[JByb04]

I also wonder what will happen when people realise that the shows that they want to see across the different services, Netflix, Amazon Prime, Crave, etc and Disney and Apple coming soon, are going to cost a fortune to maintain subscriptions?

This is where cord cutting no longer saves money. When maintaining all of these subscriptions just to watch one show adds up to one paying as much as they would for cable. It's also where shows like Discovery may not get new viewers because it would require another subscription to watch.

I'm cancelling my All Access after Thursday. I have no reason to keep it active. I'm not going to rewatch S2 & S1 over and over again. I can watch TNG on Netflix without Commercials or paying extra to watch without them.

The reason they want a Trek Series year round on AA is to prevent people from doing what I just stated I'm going to do. Especially with a lack of Merchandising Revenue coming in.

[Strathkin]

I was wondering when we might see a thread added for the New Picard Series:
https://ca.startrek.com/news/alison-...ar-trek-series

[Strathkin]

You're right about that. I fee l that the networks are run by dinosaurs who want to have their cake and eat it. "Netflix is earning tonnes of cash, let's make our own version of the platform!" instead of, "Let's pitch this to Netflix and maybe they'll cover the costs of production. We'll have global distribution on their bandwidth, including the US and Canada." Alas we know which way they went.

I also wonder what will happen when people realise that the shows that they want to see across the different services, Netflix, Amazon Prime, Crave, etc and Disney and Apple coming soon, are going to cost a fortune to maintain subscriptions?

Well Netflix did in fact pay for the vast majority of the Season One development as reported by several sites.

"The deal for Netflix to carry Star Trek: Discovery in overseas markets helped subsidize the sizable cost of making the series at little to no loss for CBS since CBS All Access is still not available in overseas markets. CBS All Access does have plans to expand into international markets in the near future."

https://comicbook.com/startrek/2018/...overy-netflix/

[LogicalLeopard]

I'd imagine an issue with TV in the US is the sheer size of the place; it's hard to get a signal from one end to the other without a massive network of transmitters. So cable makes more sense I guess as the poles are already there for phone lines.

In the UK we're such a small country size wise it's never an issue of not being able to get coverage (unless you're really remote, or if it's a new service that's not in your area like superfast broadband).
We also have to pay for a TV licence which is £155 a year I think; you can't watch TV without one (legally at least!). It gives you basic channels beamed in via aerial. There's also Freeview which is a tonne of digital channels using the same network, and and alternative version with the same content called Freesat using satellites. You can even get FreesatHD which gives HD channels free too.
That's a lot of TV to look at before even paying for anything extra outside of the legal minimum.

But if you want the new stuff and mainstream things like Discovery, GoT, Westworld...well then you need to fork out more to get Netflix, Amazon Prime. Sky (though you can get a lot of this cheaper via NowTV).

It's not too bad here right now. I mean Netflix has a fair;y decent volume of shows and movies. Amazon Prime is included with their sub for next day free delivery, so it's worth it for that imo.
And NowTV can be dropped in/out of on a monthly basis as there's no fixed sub to it.
But tbh if the number of streaming services gets any more I can see people just ignoring them. Too much extra cost for a minimal return.

I only heard about the British TV licenses within maybe the last couple years, and that struck me as being so strange. We've always gotten our three basic broadcast channels, ABC, NBC, and CBS free, along with PBS, which is a Public Broadcasting Station that is given government money and also has regular public fundraising drives. But I get it. And I do enjoy a lot of the television programming from the UK. We see some things here free on PBS's "Masterpiece" which shows things like Poldark, Call the Midwife, a lot of detective shows and mystery shoes, etc.

[Sul-Matuul]

I only heard about the British TV licenses within maybe the last couple years, and that struck me as being so strange. We've always gotten our three basic broadcast channels, ABC, NBC, and CBS free, along with PBS, which is a Public Broadcasting Station that is given government money and also has regular public fundraising drives. But I get it. And I do enjoy a lot of the television programming from the UK. We see some things here free on PBS's "Masterpiece" which shows things like Poldark, Call the Midwife, a lot of detective shows and mystery shoes, etc.

Well the one beauty of the TV licencing is that several of the channels (i.e. the BBC whom is funds) are totally commercial free. So you don't have programs being made to fill advertisers pockets etc. That lets them be a bit less crappy when it comes to quality of programs. Sure they still make commercial stuff to sell and stuff aimed at the masses, but they also do a lot of high-brow stuff too. I mean their natural history stuff is pretty much globally renowned as the top end for quality.

[WelshAvenger]

I only heard about the British TV licenses within maybe the last couple years, and that struck me as being so strange.

For those not familiar with how it works in the UK. The UK TV license is nothing more than state imposed fee where the proceeds go directly to the BBC and no other broadcaster. The BBC is the only broadcaster in the UK that does not have commercials, hence the need for the license fee. It's pretty draconian when you can't watch a single live channel in the UK without having to pay the BBC, whether or not you watch their channels. They even have teams of detectors who go around scanning your house to see if you are watching live TV without a license.

The BBC argue that they couldn't make content at the current quality if they had to rely on advertising. There used to be some merit to that argument before Netflix and HBO started to produce amazing shows with modest budgets. The fact that every other channel in the UK seems to be able to produce shows doesn't enter into the head of a BBC exec. It becomes a political issue every time the renewal of the BBC charter comes around (every fifteen years or so) and the government doesn't have the stones to tell the BBC to adapt or die. It's a very archaic institution that has been involved in some seriously dodgy goings on over the years (just look at the Jimmy Saville gong show, the backlash against pirate radio stations, forcing bands to mime to their own music on Top Of The Pops etc etc) and they're not answerable to anyone but the BBC Board of Directors and Government.

When I called to cancel my TV license, I was met with suspicion even after declaring that I was only watching streaming services and no live tv broadcasts. I received calls from them every month where they would reiterate that it was an offence to watch live tv without a license. After the third call I told them to stop calling me or take their best shot at proving I was doing anything wrong. They didn't call after that.

Sorry for the rant but it really gets on my nerves how arrogant the BBC are.

[Sul-Matuul]

Actually Channel 4 get's a small part of the licence too and they are a commercial channel run by ITN.

But i'd rather pay a yearly price for the licence and get some great TV commercial free than put up with the constant ad breaks and lowest common denominator drivel a lot of the commercial channels pump out.
Sure they make some good stuff, but there is a marked difference in quality for a lot of stuff.
At the end of the day the BBC is funded by the public as a whole, not a bunch of shareholders and advertising executives.

[WelshAvenger]

True enough Sul, but have you noticed that they've started to produce more of the low-brow stuff over the last few years? I mean it's not exactly as if they need to take any notice of ratings as their income is guaranteed regardless of quality.

I will hand it to them that they make most excellent period dramas and natural history programming and the Open University was a brilliant idea back in the day to help students.

I did see the other day that Attenborough jumped to a Netflix show! This is surely a sign of the end times.

[LogicalLeopard]

For those not familiar with how it works in the UK. The UK TV license is nothing more than state imposed fee where the proceeds go directly to the BBC and no other broadcaster. The BBC is the only broadcaster in the UK that does not have commercials, hence the need for the license fee. It's pretty draconian when you can't watch a single live channel in the UK without having to pay the BBC, whether or not you watch their channels. They even have teams of detectors who go around scanning your house to see if you are watching live TV without a license.

The BBC argue that they couldn't make content at the current quality if they had to rely on advertising. There used to be some merit to that argument before Netflix and HBO started to produce amazing shows with modest budgets. The fact that every other channel in the UK seems to be able to produce shows doesn't enter into the head of a BBC exec. It becomes a political issue every time the renewal of the BBC charter comes around (every fifteen years or so) and the government doesn't have the stones to tell the BBC to adapt or die. It's a very archaic institution that has been involved in some seriously dodgy goings on over the years (just look at the Jimmy Saville gong show, the backlash against pirate radio stations, forcing bands to mime to their own music on Top Of The Pops etc etc) and they're not answerable to anyone but the BBC Board of Directors and Government.

When I called to cancel my TV license, I was met with suspicion even after declaring that I was only watching streaming services and no live tv broadcasts. I received calls from them every month where they would reiterate that it was an offence to watch live tv without a license. After the third call I told them to stop calling me or take their best shot at proving I was doing anything wrong. They didn't call after that.

Sorry for the rant but it really gets on my nerves how arrogant the BBC are.

Geez, I hadn't heard all that! That's horrible. We thought PBS fundraising drives were bad...

[Deltron]

I thought time travel was first used in TOS "Naked Time"