Doctor Who

CEO Les Moonves Talks All Access, Says CBS Must Wait Six Months After BEYOND Before Trek Can Come Back to TV

moonves

Les Moonves revealed this morning that CBS had to wait six months after the premier of Star Trek Beyond before launching their new Star Trek television series, which will premier on CBS All Access next January. He also spoke about the future of All Access, including a possible merge with Showtime.

Speaking to a crowd at the Deutsche Bank Media, Internet & Telecom Conference this morning, CBS CEO Les Moonves spoke about the split of Viacom, which resulted in CBS and Paramount fighting over what Moonves calls a “family jewel”: Star Trek.

“When [CBS and Paramount] split from Viacom ten years ago, January 1, 2006, one of the big sticking points, as you can imagine, was “Star Trek.” You know, we both wanted it.

[Paramount] said “It’s a movie!” and I said, “No, no, no, it’s a TV show.” Actually, we’re both right. So they kept the feature film rights, we kept the television rights; they have [Star Trek Beyond] coming out July 22.”

Moonves revealed that part of the deal between the two production companies was a waiting period in between the new movies and a new television series.

“Our deal with [Paramount] is that we had to wait six months after their film is launched so there wouldn’t be a confusion in the marketplace.”

Star Trek is CBS’s Family Jewel
As Moonves has said before, he and CBS consider Star Trek a “family jewel” and are using the franchise to bolster their new streaming service, CBS All Access. For Trekkies, Moonves’s faith in the show is a good thing, since it means CBS will put their full backing behind the series in a way that appeals to its already massive fanbase.

Star Trek is an expensive show. It’s the family jewel, obviously. The previous Star Trek shows that we sold to Netflix did extraordinarily well; I don’t think it’s a great surprise that Trekkies would go to the [streaming services] of the world. So we sort of felt that we had a tiger in the bottle.

We announced Star Trek, and internationally, we basically have covered 60% of the cost of the show already. To make up that [other] 40%, it’s not going to take a whole lot of subscriptions, and it says to the world that we are very serious about this.

When you put something on [All Access], it’s got to be something special, something you wouldn’t find on the [CBS broadcast network], something that will attract subscribers. As I said, Star Trek was kind of a no-brainer: there aren’t a lot of [properties] out there with that kind of following.

In 2017, when Star Trek starts on All Access, we think that it’s going to be extraordinarily successful.”

The future of CBS All Access
A lot can change to CBS’s All Access streaming service between now and the premier of Star Trek next January. Today, Moonves hinted at a so-called “skinny bundle” of All Access and the standalone Showtime offering, at a discount to their current pricing. Showtime launched its standalone streaming service in July at a hefty $10.99/month.

“Someone’s going to figure out how to do this and how to give people what they want to watch, and it’s not for $100 a month. It will be for $35 or $39 dollars a month where you’ll really get the 12 to 15 or 18 channels that you care about. And not get the karate channel for 25 cents a month. That doesn’t make sense anymore.”

Moonves called the idea of skinny bundles “inevitable” and called them a “great idea… that will become more and more a part of our culture.”

“No matter what universe you live in, you have to have us…. You can’t live without CBS,” he said.

Moonves hinted that All Access would be seeing new and different features pre-Trek launch, saying that, while All Access has been successful, “we haven’t pulled out all of the stops. Next year it’s going to add substantially to our bottom line.” And, he implied that Star Trek will be the driving force behind All Access’s success:

“I think when “Star Trek” starts, which is in January 2017, I think you’re going to see a larger marketing push for [All Access] right then because there will be a lot of people who will sign up then.”

He said that shortly after Star Trek, subscribers can expect about three or four more originals on All Access.

Ad-free All Access?
One of the biggest consumer complaints about the All Access streaming service is the fact that viewers who pay $5.99/month for the service are obligated to sit through the same advertisements they would see for free over the air on the CBS broadcast network. Moonves has talked about implementing an ad-free version of the service for some time now, and has floated the idea of a $9.99/month ad-free service.

Moonves’s speech was streamed live this morning, and you can listen to the archived version for free after a quick registration with Deutsche Bank here.

Sort by:   newest | oldest
Beyondthetech
March 8, 2016 6:36 pm

Er, no. My complaint about CBS All Access is that it’s the only one of the networks that still charges for service if you already are a a cable subscriber. I log into the apps of NBC, FOX, ABC, CNN, Bravo, A&E, HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, Lifetime, History, Disney, Starz, and Comedy Central, and if I get it on my cable box, I don’t need to pay a separate fee. What makes CBS so much better that they need to double-dip, or triple-dip, if you want to include the forced advertisements?

Joe Canada
March 8, 2016 6:51 pm

As a Canadian, I am unable to access any shows off any of the American networks let alone being able to subscribe to CBS All Access. Luckily, a Canadian carrier, like SPACE, will probably carry it.

Don’t forget that Trek has been a forerunner in ways to get the shows on the air. Letter writing campaign got TOS to stay on the air. TBG was in first run syndication. VOY was the flagship show on the (then) new UPN. Makes perfect sense that Trek would be boldly going onto a streaming service.

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 8:33 pm

I am sure Canada is in their plans — according to Moonvies, he supposedly has international distribution commitments that has already paid for 60% of the series. Obviously, the big foreign Trek countries of Canada, the UK, Germany, Australia and Japan will be no-brainers for distribution.

Don’t sweat it, dude. You get better healthcare and probably free Trek — you win!

TUP
March 9, 2016 11:21 am

Better healthcare? Dont believe a word Michael Moore tells you.

Prodigal Son
March 9, 2016 2:22 pm

I know a bunch of Canadians and have traveled extensively in Canada. They have a better healthcare system…FACT

March 9, 2016 4:04 pm

As a Canadian, I can assure you that you are completely incorrect. Also, our healthcare isn’t free, if you make more than the poverty limit you are required to pay.

Our healthcare system is a complete joke, but sadly people who don’t know any different believe the propaganda.

Prodigal Son
March 9, 2016 5:21 pm
March 10, 2016 9:58 am

In this case, yes they do.

Robert
March 10, 2016 6:11 am

Of course it’s not free, nothing is, but it is more efficient and covers everyone in Canada. It also receives high ratings from many independent sources and organizations.

March 11, 2016 9:03 am

Where do you get this idea it’s more efficient? Our medical system is abused, emergency rooms full of people who shouldn’t be there. When a ER doctor has to explain to parents why they don’t need to bring their child in for mosquito bites. Average wait times of over six hours, doctors spread thin and over worked.

The idea of socialized medical is a good one, we just do a piss poor job of it.

Disinvited
March 11, 2016 11:31 am

Navy,

I’m an old man in the US, and what you describe is exactly what we had down here, with the added burden of having to go bankrupt paying for the “privilege.”

All things being equal, I think I’d much rather prefer not having to reward inefficiency from my own back pocket.

March 11, 2016 1:35 pm

Well we’re forced to reward such inefficiency as deductions off our paycheque, so the money doesn’t even make it to our back pocket.

Lostrod
March 9, 2016 4:08 pm

Not to disparage Canadians, but they spend a tenth of their budget on defense, leaving more for entitlements and other programs. They don’t have to spend as much on defense because their neighbor to the south carries the load of protecting North America (and elsewhere).

Robert
March 10, 2016 6:08 am

“Protecting” that is funny. The US has killed many millions of people since WWII. What do you get from your military budget except blowback and death.?

TUP
March 11, 2016 3:09 pm

Oh well as long as you’ve travelled here then…. *rolls eyes*

MattR
March 8, 2016 6:53 pm

NBC also has their all original content streaming comedy service that also has a fee. I saw another article today that said they would have 4-5 original shows next year on it.

I agree it would be nice if All Access was free to cable subscribers, but this is how things are going to evolve as more people stop paying for cable. CBS just happens to be the first one to try to adapt.

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 7:46 pm

How are you possible getting Showtime, Cinemax and Starz for free?

I highly doubt your claim.

Beyondthetech
March 8, 2016 7:48 pm

I never had all of them at the same time. Whatever the cable company gave me at the time, I used the corresponding app to stream their stuff for free. FiOS has been rotating some nice premium channel offers, just lost HBO and gained Showtime.

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 8:04 pm

You are getting a special deal then. Most everybody has to pay additional fees for HBO and Showtime — these are premium pay channels.

So your comparison of your special FIOS deal with “why can’t I get CBS All Access for free” is simply not a fair comparison.

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 11:41 pm

I don’t get all the whining about $5.95.

It’s $5.95. Seriously, folks?

Dandru
March 10, 2016 7:27 am

Yes, seriously. What is it you don’t get?

krazyjoe
March 9, 2016 8:55 am

They are offering original content.

iPadCary
March 13, 2016 3:58 pm

Those apps are just already existing cable channels
but in app form instead cable channel form,
so naturally you aren’t gonna pay for it again.

But “CBS All Access” is a whole new,, unique thing.
There is no “CBS All Access” cable channel.
“CBS All Access” is an online-only channel.

And about the commercials, cable is completely scumbag about that. Cable was supposed to be commercial-free
because you, not an advertiser, were paying the money.
But look what happened there. So it’s just a blatant cash grab,
you’re 100% right about that one! lol

Ahmed
March 8, 2016 6:47 pm

Our deal with them is that we had to wait six months after their film is launched so there wouldn’t be a confusion in the marketplace.

And what will happen when Paramount starts working on ST 14 two years from now?

MattR
March 8, 2016 7:01 pm

They probably figure the huge marketing push for a premiere of a television show and the movie would hurt the movie. However large the marketing by CBS will be for the premiere of the show, it will probably be much less for a third or fourth season (the soonest the fourth movie might come out).

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 7:47 pm

The series will be well underway by then. This is all about the launch, hence it will not be a recurring issue.

Ahmed
March 8, 2016 8:07 pm

@MattR, Prodigal Son,

That make sense.

Not that I’m impressed with STB marketing so far, it’s so quiet on that front.

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 8:25 pm

What Star Trek Beyond marketing effort? Is their one? LOL

I see three possibilities here:

1. Paramount is falling apart financially and is going to wait until the last minute to market this movie.

2. The movie is a stinker, and they don’t want to throw good money after bad money

3. We will get a surprise new trailer with Cloverfield 2 trailer this Thursday (as I predicted…but I confess I am losing confidence), and that will serve to kick off the marketing campaign.

Ahmed
March 8, 2016 8:38 pm

I’m leaning toward the first possibility since the stories about financial problems at its parent company Viacom are all over the news.

Will see if they will release a second trailer with Cloverfield 2 or not.

Tiger
March 9, 2016 3:57 am

Its crazy when I realized Beyond comes out in 4 months but its so completely quiet you would think 6 months at least. We’ve gotten a trailer and a behind the scenes interview with Entertainment Tonight and thats been it. Hopefully they will do more soon but yeah its quiet.

Disinvited
March 11, 2016 9:08 am

“We will get a surprise new trailer with Cloverfield 2 trailer this Thursday (as I predicted…but I confess I am losing confidence), and that will serve to kick off the marketing campaign.” — Prodigal Son

Thursday came and went with your prediction unmet.

So have you lost enough confidence to hang up your turban, or is it only enough to start throwing shade instead of sunshine on Paramount and BEYOND?

Tiger
March 9, 2016 3:54 am

Yeah the whole ‘have to wait 6 months’ thing doesnt make a lot of sense to me either. I mean I remember when Generations came out on the big screen and then just 2 months later they premiered Voyager. I mean really its not that hard. They advertised Generations to death and then when that opened Voyager started getting advertised. Seem to all work just fine, especially since Caretaker had huge ratings.

Joe G.
March 9, 2016 7:36 am

I understand your confusion, but in the article is states this deal between CBS and Paramount started in 2006. That was long after Generations and Voyager. Back then it was all 1 entity under 1 parent company. Now that 2 different companies own the separate rights, this is the world we live in.

TUP
March 9, 2016 7:28 am

Perhaps everyone knows there wont be another Bad Robot-era Star Trek film…

Prodigal Son
March 9, 2016 3:47 pm

How about you go away and we get many more Trek films.

Everybody wins!

Tiger
March 10, 2016 4:59 am

Says who>>

Paramount has already signed Pine and Quinto for a fourth one and I imagine the others are signed now as well. If this one makes what STID and on a cheaper budget to boot of course there will be another one. YOu may not like the films personally but they have made some of the highest profits for a Trek film so it bodes well more will come, at least one more.

Disinvited
March 10, 2016 9:12 am

“…they have made some of the highest profits for a Trek film…” — Tiger

You have absolutely zero evidence to back up that claim. It is certainly not reflected in Paramount’s current financial problems nor their decision to cut costs in BEYOND’S budget.

Sure they shuffled around more funds than some other Trek films, BUT that’s not the same as making some of the highest profits.

If that were actually the case then they would have absolutely zero motivation to upset that record proflit making applecart by abandoning sets in LA, relocating to Vancouver, firing the scriptwriter, etc.

Marquette Michigan Guy
March 10, 2016 12:19 am

All of the primary story lines in all except (WOK) have been half baked turkey’s pushing lame stories and not the proper focus on the characters – interaction – recollection ties to the past in accordance to what’s currently the story of the movie itself. I’m sick of half in the bag – bottle – cloud of smoke (reefer) inspired stories. Alien probes – whales – distant planet facing genocide – etc. Something new or better told only happened once. Time to wake up or grab your shovel and just bury Star Trek now…..Ok?

March 10, 2016 5:27 am

Well if they keep turning out the crap they have been, there won’t be another Trek movie after this upcoming one.

Disinvited
March 10, 2016 9:25 am

I wonder how ole’ Les would feel if the fans waited an additional 6 months after his wait to sign up?

clark billy
March 8, 2016 7:28 pm

Star Trek Beyond is doing some re-shoots this month. I guess they want to fix something that didn’t work in the movie. :)

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 7:49 pm

Please provide your source for this claim?

Ahmed
March 8, 2016 8:04 pm

Any links?

Chuck
March 8, 2016 8:31 pm

Reshoots are pretty common, and not always an indicator of something “not working” in the movie. I wouldn’t read too much into that.

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 9:22 pm

Until clark billy provides a source, I am assuming this is not credible.

No offense intended clark billy, but you have not provided any link or clue about where you are getting this info from.

ML31
March 9, 2016 9:06 am

True. The bad signs would be director or writers getting fired or replaced during the project.

March 9, 2016 7:31 am

Reshoots are fairly common in post production. It’s when a studio has to scrap a large portion of a production, like they did with WWZ, that talk of trouble becomes legitimate.

Lostrod
March 9, 2016 4:23 pm

Even Star Wars – The Force Awakens had reshoots. We all know how that movie didn’t work out …. :)

Regards.

Ahmed
March 11, 2016 11:53 am

Clark Billy is correct, Deadline just confirmed that.

Disinvited
March 11, 2016 1:24 pm

Ahmed,

Man, somebody’s turban must be out to the cleaners this week.

clark billy
March 11, 2016 11:13 pm

i work as an extra and saw the casting notices on facebook

Skippy2k
March 8, 2016 8:12 pm

Any time frame on when the series becomes real? When they start building sets,filming,etc.? Wasn’t sure how far ahead of the launch that we will start seeing some real info.

MattR
March 8, 2016 9:48 pm

I saw an article mentioning that Scott Bakula’s casting wasn’t even announced til sometime in May 2001, just four months before the show premiered. Since the show doesn’t debut for 10 months, there’s still lots of time for them to get things going. I’m assuming all the big stuff will start happening closer to summer.

Tiger
March 9, 2016 4:02 am

I remember it well. Whats funny was the Enterprise premise was kept in the dark that entire time. People predicted for about a year what it would be after Enterprise was announced but we didn’t even get the title of the show until Bakula’s casting was announced. Now they may pull the same thing here so who knows.

So yeah the sooner I think we’ll get any real details will be 5-6 months before it premieres which would be in the summer.

Can you imagine when we get that first news who is the Captain? Oh man thats going to be a fun day. I wonder if they are going to go with an unknown like Patrick Stewart mostly was or someone a bit famous like Bakula at the time. I’m guessing there will be 1 or 2 ‘names’ to spur interest.

Mel
March 9, 2016 12:39 pm

Maybe there won’t be a captain. Imagine the reaction to that! :-P

Chuck
March 8, 2016 8:39 pm

So I pay $5.99 (or $9.99) a month for All Access, and Star Trek – the family jewel, the driving force, the no-brainer – is new for what? 3-5 months out of the year? How many episodes to a season?

And so how many months per year am I paying $6 or $10 bucks to have access to a channel that otherwise I could probably live without?

Or is CBS smart enough to dole out, say, 2 episodes a month, so I don’t drop All Access when Star Trek goes on hiatus? Or make the pricing plan such that I’m more or less forced economically to subscribe year-round?

Not trying to be a nay-sayer, certainly not of the new series, but I’m also just a little wary of being baited into All Access for just a little Trek and a lot of ho hum.

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 9:20 pm

Do you buy at least two cups of coffee each month, or have at least one fast food lunch each month?

Harley3k
March 8, 2016 9:43 pm

Since cancelling DirecTV and their $150/month bill with it last year, I’ve loved just relying on Hulu (ad-free option), and buying the shows I can’t get there on iTunes instead (commercial free). And I still come out ahead money wise. CBS currently has its other prime-time shows available on iTunes, but I’m assuming Star Trek will be exclusive to AllAccess, so that may not be an option. Still comparing the typical iTunes price of $3 per episode would run you $40 for a 13-episode season, so at $9.99/month it might be close to around the same price if you only subscribe to the months it is airing, and figure you get all their other content also. When I’ve tried AA before they’ve let me pay per month and cancel at any time.

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 10:57 pm

BTW, this is kind of funny. I’ve called DirectTV two years in row and threatened cord cutting, and both times they gave me essentially about $40 off per month for 12 months.

Harley3k
March 9, 2016 11:22 am

@Prodigal Son and @ML31,
I hear you both and I played that game of calling the retention number for a while and arguing for a discount, but it gets old. And FF through commercials for so many years got old too. I found I was watching most of my content from Netflix, Amazon Prime, Showtime and HBO anyway all ad-free and once HBO and Showtime became stand-alone I made the switch. Hulu ad-free was a huge help. I can’t imagine going back to using a DVR now and retraining my 30-sec skip finger. I also enjoy not having SPAM right in my Guide as I had with DTV! Never worrying about having a dvr box with enough space, or that works, or getting a signal when it’s raining, etc. Can’t ever go back now ;)

Disinvited
March 9, 2016 3:18 pm

I upvote your frugalness in this and your historic holding out for the box set prices that you find acceptable.

Marja
March 9, 2016 7:23 pm

MJ, a friend of mine does the same thing every year with Comcast. Tells them she can’t afford it anymore and they cut, or don’t raise the price of her subscription :-)

ML31
March 9, 2016 9:10 am

I have DTV and don’t spend nearly what you were. I get the stations I want, use my DVR to avoid the ads. Pay one fee. No worries about crappy internet connections or low quality streaming. And I still get my local sports teams which I would never get should I drop cable.
I know the streaming quality is improving and may one day be better and/or easier than cable. But that day has yet to come. Cable is still a million times better than streaming.

LizardGirl
March 9, 2016 3:49 pm

@ML31
There’s something called Sling TV, which provides cable cutters local channels (like local espn). It’s not perfect though. We haven’t cut cable yet but it’s only a matter of time now.

http://www.cnet.com/products/sling-tv/

ML31
March 10, 2016 7:53 am

That’s great. But I can get local channels right over the antenna if I opted for that. My current level of DTV works great for all members of my household and is still a little less than Comcast. I can’t imagine the fees and bills I would get should I cut the cord and pay for all the streaming. Not to mention I would never see my local sports teams without cable.

Marja
March 9, 2016 7:20 pm

I’m sure CBS will find a way to keep people paying all year. They’re not going to let people subscribe for a month at a time to binge-watch Trek.

MattR
March 8, 2016 9:49 pm

There’s nothing stopping you from canceling it and then re-subscribing later. That’s pretty much what I do with Netflix and what some people do with stuff like HBO streaming

krazyjoe
March 9, 2016 8:57 am

They’ll just add more and more original content. It’s naive to believe that Star Trek will be the only original series.

Yanks
March 9, 2016 10:29 am

Good question, I too am interested in how many episode we are talking about here.

njdss4
March 8, 2016 9:20 pm

Sorry if I don’t jump at the chance to be charged *even more* so that I don’t have to watch ads. He’s literally saying he’s considering charging MORE than Netflix to give us a microscopic fraction of the content that Netflix gives. CBS All-Access is missing the mark entirely, and I will not support this kind of service. I’m sad to say this means I won’t be supporting my favorite TV series ever, but I won’t allow myself to be ripped off.

Harley3k
March 8, 2016 9:50 pm

I understand this, but if you think about the economics of it for the entertainment you get (assuming the show is amazing), it’s not so bad. Consider it’s on 5 months out of the year, and you pay $10/month for ad-free, that’s $50 – for hopefully a 13-episode season. I can spend that taking my family to see one 90 minute trek movie…

Your comparison to Netflix is absolutely valid; however I might give some of the other CBS shows a chance if I didn’t have to sit through the comercials though.

ML31
March 9, 2016 9:13 am

The problem I have is the trend it might set. Putting things on exclusive platforms just means more and more fees and more headaches. Even if the image quality were good it still creates problems. I’d rather pay one fee for everything than 12 fees for the 12 different service providers to get what I got from one.

Disinvited
March 9, 2016 3:15 pm

ML31,

One assumes, that like magazine subscriptions, these services will be open to third party packagers who’ll buy blocks of subscriptions in bulk at a discount rate and put together packages of channels that’ll be cheaper than if each were subscribed to individually by the subscribers themselves.

ML31
March 10, 2016 7:55 am

Disinvited,

You just described a cable provider.

Prodigal Son
March 8, 2016 10:55 pm

Seems kind of lame to me, dude. Just cut back a couple Starbucks stops and get the show. You make it sounds like’s this is some big purchase. LOL

Kev
March 9, 2016 4:37 am

Perhaps we should pay $10.99 a month for every single series we watch. I mean it’s not like it’s “some big purchase.”

You are CBS’s target audience… and you are why they think All Access is going to become a success because of Star Trek.

You are why Star Trek Into Darkness was half the movie it could have been and Star Trek Beyond would be better named Star Trek Fast & Furious.

Since you don’t make CBS and Paramount earn your $ you are their faviourite kind of customer.

DanNB
March 9, 2016 9:53 am

@Kev

Right, because they will be saying: Look, nobody is watching our show. Let’s make it more intellectual then.

Prodigal Son
March 9, 2016 11:21 am

I pay for Showtime in the fall soley to watch Homeland, and I pay for HBO in Spring soley to watch Game of Thrones. Star Trek would be another series I will pay to do this with on CBS all access.

So for my top 3 TV series, sure I’ll pay for them like this. What’s the problem?

Marja
March 9, 2016 7:32 pm

Nice for you, Prodigal, and I’m glad you’re able to pay for all these things. But please don’t be blind to those who haven’t as much disposable income as you. Thanks.

Harley3k
March 9, 2016 11:36 am

@Kev,
I do fear it can come to this. Currently there is at least 1 or 2 exclusive shows on each of the stand-alone streaming services that I watch, Netflix, AmazonPrime, HBO, Showtime, and even Hulu has exclusive content now.

Tiger
March 9, 2016 4:39 am

I dont get why people are making such a big deal about it? You dont want to pay a lot of money then just wait until the series is completely done, pay your $6, binge watch it and cancel. I paid $12 today for a pizza. Are people going to seriously moan about $6 they can cancel at any time?

Marja
March 9, 2016 7:33 pm

I really doubt CBS All-Access is going to work in just quite that way.

Marja
March 9, 2016 7:28 pm

njdss4, I see in the CBS All-Access ad displayed on my TrekMovie page that I can watch Magnum PI, NCIS, The Big Bang Theory, and some other show that are on never-ending reruns on TNT or other channels … not a huge incentive thar.

thebiggfrogg
March 9, 2016 12:40 am

Sorry Les. I love me some Trek, but I CAN live without CBS as Trek is all I would watch on All Access. I already have Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu, which have a breadth of content. Pay and ads too? Ha! Besides, most of your consumers are not bottomless wells of dough and can’t afford every service under the sun. Fact of the matter is: other than Trek your content sucks!

krazyjoe
March 9, 2016 8:58 am

How do you know that Trek is the only thing you’d watch? They haven’t yet announced what other content will be on there.

So, you don’t know.

RomII
March 9, 2016 2:50 am

They should really have two Star Trek shows in development, so there is Star Trek all year round. I really do not mind paying $1.50 for a new Star Trek episode every week, but assuming it will be a 22 to 26 episode series, what happens to the rest of the year? I think a lot of people would unsubscribe and come back the following year.

Marja
March 9, 2016 7:36 pm

It’d be lovely if they make that many episodes (22) of an expensive show like Trek. One can hope. But personally I’m reserving my enthusiasm until I see it’s going to be more than 13 eps.

northstar
March 9, 2016 5:25 am

“You can’t live without CBS” – Wow, what is this guy thinking? I can live very well without CBS. We´re in the 21st century….

Timncc1701
March 9, 2016 6:06 am

I for one will pay $5.99 for a month and see how it goes. If it is like all talk no action DS9 or all action no thought like STID, that is the last $5.99 they get from me.

CmdrR
March 9, 2016 7:16 am

Just once, I’d love to hear Moonves talk about something other than money. “We’re bringing in the best creative minds, guys who really love Trek and are committed to making thought-provoking television. We’re giving this new series a 3-year commitment to find its voice and its audience.” — Note, the preceding quote occurred in my dreams. Any resemblance to this quote and anything Les Moonves has ever said… would give me a heart attack.

Marja
March 9, 2016 7:39 pm

CmdrR, Again, he’s talking to investors here, DeutscheBank. They probably don’t give a care if it’s creative or well-written — just how $ucce$$ful.

jerr
March 9, 2016 7:27 am

oh my gosh… the comment section is updated! To bad it’s still not Discuss :-(

TUP
March 9, 2016 7:30 am

One thing is, this guy is talking himself into having to support a quality project. It cant suck or have budget constraints with the way he’s talking. Well, it *could* suck, but he’s putting pressure on his people to not make him look foolish.

Hopefully everything works out.

boborci
March 9, 2016 10:58 am

It will be great – I know nothing about it but I am sure you’re going to love it. How could it miss with all those great people involved?

TUP
March 9, 2016 11:18 am

@BobOrci – I’d upvote that comment if I could. So there you go, you’ve received a positive response from me. ;-)

I actually am feeling pretty good about the new series. I think everyone involved really wants it to do well and the people they’ve hired, like Meyers and Rod would seem to indicate they dont want to convince long time fans that they need to embrace a new Trek. They seem to be accepting that they need to embrace Star Trek in a traditional sense.

Im on the fence about Fuller. I assume he wants to do well and will work really hard. I have little doubt of that. But he’s been hit and miss in his career.

Now they need to announce a really good concept (ie. Universe/era/setting) and a strong cast.

DS9 had a really good cast. TNG wasnt bad either (Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner being very very good). Voyager had a lousy cast. Even when Voyager had a good episode, it still had that lousy cast.

boborci
March 9, 2016 3:44 pm

I was a huge fanof Pushing Daisies. Fuller rocks.

Disinvited
March 9, 2016 4:00 pm

boborci,

Me too. Still am. Both boxed sets.

Is it possible a consensus is forming?

TUP
March 10, 2016 8:32 am

I didnt watch Pushing Daisies. I did like Dead Like Me very much but felt it got better after Fuller left.

French Trekker
March 9, 2016 8:26 am

Hope to have it in France. After all we have Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead, Agents of Shield, X-Files and more here … otherwise it will be by other means …

Ralph Pinheiro
March 9, 2016 8:41 am

There are rumors on social networks that Star Trek Beyond debut dates in Brazil and Argentina will change from July to August. In Brazil always release before that USA.

Ahmed
March 9, 2016 1:29 pm

Why would they release the movie in August in the middle of the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio?

Prodigal Son
March 9, 2016 2:29 pm

Because women attending the Olympics will want to stay inside all the time to avoid mosquitoes?

krazyjoe
March 9, 2016 8:55 am

I’m psyched!

In order to boost All Access’s demand, it should also be the exclusive home to CW shows (now that CW shows are leaving Netflix). Also, in terms of original content, they should develop a NEW spinoff of Flash to be an All Access exclusive. The more original content they provide, the more successful they will be!

Yanks
March 9, 2016 10:27 am

I hadn’t really thought about the foreign market from a fan perspective. Placing it on web does make it available to more fans around the world, and trek is not just a US treasure. If I’m not in the US, I’m guessing I’d be pretty happy about this.

I don’t however want to have to sit through (or fast forward through) commercials.

Mel
March 9, 2016 1:18 pm

I really doubt people outside of the USA will be able to subscribe legally to CBS All Access. There is generally a geoblock for these kind of things with other streaming sites. I doubt it will be different here, because otherwise those foreign channels/streaming sites wouldn’t pay 60% of the production costs. They want exclusive rights for their money in their territory.

Disinvited
March 9, 2016 3:01 pm

Mel,

As a matter of practicality, CBS can make it a very difficult thing to do. As a matter of legality, CBS will find it very difficult to extend U.S. laws to all areas outside its borders. So the legality of it in the U.S. won’t necessarily be that big a factor in those areas. So you might not face jail depending on your local laws but if CBS can figure out what you are doing, even if you’ve found a way to appear to subscribe in the U.S. while in fact being outside, you face them cutting the chord and that probably at the least convenient to you moment with no recourse to argue against it.

For the longest time (I’d have to check to see if it is still the case since their purchase by ATT.) it was (is?) not illegal for Canadians in Canada to decrypt and receive DirecTV’s encrypted satellite broadcasts for free.

Yanks
March 10, 2016 7:41 am

I thought CBS was working in the foreign market about this. What are they doing if not selling their product?

Disinvited
March 10, 2016 9:45 am

Yanks,

Outside the US, CBS is pretty much syndicating it, much as they have done other Trek series.

Which means many there are anticipating delays and dreaming of somehow avoiding that by subscribing directly to it outside of CBS’ desired parameters.

It’s an interesting strategy. One imagines that in trying to launch the thing, CBS isn’t going to waste a lot of resources policing subscriptions as long as paying subscriptions roll in. And one has to wonder that when the policing begins what Les would decide to do if he found that 60% of his paid monthly subscribers were actually outside the US borders?

On the other hand, if there’s a large attempt to pirate ALL ACCESS without paying, well then everyone suffers as CBS clamps down.

I Khan Believe it Ain\'t Butter
March 9, 2016 11:16 am

A new series sounds great.
But is there any actual movie news?

Or is Paramount laying low because of the huge stink bomb about to be unloaded for the 50th Anniversary?

Walt Kozlowski
March 9, 2016 1:06 pm

Yeah the lack of Beyond promotion with less then 5 months out is disturbing.When are they going to change the name of this site to “trekseries.com”?

Ahmed
March 9, 2016 1:15 pm

Some people are speculating that tonight we might see a new STB trailer attached to ’10 Cloverfield Lane’, a Paramount movie.

Merchant of Vulcan
March 9, 2016 2:47 pm

I’m wondering if it has to do with financial troubles at Paramount. I am beginning to wonder if there are more serious concerns about the film. If there were to be a trailer for Cloverfield I would think someone would break it on the internet first.

ziplock9000
March 9, 2016 1:15 pm

“Speaking to a crowd at the Deutsche Bank Media” Yet no mention about how anyone outside of the US will get access. Also if they still expect even hardcore trekkers to pay a monthly subscription to All Access just for one show, they will find out the hard way that the vast majority wont and will just pirate it.

TUP
March 10, 2016 8:31 am

I imagine they are still working on clearances.

Disinvited
March 10, 2016 10:07 am

ziplock9000,

Les made it clear at a teleconference, shortly after he made the Trek ALL ACCESS announcement, that CBS is syndicating this series outside of the US just as they have done all the previous Trek TV series.

Botany Bay
March 9, 2016 1:44 pm

Where do these people come from? Star Trek did well on nextflix because netflix already has a huge audience. Anybody who has a family member who watches netflix knows they binch watch tv series then move on to the next. Star Trek was simply another show to watch.

Limiting access to Star Trek in order to promote your own streaming services will kill it. Star Trek needs to be available everywhere so more people can see it. If you limit access then the only people you are going to get is the most hardcore trekkies. If you put it up on tv and all the most popular media sites you will expose it to the causal viewer and pick up a bigger audience which means more ad revenue and more sales in merchandise. T.V. executives are some of the dumbest people on this planet.

Prodigal Son
March 9, 2016 2:26 pm

I wouldn’t for a second bet against Moonvie’s team for not being financially smart on what they are doing.

Disinvited
March 9, 2016 3:32 pm

Pthug.rodigal Son,

Agreed. Les is no comedian, but does do a passable dees and dose thug. ;-)

THX-1138
March 9, 2016 2:16 pm

The broken record says:

It’s not All Access if everyone can’t get it.

Marja
March 9, 2016 7:46 pm

THX ;-)

Or should they call it “Access All (our crap, except the wonderful) Star Trek”

kmart
March 9, 2016 5:11 pm

Hey, I just noticed that Kurtzman is supposed to produce AND direct the MUMMY reboot, which comes out next summer. Wouldn’t he be spread a little thin overseeing TREK while doing all that?

Cygnus-X1
March 9, 2016 6:52 pm

I like the sound of that.

Leave Fuller & Meyer in charge of Trek.

Let Kurtzman go off and do his monster movie or whatever. Maybe the Mummy will battle Transformers. Better get advance tickets for that opening.

Prodigal Son
March 9, 2016 7:22 pm

LOL

Marja
March 9, 2016 7:47 pm

Cyg, I’m sure you’ll be first in line amirite?
;-)

Ahmed
March 10, 2016 10:10 am

@kmart,

In addition to the Mummy reboot, Kurtzman is producing three current TV shows, Fuller too is the showrunner of the upcoming ‘American Gods’ series.

Marja
March 9, 2016 7:53 pm

I think if I hear him say “Trek” and “family jewel” in the same sentence anymuch more, my head is going to explode.

Moonves disliked Trek for years, “did not want to air shows he didn’t understand”, and now he’s driving this “family jewel” thing into the ground.

So to speak.

Disinvited
March 9, 2016 8:24 pm

Marja,

Don’t forget, he’s regarded Paramount as the “crown jewel” that he was wrongfully denied for longer than that.

Prodigal Son
March 9, 2016 10:33 pm

He might get Paramount yet at some point…he’s the kind of guy who turns studios around.

Disinvited
March 10, 2016 9:20 am

Prodigal Son,

Not only that, he’s the kind of guy that plays interoffice hardball so that he can maneuver them into being ripe for the picking.

Prodigal Son
March 9, 2016 10:36 pm

In fairness to Moonvies, when he got Trek, the most recent “data points” he had to consider were Enterprise and Nemesis. That’s enough to turn anyone off to Trek.

Markm
March 9, 2016 8:58 pm

Moonves has been pretty good for CBS. He certainly isn’t stupid. Anyway, I love trek and will gladly pay a few bucks for it. I hardly watch anything on cable with the 10000 channels I get.

Would gladly pay for something good. Which I think he can deliver on.

Here is what is going to happen. All the people on her that won’t pay for it will hear us talking about it and sign up.

There was an argument 40 years ago when cable came out and people said they wouldn’t pay for something they can get later on regular tv. Guess what? :-)

Prodigal Son
March 9, 2016 10:38 pm

Yep. 90% of the crabby people here will buy it anyway.

Harley3k
March 10, 2016 8:31 am

No doubt!

Marja
March 11, 2016 1:12 pm

I’m thinking, Moonves is the same S.O. a dog who wants CBS to keep emphasizing Trump’s campaign in their coverage because the controversial candidate (the politest possible term I can use for Trump) attracts so many viewers, thus, ADVERTISING DOLLARS.

Now that’s money grubbing by god!

Disinvited
March 9, 2016 10:49 pm

If you think $5.99 is too much for Trek episode delivered to your home, IMAGINE paying $50 to see STAR TREK BEYOND from the comfort of your home entertainment system on the same day it premiers in the ticket theaters:

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/studios-exhibitors-consider-revolutionary-plan-for-day-and-date-movies-at-home-exclusive-1201725168

Harley3k
March 10, 2016 8:32 am

$50 would be a nice discount, when you add up the cost tickets, food, parking, etc. And I’d have better seating! Bring it on, I say.

Disinvited
March 10, 2016 10:00 am

Harley3k,

And there’s no way they can police how many attend your Trek viewing party. Although I wouldn’t put it past them if people are foolish enough to advertise.

I can see it now:

Need gas money. See BEYOND premier, at the ALL ACCESS Party. $5 covercharge at the door.

Ahmed
March 10, 2016 10:08 am

Perhaps you’ll be required to turn on your webcam so they can see how many people are watching it with you & charge you even more :)

TUP
March 11, 2016 3:07 pm

The idea of watching a film at home on release day doesn’t make a ton of sense yet. But eventually it will. Personally, even if the price was exactly the same (or cheaper) to watch at home, I’d go to the theatre for most films I really want to see. Its the experience.

I have a 52″ TV and surround sound. So probably middle of the road now a days. But down the road when more people have 100″ 4K screens and home theatres, this could be viable

dswynne
March 10, 2016 10:09 pm

I’m sure they’d factor in viewing parties in the calculus. I know that bootlegs seem to spring up on the same day…

Marja
March 11, 2016 1:14 pm

That’d be a nerd-“gas money” all right ; -)

Prodigal Son
March 10, 2016 8:54 pm

If I can get it in 1080P quality, then I might be interested.

Ahmed
March 10, 2016 10:04 am

$50 for a 2D movie on my TV, no thanks. I don’t even pay that much for IMAX.

jonboc
March 11, 2016 6:15 am

I wouldn’t pay it for just myself, but an outing with a family of 4, with the obligatory popcorn and drinks will cost you well over $50, even at matinee ticket prices…so in that instance, I can see dropping $50. With a decent home entertainment system, a large flat screen or projector, some cherry coke and jeno’s pizza rolls….you can have the makings of a pretty good evening.

Keachick
March 14, 2016 2:11 pm

If I were to take a family of four – two adults and two children and each had an icecream, we would be lucky if we saw change from NZ$80.

Why Watch
March 10, 2016 10:17 am

I’m not about to subscribe to CBS All Access for one show. I watch a couple of other CBS shows, but if I miss them I don’t online to watch them. So no new Star Trek for me. My life won’t be ruined if I miss it.

dswynne
March 10, 2016 10:07 pm

Awwww, poor thing. I suppose you can’t wait until a) the inevitable DVD/Blue Ray release that you can rent or buy, or, b) when the first season is completed, subscribe for a month, binge watch, and then cancel. Oh, well…

JLPDayton72
March 11, 2016 3:31 am

Delusional. It needs to be on network TV. Bump one of the completely unoriginal NCIS shows in favor of Star Trek. But then again, when did television execs ever know what they were doing?

Brian
March 11, 2016 8:50 am

Whith the show not coming out until 2017, do we know how many episodes the 1st season will have I am really hoping it has the normal 27 episode per season of past Star Trek.Having over a year to plan and right i think they have more theb enough time to write 27 good episodes but I am not a writter so I may be wrong. I know the new show is not even out yet nut what happens if they want ro make movies with the new cast after the show hopefully does a 7 year run.

kmart
March 11, 2016 8:22 pm

I’d be happy with eight out of a dozen really good shows, rather than more than doubling that order and winding up with a lot of loser filler eps. Time for Trek to embrace the format of quality, and that is usually 10-12 eps per season (or 4-8 in England.)

Brian
March 13, 2016 9:10 am

I guess I wil be happy with filler Star Trek episodes just due to the fact that it will be Star Trek on tv. I mean 2-3 episodes in the Holodeck could be really cool. I think I am just so ready for Trek to be back on tv i will take every episode they give us filler or not.

Ahmed
March 11, 2016 12:01 pm

The UN lady from ‘The Expanse’ joins ‘Star Trek Beyond’, and Deadline confirms what ‘clark billy’ said on March 8 about reshoots.

====================

Shohreh Aghdashloo Has Boarded ‘Star Trek Beyond’

Oscar nominated and Emmy winning actress Shohreh Aghdashloo (House Of Sand And Fog, House Of Saddam) has joined the third installment in the Star Trek series, Star Trek Beyond,

The film, which we hear is undergoing some reshoots next week with Aghdashloo playing the role of the High Command of the Federation, is being directed by Justin Lin. J.J. Abrams is producing. However, the film is still on track to be released this summer, on July 22, from Paramount.

http://deadline.com/2016/03/shohreh-aghdashloo-star-trek-beyond-paramount-1201718696/

Disinvited
March 11, 2016 1:15 pm

Ahmed,

Doesn’t “reshoot” and “join” imply that somebody else had the role prior and their performance was found wanting?

Any idea who was “Stoltzed”?

Ahmed
March 11, 2016 1:54 pm

@Disinvited,

No idea if that’s the case here, but I guess we will find out sometime soon.

kmart
March 11, 2016 4:45 pm

Could just be that this was always planned to be done later, like the San Fran, Klingon and ep9 scenes in TMP, and they’re doing reshoots at the same time.

Harley3k
March 13, 2016 12:01 pm

@kmart, that’s my thinking (hoping) as well. She’s been busy with Expanse so timing for her scenes may not have been in line with the primary shooting schedule.

Marja
March 11, 2016 1:19 pm

Great! She was fantastic in “The House of Sand and Fog.”

A great tragic movie starring Ben Kingsley, by the way, based on an excellent novel.

Ahmed
March 11, 2016 1:53 pm

She’s a great actress. I watched her first in ’24’ & then in ‘House Of Saddam’, and in many other TV shows.

boborci
March 11, 2016 2:30 pm

Wrote and produced a pilot with Shohreh years back that never made it to air, but she was a blast to work with. Very funny and irreverant woman

Ahmed
March 11, 2016 2:49 pm

@boborci,

I guess we will never get a chance to see it. It’s too bad that studios rarely, if ever release unaired TV pilots.

dmduncan
March 11, 2016 11:23 pm

So what happens to these made but unaired projects? Do they just sit in a vault somewhere forever? Didn’t you and Alex also make Locke and Key? No way for people to ever see these things?

Trek Tech
March 11, 2016 1:11 pm

The fact that Trek Beyond has just announced (very late) reshoots tells me CBS may want to just kick dirt on the JJVerse once and for all and get Trek back on TV.

Disinvited
March 12, 2016 7:14 am

Cygnus-X1,

If Les admits to this for this film, doesn’t it stand to reason that the agreement’s been in place for the previous two, and wasn’t that also claimed/predicted by that para whose it person?

Cygnus-X1
March 14, 2016 6:29 pm

Yeah, Paramobius basically was a year early with his prediction. The announcement happened at the same time that he said, but a year later—February 2016 instead of February 2015.

The issue of seeking (and agreeing) “to avoid confusion” suggests that CBS doesn’t want Paramount doing another Trek movie after CBS has begun its new Trek TV series.

Jonboc
March 12, 2016 8:43 am

Legitimate complaints aside, the value is there…I mean, it’s $5.95. 6 bucks For hundreds of hours of programming that I can watch (including brand new Trek) as much as I want, 24-7, all month long.
Or….I can spend a couple more bucks for a chili-cheese coney-combo at sonic, which will feed me for one meal for one day, and will provide about 15 minutes of enjoyment and, afterwards, hours of indigestion. Like it or not, for what you’re getting… pound for pound…$5.95 for CBS All Access is a good value.

March 12, 2016 12:58 pm

When did this deal occur? The CBS/Paramount Trek split isn’t exactly new. A longstanding agreement that any new show must be separated from any new movie by 6 months? Or some stipulation that they had to come to some sort of terms before any new show?

March 14, 2016 8:49 am

Please sign the petition against the new Star Trek being limited to this new pay only option!

https://www.change.org/p/leslie-moonves-cbs-com-save-the-new-star-trek-series?recruiter=47901719&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink

Deb
March 19, 2016 10:40 am
Dear Mr. Moonves, You are smart enough to recognize Star Trek as a Jewel, yet, yet, you and Paramount are afraid of a successful fan movie. Serious, this is FREE advertising that Lucas embraced with Star Wars. Fan-based work helps help to fill in the story/timeline gaps that no entity can hope to to completely fill in, for the story is ever evolving forward. If it is that good – Buy it! Pay them and give them royalties. Or better yet, put up both the old and new timelines for the two parallel Star Trek Universes and plug in both industry made and fan made works fit in. Add in the books for completeness. Even make it a group effort, monitored by CBS, but both CBS/Paramount and Fans collaborate. Collaboration is the direction that media is heading. Embracing it will serve you. The big picture looking up the road ahead? Like cassette tapes, like CDs and DVDs, Fan-based movies/shows are the future. You now have a wealth of stories leaving copyright as fair game, plus those still copyrighted stories that have no hope of ever being made into visual media. (The Lensmen Series for one). Technology has made this ever so possible. Look over the Elfquest Site. Elfquest, long ignored by larger media, has a fan-made series. And the Pinis sanctioned them. (Has anyone approached A Distant Soil Creator, Colleen Doran?) If you want to control it, give the fans guidance – where the story is going. If you don’t… Read more »
Jackson Roykirk
March 24, 2016 6:54 pm

“… you’ll really get the 12 to 15 or 18 channels that you care about. And not get the karate channel for 25 cents a month. That doesn’t make sense anymore.”

Wow. Les “gets it.”

“Someone’s going to figure out how to do this and how to give people what they want to watch, and it’s not for $100 a month. …”

Apple, via Apple TV.

wpDiscuz