be sure, but if I only wanted entertainment I don’t need Star Trek. If I want entertaining yet thought provoking cinema, I want my Star Trek.
Hmmm. Hope Bob Orci’s reading!
dont forget we need some big shot Starfleet Admiral dishing out orders to Kirk at some point just like in TOS –
Harrison Ford right?
Star Trek: Avatar
Whatever you do, bring back Kirk Prime aka Bill Shatner and I’ll be a happy camper.
#7 – nah Star Trek: Aliens would be more fun (for a Dark Horse style graphic novel anyway)
Star Trek fans don’t know what they want.
Before this last movie was finished there were people saying they’d rather see the efforts put into a directors cut of Star Trek: Nemesis or a direct to DVD film starring Captain Riker. :)
No more Willy Wanka engineering please. I know they wanted all the free beer they could get from Budweiser to make the engine room but Bridge trusses and sewer pipes dont make a star ship morons. They must of had plenty to drink when they thought R2D2 would fit into this movie
#7 (again) – actually ST Avatar has sorta been done has it not?
Oppresive human force tries to relocate alien natives for a natural resource to benefit mankind. Main character insurrects, falls in love and joins the natives to fend off the greedy humans.
Although I guess we can unite on the whole brewery thing.
It does look horribly out of place as “engineering” huh? I want my Star Trek engineering back, the one with the big warp core tube thing. That one. Please.
That’s about the right mix of “ingredients”(the boldface suggestions).
I do hope JJ & Co. will give Mr. Greenwood quite a bit of screen time, as admiral Pike, in the sequel.
Hopefully, this sequel (ST12?) will build up tension with the Klingon Empire, so that the next sequel (ST13 or ST14?) will have more action/fights/space battles in it. Pursue the obvious scenario (Federation runs a UN-style intervention to save a “Pandora”-like planet from Klingon exploitation & conquest, turning into a hot & violent war); just do it very well, and it will succeed.
I don’t care about any plot points but this….
Please use the Shatner/Kirk scene written for for first movie. Perfect pacing and tone. It would make a nice way to end the second movie, which should be about the team coalescing as a crew and finding their place in Star Fleet.
Kirk and Spock cement their friendship, after some hard times and second thoughts.
For the crew of the Enterprise, “The journey is home”.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Trek2012 should be an adventure in which the Romulans attack the Federation in the belief that the Federation has been critically injured with the loss of Vulcan. Pike figures centrally in my script, in which he “goes rogue” with a Starfleet splinter group in order to defend the Federation despite the lassitude of the Federation Council. (Pike has already mentioned that Starfleet has gone soft.) Pike leads the Excelsior, an advanced battlecruiser, and a fleet of fourteen other starships outfitted with the latest in Federation weaponry. His mission goes awry as double-crosses abound. Pike’s mission gains adherents, however, and the Federation assumes a war footing. Against the events of the Prime timeline, the Organians appear to warn against Pike’s incursion, but Pike disregards them. The Enterprise under the command of James T. Kirk must save the Federation and, in the process, the captain who mentored him.
By the way, I’ve just seen Avatar. If there is one film that could best Trek2009 for Best Picture, it’s Avatar.
I’m glad that the majority of people agreed that we needed more McCoy. I think this latest movie had too much Uhura. I know they wanted to throw a woman into the mix, but I think they simply swapped her for McCoy. Problem is when youre doing a movie based on a 60’s franchise you get stuck with the inequalities of the time to a point. I was also honestly much more impressed with Urban’s performance, even more in a way than anybody else. Also glad that there’s a clear “No Khan” majority. I think that would be a huge blow to the movie and us Trekkies. The Klingon’s havent been a villain at all since Generations and the Romulans have had two movies in a row now, enough of them. So I say either Klingons or something new. The only thing I disagree with on the polls is having JJ direct. I think he’s a great producer and would do a good job directing again, but I think if another, equally talented director, and one that knew Star Trek better *coughFrakescough* came along they should consider them, especially since it would mean having the movie done a year sooner.
Khan is the only way, I understand that klingons are popular but look at what happened to TNG and DS9 when they used klingons to death, Talk about been there done that. Khan gets 1 tv episode and 1 movie and some here are saying khan’s been overplayed. and why gary mitchell? he was only cool because he got godlike powers and he didnt seem all that different towards kirk and spock even before he went bright eyed. Kevin riley may be a good pal for chekov. I don’t mean in a silly way.
more screen time? laughed when kirk got only 7 percent..Imagine how shatner would have felt back in the 60’s when reading such a pole..You know what he would do..it would stick in his craw, Are you ready for the vote?
Bendaras would be the absolute perfect khan. for those who doubt me, watch a copy of “desperado”
Shatner could appear as old Kirk. Who’s to say that the mission on board Enterprise B will end in this new Abramsverse the same as in the prime one. Shatner at his age now could play the alternate Kirk with whatever story they came up with. Don’t know if it’s a good idea but the fact that Kirk died in the prime reality means nothing in the new one. It may not happen.
It’s fascinating that I did not vote in those polls and yet I agree with everyone of the winning choices.
Yes, more McCoy!!!!
And I say NO KHAN and no need for guest actors from the old show (including no Shatner!)
Oh, and Bring-on the Kling-ons!
I’d like to see Bakula as an old Archer at a proper commissioning ceremony for Enterprise. Just a cameo though.
Since I saw Avatar 3D today, I think the next Star Trek movie should be filmed in 3D.
BTW Avatar 3D is so awesome!
I agree, at this point, that Khan should NOT return unless it’s a crazy good story.
As for Bill Shatner…. (By the way, I’ve recently made some very good deals naming my own price through Priceline — it really works!) I want him to remain associated with Trek in a major way. Perhaps as part of a TV special, animated or no.
22, I also saw it in 3D, and yes, the next Trek should be both IMAX- and 3D-capable! IMAX 3D-capable, as well!
I think I would be in seventh heaven (Trek reference! Commander Decker, Dr. Taylor (STIV)), so to speak, if that were so.
Regarding Avatar: I think that some say that its messages — against imperialism, against ecological destruction, and against an overeager “war against terror,” for example — are heavy-handed. To this I say: Fie! Whether you agree with those messages or not, there are millions of people — billions, perhaps — who relish in the idea that Hollywood stands for something again. And to this, further, I say: Bravo.
May Trek, which helped blaze the trail for “message movies” in the modern era (e.g., STIV), also uphold this banner for the sake of humanity, peace, and justice!
Oh yes I forgot to add my most recent comment – I wish you all Happy Holidays! :)
Ive seen Avatar at least twice before…the first time it was called Dances with Wolves and the second time it was called Last Samurai. The people singing its praises only prove what Ive said before: as long as it is pretty you dont care about substance or originality which is why the CGI mediocrity of Transformers 2 and the woefully lame Twilight: New Moon were also boxoffice gold. Standards, people…standards…..
There is more to a great movie than pure originality, 26.
Take Shakespeare, for example. Two of his best-known tragedies (Hamlet and Othello) involve mistakes committed by the hero.
The first time this was done, it was known as Oedipus Rex.
Of course, Oedipus only blinds himself.
On the other hand, did any of the previous movies feature a character who transferred his soul to another?
As the Bard himself said — and as, before him, the Bible said, there is truly nothing new under the Sun.
Q.E.D.
I say more science and refited Enterprise.
Also pull it more way from TOS and more into it’s own world (new uniforms, new worlds, new tech, kill off some of the main crew).
Just go wild like other star trek would not.
It is a alternate reality, right…. I want to see the alternate world become even more and more alternate from TOS. I think it is the one thing missing from ST09.
Please no great big villain. Can’t we have a Star Trek with a mystery, a force of nature, or a complex antagonist that is not an evil baddy?
29, the “baddie” in my script would be Pike — a good man trying to do the right thing, but for the wrong reasons.
His redemption — against his initial wishes — also saves the Federation.
(Yeah, so this sounds an awful lot like Anakin/Vader to Kirk’s Skywalker. And this is wrong exactly why?)
The Klingons have appeared far too often throughout all of the Trek series’ and movies. There is very little new to say about them and they don’t even seem so formidable any more.
Use a villian who has been underutilized in previous trek like the Kelvin Empire or those nasty centipede aliens who infested Starfleet Command in the first season episode of Next Gen.
I’m disappointed that people want to see MORE Klingons. Talk about “Been there, done that” (a hundred freaking times). Between the TOS Movies, about 90% of the TNG-era episodes (just about) and the other miscellaneous crap, Klingons have been DONE TO DEATH. I’d rather see a big-screen treatment of a classic TOS villain OTHER than Klingons. We’ve seen enough of those things.
Unless we’re talking about TOS-era Klingons (not the TNG-era Neanderthal Klingons)…now THAT is something that we hardly ever got to see. :)
But the powers that be (including fans, apparently) aren’t interested in originality, just the same-old same-old sh*t.
Scene One: Enterprise narrowly defeats a Klingon D-7, but not before the Klingons blow off both the Federation ships fugly nacelles.
Scene Two: While the E is getting more streamlined nacelles installed, Kirk hangs out at a space bar and meets evil Rand (not mirror, but different from the pineapple chick of TOS.)
Scene Three: The E and crew head off to check out some spacey weirdness… with conflict inevitable.
I’ll leave it at that for now. Something along those lines, and I’m a happy puppy.
Hmm. Last time we got STAR TREK without “STAR TREK” in the title, it was called ENTERPRISE.
Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh… no.
Klingons are to STAR TREK as Lex Luthor is to SUPERMAN.
ENOUGH ALREADY!!!
Have the bad guy as Kirk and have him redeem himself thus earning respect from the crew/starfleet/universe and the audience.
Serious continuing Gay Male character
Serious continuing Gay Male character
Serious continuing Gay Male character
One other thing I’d like to see, please:
Orci & Kurtzman sent back to screenwriting school.
Glad to see there needs to be more McCoy! He’s probably my favorite character(tiny bit ahead of Kirk) because of 09; I mean, seriously! I loved his scenes the most! And he played well off of everyone.
As for everything else said in the polls, I pretty much agree. I love Klingons… >:D
30, I like the idea to have Pike be the “bad guy”– of course, his intentions are good but he gets something wrong. If this were done, I hope it could be embedded in some kind of story that at least has elements of exploration.
37, I completely agree with you on that, but there’s an overabundance of male characters as it is. Definitely in a new Trek series though. In addition, depicting various characters as gay and having it be casual and natural would be great.
No Abrams, No Orci, No Kurtzman and completely redesign the Enterprise.
If they do use the Klingons…They have Kor as the main villian.
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Kor
^should have Kor
#37
If the story called for a gay male character, sure, but I wouldn’t want to see one just for the sake of having one.
To each their own, I would rather watch Kirk make love to a female or a man make love to a female. If done right, I suppose it could be a good allegory but I rather they explore other issues/space. It is not something, I would wake up and say gosh I want to watch that Star Trek with that gay character, but heck Broke Back Mountain was a success, so who knows. I know I am a hypocrite but 2 gay hot females would rock hehe :)
While I think this is definitely interesting data, which I agree with for the most part, I’d urge the writers not to bow to fan consensus. It’s good to look outside for ideas, but it becomes risky if the writers feel they have to follow the whims of the fans.
Many a good series has been ruined by trying to please too many people at once.
40, Pike + Exploration (Organians) + Mind-Blowing Space Battles — that would rock.
The “alternate” part of this Alternate Reality would see itself realized through the anti-canonical involvement of the Organians, who, in their wisdom, no longer think that human beings are worthy of whatever protection the Organians previously (in the Prime Timeline) thought advisable. In this reality, the Organians — the TOS version of the Q — believe that there is something amiss about the Federation and those who, like Pike, seem to fire first and ask questions later.
While the Organians fault the Romulans for attacking the Federation, they are privy to a secret that casts humanity in a much poorer light nonetheless.
Kirk must understand the strange secret the Organians conceal by seeking the truth in new civilizations — all while battling the Romulans and their allies, and saving Pike’s soul — as well as the soul of the Federation.
Star Trek: Redemption.
#37
Please not for the sake of it. And definitely not in a blockbuster MOVIE. We have to remember that Trek 11 lifted the franchise of its deathbed; the franchise, however, is still very vulnerable. If the next one flops, this crew might not get another chance. We might not get another chance! And we, ourselves, should remember not to be too preachy: people simply have different moral values, which we, whichever side we’re on in the debate, ought to respect. We should respect the fact that many people (not myself) simply have a different moral view to the one you’re expressing, without their preaching any violence or ugliness whatsoever. If Trekkies want the sequel to make a lot of money, as much as possible, we should, thus, want to be somewhat conservative. This is again why any allegory must be treated with a great deal of care and not downplay one side of the debate. To highlight this difficulty, consider this. Torture, any form or extent of torture, is wrong, to some moral people, and should, thus, be proscribed on deontological grounds. Other moral people argue that torture is bad; but it’s lesser of two wrongs and can be justified on consequentialist grounds. The audience will comprise both camps here. Please tell me how you do a torture story without a significant percentage of the audience objecting on some grounds, given these differences of beliefs: with great difficulty, if it’s indeed possible.
This first rule of media is: give the people what they want. (Otherwise, they won’t buy it; you won’t make any money.)
Indiana Jones Adventure in space with a murder mystery with huge implications. Or just a pure sci fi alien invasion, enterprise and fleet versus them movie, at the heart of it with Kirk started intergalatic war because he got another warlords girlfriend/wife pregnant. Sorta like Troy I guess. Ship to ship combat, fist to fist combat ala arena/amok time music. Don’t cheap out, just go for the home run and try to make the best sci fi movie of all time.
Pretend you are writing for James Cameron.
What ever happened regarding Star Trek fans wanting to be called Trekkers not Trekkies? Did we finally give up on this?
#46
Do we really need Pike in the sequel? Would it even be a good idea? Like Obi-wan, Pike has essentially served his purpose vis-à-vis his pupil: Kirk. Pike has little left to offer our new heroes but the occasional bit of advice. Kirk is Captain now. Do we really want his supervisor looking over his shoulder? Moreover, we need big Hollywood names in the next film to attract a bigger audience and make more money…