RUMOR: Is Star Trek Leaving Amazon Prime, Netflix?


Ever since the announcement that the new Star Trek series will be aired exclusively on CBS’s new streaming platform, CBS All Access, there has been speculation of Trek‘s departure from competing streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime, both of which currently offer the full catalogue of Trek for any subscribed customer’s viewing pleasure. It now appears that Amazon Prime may be the first to lose Trek on February 15th.

UPDATE: While neither Amazon, Netflix, nor CBS have made official comment, we can say that Trek was not pulled from Amazon Prime on February 15th, and the “leaving soon” notice seems to have disappeared from all previously affected Trek series’. It is unclear if a new deal has been reached, if an old deal was ever even set to expire, or indeed if this was all just a big misunderstanding!

Last year, CBS made a lot of fans cry tears of joy when they announced a new Star Trek television* series. Star Trek is coming back to the small screen where it really shines! But some fans were caught off guard by the caveat that came along with that announcement: that they would only be able to watch the new Star Trek series with a paid subscription to CBS All Access, the network’s streaming service.

We’ve talked at length about what the move to streaming only means for CBS and for Trek as a franchise, both here on the website and on our podcast, The Shuttle Pod. One thing that all of us have agreed on is that CBS will likely make moves to make All Access the exclusive home of Star Trek. The fact that they are using the new Trek series to bolster the service indicates their confidence in the Star Trek brand and its ability to bring viewers to the table (or tablet, as it were). But, how do you make CBS All Access as tantalizing as possible? Make it the only place to watch all of the Star Trek catalogue whenever you want, without ads. That means ending licensing contracts between CBS and streaming services (would be competitors) like Netflix and Amazon Prime.

Today, folks started noticing real world incarnations of such speculation. Every Star Trek series, minus The Animated Series, is marked to leave Amazon Prime on February 15th.


No word yet on whether (or when) Star Trek will leave Netlflix. The folks over at What’s On Netflix don’t have it listed amongst the shows on Netflix’s chopping block for February.

As we’ve talked about before, this move by CBS is not unexpected. While All Access is the first network-owned streaming service of its kind, other networks are likely to follow suit. Just this month, it was announced that CBS Corp. and Time Warner Inc.’s Warner Bros. have discussed creating a paid streaming service for their jointly owned CW network.

In related news, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier will be added to Netflix next month, in a move that suggests the Star Trek movies will be unaffected, at least for now. This could continue to be the case since Paramount, not CBS, owns the rights to all of the Trek films.

So far we’ve been unable to reach CBS, Amazon, or Netflix for official comment. Until that happens, or until a press release is issued, let the speculation continue!



Sort by:   newest | oldest
Lancelot Narayan
January 25, 2016 5:47 pm

Does anybody know how viewers outside the US will be able tosee the new Star Trek series? This must have been discussed.

January 25, 2016 5:52 pm

What about hulu?

January 25, 2016 6:08 pm

I’d expect to see all of CBS’s properties under one roof, as soon as it’s contractually feasible. Shouldn’t be a surprise.

January 25, 2016 6:13 pm

Nooooooo I just started Enterprise on Netflix. I wanted to watch all of the shows before the new one comes out next year. Enterprise was the only Trek show have not seen every episode of. God dammit,I am going to have a hard time talking my wife in getting CBS all access seeing how i already have 3 other streaming networks. This is a kick between the legs.

January 25, 2016 6:33 pm


I, for one, will not be railroaded into subscribing to All Access if the new Trek show, which Alex Kurtzman is executive producing, is not acceptable.

An interesting point to consider is that Hulu’s current business model is not sustainable precisely because it comprises the strategy of its owners’ subsidiary networks (ABC, NBC, FOX) denying content to competitors like Netflix and Amazon at the hefty cost of foregoing those very licensing fees which would typically bring in substantial revenue to those networks. Hulu’s owners have been in a sort of limbo, reluctant to keep injecting capital into that company, but having to do so anyway to keep it afloat. Meanwhile, Netflix, for one, hasn’t been hurt at all by the Hulu-owners’ content freeze-out. Netflix has been expanding around the globe as blazing speed and responded to concerns about content by simply producing their own, and rather well I might add.

If CBS goes the Hulu isolationist route, one must assume that Les Moonves has crunched the numbers and determined that the additional subscription fees that CBS expects to gain by hoarding its licenseable content will exceed the licensing revenue that they’ll lose by so doing. However, subscription fees are not predictable. If not enough people sign up for All Access, I’d expect tol see Star Trek back up at Amazon and Netflix, assuming Netflix gets the freeze-out as Amazon has.

In any case, there are obviously other ways of getting one’s TV-Trek fix, besides being corralled into CBS All Access.

January 25, 2016 6:44 pm

It was just a matter of time. Good thing CBS can’t walk in my house and take my dvd’s. Still not paying for the separate service.

Upper Peninsula Guy
January 25, 2016 6:46 pm

The primary question hasn’t been properly addressed.

None of this effects the ability to stream any episode

but just by who and for what reasons – purposes. I’d

like to watch Supergirl but none of the top 3 providers

stream it. One of the top 3 should stream it. CBS is

making something very simple exceedingly difficult.

January 25, 2016 7:00 pm

I would like to be able to see TOS and TNG in HD on Netflix for years to come! The other series can move to All Access…

January 25, 2016 7:03 pm

While Netflix loses a decent amount of its value to me if CBS won’t let Netflix renew Trek TV shows (whenever their contract is up), there is also no way in hell I will pay for CBS All-Access, even if it’s the only place where I can watch Trek. Netflix still offers a ton of things to watch, whereas CBS has nothing I want to see outside of Trek.

Seems pretty clear that CBS is allowing their greed to push them into making moves that will backfire on them. This is shortsighted and disappointing.

Prodigal Son
January 25, 2016 7:15 pm

No issue for me…I have TOS, TNG and Enterprise all on glorious Blu-Ray…and DVD for DS9. Voyager is not worth owning in any format.

Prodigal Son
January 25, 2016 7:19 pm

Jesus, listen to the self-entitled crybabies here.

Of course CBS is going to want CBS-owned showed on the new CBS online offering, as that will compete with Netfilx, Hulu and others for subscribers.

Whoopdie fracking doo, cheapskates.

January 25, 2016 7:46 pm

CBS and other networks are welcome to try this but I won’t biting. As much as I want to see the new Trek series there is no way I will pay for another streaming service. As for the older series, I’ve seen them all multiple times and feel no need to pay extra to watch them again. Good luck with this plan, CBS. You might be some new users to your streaming service but it won’t be long term.

January 25, 2016 7:48 pm

Anything I truly love I own in a physical format, partly because of quality and partly because the entire streaming business is still in it’s infancy, with the endgame far from clear.

You can’t begrudge CBS or anyone else for attempting to leverage their vast and valuable catalogs on their own services. Netflix CEO Reed Hastings has seen this coming for a while, which is why they’ve been spending pretty wildly on new programming. They stand to lose a lot of licenses over the next few years and want to have a catalog of their own that people will hopefully pay for.

The next few years are going to be fascinating.

Prodigal Son
January 25, 2016 7:52 pm

@ Brian Drew

Well said — I think we have the same philosophy on this.

CDR Arch
January 25, 2016 8:03 pm

Good thing I own all the DVD sets except Voyager…now I might get that one too…The ONLY way I would pay CBS All Access is if they purchased Axanar or Trek Continues. But since that is unlikely I will probably just skip the next series and enjoy our 600 episodes and new fan films…

Prodigal Son
January 25, 2016 8:14 pm

@CDR Arch

Actually, I would refuse to purchase CBS All Access if the included “War Trek”, or as you refer to it: Axanar.

That would be a deal-breaker for me.

Mike M
January 25, 2016 8:26 pm

@1: I’m in Canada, so I have the same concerns, too. Will I be able to subscribe to CBS All Access in Canada or will I have to use a VPN to get around it?

Mr Red Shirt
January 25, 2016 8:42 pm

My main problem with CBS All Access is the commercials. I can’t stand it. I mean I’m paying for the service that I don’t want in the first place so the wife can watch The Good Wife and something else I can’t remember what. I don’t really watch it and tried to watch a TOS episode but the commercials are just ridiculous. I really have no other reason to watch CBS All Acess shows. If I am paying then no commercials. That’s the deal!!!

Michael Clevenger
January 25, 2016 8:59 pm

I will refuse to purchase CBS All Access, sorry.

Rodger Daltery
January 25, 2016 9:00 pm

Only TNG is on Netflix in Canada anyway.

Killian Haim
January 25, 2016 9:08 pm

money mongors

January 25, 2016 9:14 pm

Makes good business sense. I do like CBSAA except that they have separate apps for CBS Sports and CBS News, AND the CBSAA app itself has a weird LIVE feature that only shows live content if it is locally available???

This is a huge flaw, in my opinion. I thought CBSAA was going to be a true cord cutter app like Sling TV which DOES give you live programming, and I am puzzled why the CBSAA app seems so ad hoc and not ready for prime time. They need to spend some $$ to improve user experience.

Before I subscribed to it I thought it was going to be ONE APP that gave you ALL their content, live programming included, which means CBS Evening News and all regularly scheduled programming instead of all VOD.

But it doesn’t. CBS Evening news is a day behind, and if you want to watch the CBSN version it requires a separate app. Same for sports

I think it needs a lot of interface work, app consolidation, and definitely live streaming, not just VOD.

Once they get that fixed it won’t be a bad deal. And when other networks start unbundling from cable and satellite, it will save you money if you are like me and don’t need or want the number of channels that cable/satellite gives you.

Ryan Burton
January 25, 2016 9:18 pm

Oh well. If Netflix doesn’t allow me to stream Trek episodes OR movies whenever I want, it’s not the end of the world. Yet it won’t convince me to buy DVD or Blue Ray sets either. There’s a difference between being a fan and devoted-fan who collects the hell out of all this merchandise. Whether Netflix, Amazon, or ANY place, my opinion still stands. After all, Quark explained it well with the 3rd Rule in the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition: “Never spend more for an acquisition than you have to”. Think about that one. ;-)

Prodigal Son
January 25, 2016 9:39 pm


In about 10 years, by the time the online market sorts itself out, when most houses are either using fiber or wireless 5G, then the typical person who does not have cable or satellite, will need to subscribe to three or four services to get the programming — and the cost it total of these will be about the same as what cable and satellite will be charging (and by then, cable and satellite will be much more menu driven).

In the long run, there is no free lunch.

January 25, 2016 9:39 pm

8. Upper Peninsula Guy – January 25, 2016

What do you mean? CBSAA streams Supergirl.

Prodigal Son
January 25, 2016 9:43 pm

@Ryan Burton

If I wanted to view Star Trek in “fake HD”, that is all compressed all to hell with algorithms, and with shitty audio, then I’d watch it on Netlix and not on my Blu-Rays.

Nah! :-)

January 25, 2016 9:46 pm

@ Prodigal Son:

Arguing that Axanar is “War Trek” and a deal-breaker for you, makes absolutely no sense, when you are perfectly fine with DS9. Which actually WAS “War Trek”, and according to most… One of the best Trek shows. I think you have a grudge against fan films in general, and Axanar in particular, since you are often commenting on how bad Axanar is.

Meanwhile, JJ-Trek is perfectly fine according to you. JJ-Trek could’ve been directed by Michael Bay, and you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.

Prodigal Son
January 25, 2016 9:59 pm


Having seen all of DS9 and Prelude to Axanar, I do not see any resemblance whatsoever. Prelude to Axanar celebrates the competition between the military industrial complexes of the Federation and Klingon empire to produce the most battle-capable starships and weapons, which then Federation generals use like chess pieces in self-congratulatory segments the bring to mind movies like Patton and The Desert Fox. By contrast, DS9 is centered by a crew that always wears it’s humanity on it’s sleeve, and always goes the extra mile to prevent war in the best tradition of real Star Trek.

And let me turn the Axanar – JJ Trek comparison to you…how, with a straight face, can you claim to like Axanar, but not like Star Trek Into Darkness? STID is exactly what Axanar is trying to be — action picked star-fleet militarily dramas, new military technology, and chess games where the security of the entire Federation is at stake. It’s hypocritical to say you like one, but dislike the other.

At least I am consistent. I love ST-2009, but I think STID was a misfire — yea, it was too much towards “War Trek”, which is what Axanar is doing.

Bob Dog
January 25, 2016 10:34 pm

I will NEVER, EVER pay money to stream a show that has a) commericals, or b) a network ‘bug’ or logo in the corner.

CBS…. do not screw this up.

Prodigal Son
January 25, 2016 11:00 pm

@ Bob Dog

That is bizarre? Let me get this straight then. Assuming you have paid for Cable TV or Satellite TV at least at some point in your life, you refused to watch shows then on Cable/Satellite that had commercials like CBS, NBC, ABC, SyFy, AMC, ESPN etc?

Seriously, dude?

January 25, 2016 11:21 pm
14. Brian Drew – January 25, 2016 You can’t begrudge CBS or anyone else for attempting to leverage their vast and valuable catalogs on their own services. It really comes down to their putting Alex Kurtzman in charge of the new Trek series that I begrudge. If not for that, I’d be more hopeful about the new series, and therefore more willing to subscribe to All Access, and hence none of this would be an issue. An interesting turn of events, however, could be that the myriad cable networks now operating consolidate back down to just 3 or 4 TV-content providers, like in the old days. ABC, NBC and FOX already have a stake in the SVOD market in the form of Hulu at $8 or $12 per month with and without ads, respectively. CBS is joining the market at $6 per month (with the possibility of a $9 or so w/o ads option down the road). Netflix at between $8 and $10 per month (depending on when you subscribed), is ramping up its own content production, and licenses TV content from other providers (a bit like TV syndication, if you will); and likewise for Amazon. As many people have expressed, the benefits of cord-cutting by consumers fed up with cable TV bills (and awful service!) is entirely undone by having to subscribe to too many SVOD services, and generally speaking the market doesn’t seem like it will bear every TV channel having its own SVOD service. So, what does… Read more »
Prodigal Son
January 25, 2016 11:37 pm

@ Cygnus

I think we are actually in close agreement on the direction SVOD/TV is taking. The only thing I think I would comment on is that Amazon’s market value is about $175 billion, while Netflix’s is only about $32 billion, so it’s much more likely that Amazon would absorb Netflix versus Netfliz absorbing Amazon.

And Cable and Satellite won’t stand still — they will eventually move to more discrete channel pricing, and they are going to have to separate out live sports to survive, because a lot of their pricing issues are due to subsidizing sports by viewers who really don’t want those channels.

January 26, 2016 12:09 am

12 PS, Sure, call people who don’t have the kimd of money you have “crybabies.” Nice going, diplomat.
———— ———— ———— ————

This is setting a bad precedent. Soon every studio will start their own stream and we’ll be right back to a huge expense comparable to cable.

CBS is breaking a contract with Netflix to do this. Any penalty they pay may or may not be smaller than their revenue >;-}

While some Trekfans are wealthy or middle class, poorer kids will not get the inspiration they deserve from the public airwaves as so many of today’s scientists and astronauts did in the ’60s, ’80s and onward, then from reruns on TV or the cheaper than cable Netflix. Shame, CBS.

(Yes, this is the way of the world now…even inspiring things should be sucked dry of any profit they can yield, and “screw the poor.” Everything now belongs to those who can pay. [And yes, I’m a Social Democrat.)]

Heh, maybe the new Star Trek will have the “honor” Game of Thrones has, of being one of the most-pirated programs. Let’s hope it makes them equally proud.

January 26, 2016 12:59 am

Calm down. It’s all about business. Broadcaster and TV shows don’t exist to to make you happy, but to make money. If there is a good product in the end, it’s win-win for both sides. There are going take the money from subscribers AND advertisers. That should be no surprise, because as said, the goal is to make money. And there’s another advantage in streaming: They know a lot about their audience, as they can collect data. What they watch, how often, when its paused etc…

January 26, 2016 1:00 am

Fact is, if the new Star Trek is any good, most people in the world who can’t get it on their current TV setup will get it for free off the Internet.

The key is how does CBS intend to use that to its advantage, like HBO has with Game of Thrones…will it lead to heightened brand awareness and brisk worldwide sales of seasonal DVD’s/books? Or will they get all cranky like they did with Enterprise in the US on the limited-reach UPN, call it “fatigue” and tuck tale and run from all who want to see the show, but can’t do so without spending extra money for it?

Legate Damar
January 26, 2016 1:50 am

Doesn’t All Access have commercials? I really hope that the old Trek shows are still available for streaming on commercial free platforms.

January 26, 2016 2:00 am

34.Pasty. Exactly. Trek has always been about making shows that people will watch. If people* hadn’t watched it somewhere (originally, in syndication, in theatres) and they didn’t think people wanted to watch more of it, they wouldn’t be making it.

*people, whether they’re “fans” or not — I go to see the Marvel, Bond and Star Wars movies although I’m technically not a hardcore fan of any of them. I’m watching the new X-Files too, but I was never a religious follower of the original. It was just a show I enjoyed sometimes (although it all got a little convoluted toward the end and ended up requiring too much work to follow and I lost interest).

January 26, 2016 2:05 am

Good story, btw. I’m in Canada and use a chrome plugin to watch Trek on US Netflix. And they’re talking about blocking that. Trek’s one of the main reasons I watch Netflix at all (there’s something comforting about having instant access to the past).

Kylo Rum
January 26, 2016 3:57 am

Anyone who wants to watch this new show should download Kodi or get an android box. It’s the way I watch shows like Walking Dead, Game of Thrones and Star Wars Rebels. I’m not subscribing to this CBS thing to watch a new Star Trek series.

New Horizon
January 26, 2016 4:54 am

I pay for Netflix, and that’s all I’m willing to pay for. My wife and I gave up cable 20 years ago and really only started to watch shows online around 7 years ago. Pretty much went 13 years without TV of any kind. It doesn’t bother me in the slightest if CBS decides to move all their Trek shows to their streaming site, I only have a limited amount of money to play with and shows just aren’t that important to me. Happy to watch them if they’re on my streaming site of choice, but if not…no big deal.

January 26, 2016 5:55 am

” It now appears that Amazon Prime may be the first to lose Trek on February 15th.”

Darn it! I hate that news. Another example of ‘if I love something and it’s convenient for me’, of it going away.

Who cares
January 26, 2016 6:10 am
January 26, 2016 7:53 am

@33. Ah, but you missed something there. When someone gives you the ‘non nod wink wink’ and suggests there are ‘other’ ways to access content…that usually suggests they are stealing it.

Marc Henson
January 26, 2016 8:55 am

I’m getting CBS All Access. That was never really a concern of mine. It’s only what…7, maybe 8 bucks a month.

Even if the new Trek was the only show I would watch on it, that would still make it more than worth it. Plus I watch Supergirl and Twin Peaks, and I assume the new Twin Peaks will be on there.

Face it guys. You’ll get CBS All Access. And if you don’t, I can only roll my eyes and wonder why.

January 26, 2016 9:26 am

There have been rumblings ever since TV went HD that soon the US government would buy back all of the available broadcast spectrum, meaning no more over-the-air TV. So we’ll be limited (in the US, at least) to either cable/satellite/fiber, or streaming.

January 26, 2016 9:40 am

“The fact that they are using the new Trek series to bolster the service indicates their confidence in the Star Trek brand and its ability to bring viewers to the table (or tablet, as it were)”

Or you can see it as a sign of no confidence (won’t let it play with the “big kids” on broadcast) and are fencing it in where the fanbase can be milked to help pay for it directly.

Bob Dog
January 26, 2016 10:31 am

To Prodigal Son – I have not paid for cable in almost fifteen years. I do not get satellite tv, etc. I WILL NOT PAY to watch a show with a logo in the corner. I remember when that sh*t started. One network would do it, then another would get a BIGGER logo, then the next network would get one that was ANIMATED and it just went on and on until everyone does it now.

But I still won’t pay for it. Or commercials either, good God, they go on forever these days.

If you went to the movie and there was a big, colorful, moving logo in the corner that said ‘PARAMOUNT’ or ‘TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX’ you would ask for your money back, right?

Same deal. I rent discs from Netflix and stream from Netflix and Amazon.

That’s it.

Who cares
January 26, 2016 10:44 am

@34. There is NO, repeat NO current evidence that Netflix is losing Trek, I use Netflix daily, and I watch Trek on Netflix daily, there is no tag on the shows that they will be leaving soon, and none of the Trek shows are included in the list of things leaving Netflix in February, losing 2 of the Naked Gun movies, bunch of other stuff I don’t much care about, but no mention of Trek at all. Saying CBS is breaking a contract without any supporting evidence is just bad form.

Prodigal Son
January 26, 2016 10:54 am

@ Bob Dog

OK — you are completely consistent then. I respect that, dude.

@ Marja

No — the crybabies I was referring to are the ones that act so shocked and entitled that CBS will bring back the older series from Amazon and Netflix to its new CBS on demand service. That is what I was referring to. I don’t begrudge anyone who chooses not to pay because they can’t afford it — no way!