I have noticed that marketing seems to be hitting the Starfleet International chapters hard. the last few months has seen promotion material aimed at different chapters and Cryptic is suppose to have a big presence at the 2010 convention this July. Not a bad thing since a ton of Trekkers already play.
Not noticed this. I was not aware that CBS had any products to push.
Interesting side note. CBS now has all of Paramounts properties as well as various TV properties. (Just recently discovered this. Apparently it all happened in 2006)
For example STO is handled under CBS Interactive division.
Interesting side note. CBS now has all of Paramounts properties as well as various TV properties. (Just recently discovered this. Apparently it all happened in 2006)
For example STO is handled under CBS Interactive division.
How was Paramount able to make the latest ST movie if they no longer had the rights?
How was Paramount able to make the latest ST movie if they no longer had the rights?
National Amusements owns controlling voting interest in CBS and Viacom so even thought the companies split they're still controlled by Sumner Redstone.
Interesting side note. CBS now has all of Paramounts properties as well as various TV properties. (Just recently discovered this. Apparently it all happened in 2006)
For example STO is handled under CBS Interactive division.
CBS TV got the TV rights when Paramopunt TV was dissolved and Viacom split up. The Film rights remain with Paramount Pictures.
Also I'm pretty sure that the Star Trek Online license was granted and is handled by the subsidiary CBS Consumer Products. ( they handle all CBS licensing )
How was Paramount able to make the latest ST movie if they no longer had the rights?
Pulled this from the Wiki for ya. Explains it better than I could.
# 2006: On January 17, CBS Corporation CEO Les Moonves announced that Paramount Television would be renamed CBS Paramount Television as of that day, after merging with CBS Productions, with both the CBS 'eyemark' and Paramount's mountain united in the new logo, and the network division becoming CBS Paramount Network Television.[1]
# 2006: CBS Corp. merged its TV distribution armsKing World, CBS Paramount International Television and CBS Paramount Domestic Televisionto form CBS Television Distribution (CTD).
# 2009: May 15, CBS quietly drops the Paramount name after a three and a half year loan of its use from now sister company Viacom forming CBS Television Studios.[2]
CBS TV got the TV rights when Paramopunt TV was dissolved and Viacom split up. The Film rights remain with Paramount Pictures.
Also I'm pretty sure that the Star Trek Online license was granted and is handled by the subsidiary CBS Consumer Products. ( they handle all CBS licensing )
Ya, that sub is CBS Interactive from what I have been able to dig up.
How was Paramount able to make the latest ST movie if they no longer had the rights?
Paramount Pictures still own all movie rights. Paramount TV was a separate company owned by Viacom and they had the TV rights. Now they no longer exist the rights for the TV shows belong to CBS TV.
Ya, that sub is CBS Interactive from what I have been able to dig up.
I'm saying that the company is called CBS Consumer Products ( can't link them, their website has not worked in months for me )
CBS Consumer Products, a unit of the CBS Corporation, manages the worldwide licensing, merchandising, and video activities for a diverse slate of properties owned or controlled by the CBS Corporation, including CBS Television Studios and CBS Television Distribution
I wouldn't be surprised if CBS/Paramount ramp up marketing the Star Trek brand to Europe over the next couple of years. The 2009 Star Trek movie underperformed in many overseas markets, and several people involved have stated that they intend to increase those numbers for the sequel.
I wouldn't be surprised if CBS/Paramount ramp up marketing the Star Trek brand to Europe over the next couple of years. The 2009 Star Trek movie underperformed in many overseas markets, and several people involved have stated that they intend to increase those numbers for the sequel.
hat movie belongs to Paramount pictures and has nothing to do with CBS
hat movie belongs to Paramount pictures and has nothing to do with CBS
Both CBS and Paramount share a symbiotic relationship in profiting from the Star Trek brand. As CBS has both the TV episodes (the bulk of the franchise) and the largest product marketing piece, it makes perfect sense they would lead the strategy.
Both CBS and Paramount share a symbiotic relationship in profiting from the Star Trek brand. As CBS has both the TV episodes (the bulk of the franchise) and the largest product marketing piece, it makes perfect sense they would lead the strategy.
But again. The Movie is Paramount's. A completely different company. What do CBS have to gain from advertising the Star Trek brand? They don't have any new product to push.
But again. The Movie is Paramount's. A completely different company. What do CBS have to gain from advertising the Star Trek brand? They don't have any new product to push.
The two companies feed off of each other's use of the Star Trek brand. For example, the 2009 movie undoubtedly sparked increased sales of DVD's of the series. A constant presence of the TV episodes on TV, and products (such as STO) keeps brand awareness fresh in between movies, thereby fostering an audience for the next flick.
But again. The Movie is Paramount's. A completely different company. What do CBS have to gain from advertising the Star Trek brand? They don't have any new product to push.
That said, people may be motivated to try STO after seeing a new ST movie they like(even if they dont wind up sticking around )
But again. The Movie is Paramount's. A completely different company. What do CBS have to gain from advertising the Star Trek brand? They don't have any new product to push.
Again, National Amusements controls both CBS and Paramount so there's huge synergy involved between the two corporations. An interest in the movies helps increase an interest in the older series, and vice-versa. There's money to be made from syndication and money to be made in movie theaters, all targeting the sci-fi fans and all based off the same IP.
Again, National Amusements controls both CBS and Paramount so there's huge synergy involved between the two corporations. An interest in the movies helps increase an interest in the older series, and vice-versa. There's money to be made from syndication and money to be made in movie theaters, all targeting the sci-fi fans and all based off the same IP.
well that's
simply because CBS and Viacom ( which includes Paramount )( are the two halves of the old Viacom before the split. National Amusements were and remain the largest shareholder and have voting control. They are not 'owners' per se.
simply because CBS and Viacom ( which includes Paramount )( are the two halves of the old Viacom before the split. National Amusements were and remain the largest shareholder and have voting control. They are not 'owners' per se.
They have voting control. You don't need to own a company out-right to control its destiny or decisions. If those in control want their companies to have synergy they have synergy. There doesn't need to be any other reason then that. Star Trek synergy between CBS and Paramount benefits NA. That's all that matters.
simply because CBS and Viacom ( which includes Paramount )( are the two halves of the old Viacom before the split. National Amusements were and remain the largest shareholder and have voting control. They are not 'owners' per se.
They have voting control. You don't need to own a company out-right to control its destiny or decisions. If those in control want their companies to have synergy they have synergy. There doesn't need to be any other reason then that. Star Trek synergy between CBS and Paramount benefits NA. That's all that matters.
It may benefit NA but it does not matter what companies an investor has control of. If they operate in the same area then they operate in competition. They have to operate in competition. They are a publicly traded company and have obligations to the shareholders no matter who they may be.
The whole reason for the split was because the old company was failing on the stock market.
I'm not explaining it actually. I'm fully aware I am wasting my time.
BBC America is pushing Star Trek TNG, and Sci Fi is running the add every fifteen damn minutes, etc...
BBCAM just got the rights to show old ST TNG... so they are promoting it like crazy. Since I watch a ton of BBCAM, I notice it is now like every other commercial that they play it.
But again. The Movie is Paramount's. A completely different company. What do CBS have to gain from advertising the Star Trek brand? They don't have any new product to push.
Well as some of the actors from the new JJ Star Trek movie also do TV... CBS may intend to do a series with them after the second movie... JJ does like to do TV and Lost is ending this season...
Comments
Don't watch live TV or live radio so I don't know about those mediums. Haven't seen much ads net wise either. (Probably just me though.)
Where have you noticed this?
Interesting side note. CBS now has all of Paramounts properties as well as various TV properties. (Just recently discovered this. Apparently it all happened in 2006)
For example STO is handled under CBS Interactive division.
How was Paramount able to make the latest ST movie if they no longer had the rights?
CBS TV got the TV rights when Paramopunt TV was dissolved and Viacom split up. The Film rights remain with Paramount Pictures.
Also I'm pretty sure that the Star Trek Online license was granted and is handled by the subsidiary CBS Consumer Products. ( they handle all CBS licensing )
Pulled this from the Wiki for ya. Explains it better than I could.
# 2006: On January 17, CBS Corporation CEO Les Moonves announced that Paramount Television would be renamed CBS Paramount Television as of that day, after merging with CBS Productions, with both the CBS 'eyemark' and Paramount's mountain united in the new logo, and the network division becoming CBS Paramount Network Television.[1]
# 2006: CBS Corp. merged its TV distribution armsKing World, CBS Paramount International Television and CBS Paramount Domestic Televisionto form CBS Television Distribution (CTD).
# 2009: May 15, CBS quietly drops the Paramount name after a three and a half year loan of its use from now sister company Viacom forming CBS Television Studios.[2]
Ya, that sub is CBS Interactive from what I have been able to dig up.
Paramount Pictures still own all movie rights. Paramount TV was a separate company owned by Viacom and they had the TV rights. Now they no longer exist the rights for the TV shows belong to CBS TV.
I'm saying that the company is called CBS Consumer Products ( can't link them, their website has not worked in months for me )
Not working for me either. Had to go through the corporate site.
Both CBS and Paramount share a symbiotic relationship in profiting from the Star Trek brand. As CBS has both the TV episodes (the bulk of the franchise) and the largest product marketing piece, it makes perfect sense they would lead the strategy.
But again. The Movie is Paramount's. A completely different company. What do CBS have to gain from advertising the Star Trek brand? They don't have any new product to push.
The two companies feed off of each other's use of the Star Trek brand. For example, the 2009 movie undoubtedly sparked increased sales of DVD's of the series. A constant presence of the TV episodes on TV, and products (such as STO) keeps brand awareness fresh in between movies, thereby fostering an audience for the next flick.
That said, people may be motivated to try STO after seeing a new ST movie they like(even if they dont wind up sticking around
well that's
simply because CBS and Viacom ( which includes Paramount )( are the two halves of the old Viacom before the split. National Amusements were and remain the largest shareholder and have voting control. They are not 'owners' per se.
You're wrong, wrong, wrong... *throws temper tantrum
WRONG WRONG WRONG... *throws hissy fit.
(Actually you really are not wrong, I just wanted to be cantankerous. So if you don't understand what I am saying... I AM KIDDING
It may benefit NA but it does not matter what companies an investor has control of. If they operate in the same area then they operate in competition. They have to operate in competition. They are a publicly traded company and have obligations to the shareholders no matter who they may be.
The whole reason for the split was because the old company was failing on the stock market.
I'm not explaining it actually. I'm fully aware I am wasting my time.
Well as some of the actors from the new JJ Star Trek movie also do TV... CBS may intend to do a series with them after the second movie... JJ does like to do TV and Lost is ending this season...