Stargate : Command - ideas, suggestions, problems and feedbacks

[Falcon Horus]

If they give us permission, which I think is the case with cosplay and general fan-art, then they can't really do anything about it (like claiming it or something) as long as it's not sold or otherwise profited from. Other than that, I don't know.

I'm familiar with the ins-and-outs of cosplay, and replicas so no dark corners there. Disney, unfortunately, is particularly fierce about protecting their copyright material. Firsthand experience with that -- not from the opposite side I might add.
They get upset when princess cosplays are too screenaccurate.

If MGM wants more fan interaction, wouldn't that mean that they might come down on us after all.

Not that it would stop me from printing a Zat or anything. I know a girl who did some really cool Wraith handguns a few years back. PH, you hear me!

[Xaeden]

Considering MGM has an online platform of their own, I doubt they are offering it up to anyone right now which is quite honestly very limiting their audience. Unlike CBS-All-access who put Star Trek Discovery on Netflix for all to see and boy am I glad they did (looking forward to season 2).

I don't. Their online platform is small potatoes. A new show that airs on a network or someone else's digital platform is potentially worth hundreds of millions of dollars if successful. MGM won't have to pay the full production budget (typically whoever they ink a deal with pays the lion's share, but even if they get into a 2/3rds partnership like the one they had with the Sci fi channel, that's still a huge upfront burden off of them), and then they get to syndicate the show without having to share any money with whomever airs it. Plus, there's merchandise.

This would also elevate their own digital platform as they could direct fans of a concurrently running TV program to their All Access platform to catch-up on episodes from the others shows, new content if they want to keep that up, and if they ever get a true digital service off the ground that could fund original series content as there's nothing to stop them from putting up a fifth show themselves (their deal with the Sci fi channel, for example, blocked them from shopping Sg-1 to another network, not from shopping a whole new spin-off).

What you're saying is that MGM does not want or understand that a deal with a third-party that leads to a successful series would cause their profits to massively balloon and are instead trying to limit Stargate to a service that is only known to a subset of existing fans of a franchise that went cold in 2011.

No third-party digital service. iTunes already has the rights to MGM's library.
Google Play Store and Microsoft Store, and the Playstation Store were also among the digital download services worldwide.

Huh? Those are third-parties.

Allow me to burst your price-bubble here: Stargate Origins: Catherine is available as digital download for the same price as what a premium access membership costs on Stargate Commend. We literally get one film for the same price as all-access members get all the series and films, all the dial home interviews, all the behind-the-scenes-stuff and all the episodes, including a free copy of the film.

I'm aware. However, do keep in mind that MGM does not get $20 from digital downloads of the movie in those territories. Part of the reason for the high cost is because they have to split profits with those third-party distributors. All Access costs less because they're distributing it themselves.

So no, we didn't get charged less. We get charged the same, for less.

I never said you get charged less for Origins. I said that if they made their service available in territories where they were currently unable to put Sg-1, Atlantis, and SGU up due to exclusive syndication deals, they would likely charge less for what remains (Origins and the interviews). People, not always, but generally understand (or will understand if explained to them) that content available through third-party distribution deals are going to cost more. Nobody is going to understand MGM charging more for less on their own service.

Ask TopFan where they are hosting their different templates, because they are the owners of the template and the people behind the website scriptings.

I don't know what the significance of this is. Could you elaborate as to why you are bringing this up?

Like nivao mentioned, you need an account to watch the free episodes or to interact on the message feed. The episodes are still available because just recently someone watched them and wanted to know how to watch the rest.

Thank you to you and Nivao for clarifying that. Again, I'm not interested in subscribing to MGM's service or watching only part of Origins, so I do need help with some specifics from time to time and try to make that clear. My analysis is based purely off of following industry news about how studio and other digital platform business models have worked. Upon request I can link to articles backing up specific claims, such as the reasons for how and why Netflix and CBS All Access also similarly took time to expand into all markets.

[Falcon Horus]

I don't. Their online platform is small potatoes. A new show that airs on a network or someone else's digital platform is potentially worth hundreds of millions of dollars if successful. MGM won't have to pay the full production budget (typically whoever they ink a deal with pays the lion's share, but even if they get into a 2/3rds partnership like the one they had with the Sci fi channel, that's still a huge upfront burden off of them), and then they get to syndicate the show without having to share any money with whomever airs it. Plus, there's merchandise.

Basically how they co-op The Handmaiden's Tale with Hulu.

This would also elevate their own digital platform as they could direct fans of a concurrently running TV program to their All Access platform to catch-up on episodes from the others shows, new content if they want to keep that up, and if they ever get a true digital service off the ground that could fund original series content as there's nothing to stop them from putting up a fifth show themselves (their deal with the Sci fi channel, for example, blocked them from shopping Sg-1 to another network, not from shopping a whole new spin-off).

I think they have full ownership of Epix, which is a digital channel already populated with original MGm programming, and more to come.

You think they'll be as smart as CBS who basically put Discovery on their digital channel to promote it, and their entire library in one go (although, that already existed on their digital platform).

What you're saying is that MGM does not want or understand that a deal with a third-party that leads to a successful series would cause their profits to massively balloon and are instead trying to limit Stargate to a service that is only known to a subset of existing fans of a franchise that went cold in 2011.

Understand -- no, they are doing exactly that with The Handmaid's Tale so I'm sure there's at least one smarty pants running around in that company.

Perhaps it's the nature of stargate as a "scifi" show that holds them back on investing, or holds other production companies back on supporting the costs.

Vanishing Angle was the production, i.e. money, company behind Stargate Origins. MGM is listed as distribution company, i.e. not the money.

Huh? Those are third-parties.

Nope, they are second parties...

Sorry, misunderstood.

All Access costs less because they're distributing it themselves.

The full price of All-access is 20$ through the website, and 19,99$ through the app.

I imagine, they get a little more from that, than they do the digital downloads worldwide (which in my neck of the woods stood at 16,99 €).

I found a website that helps independant filmmakers put their stuff on iTunes, and they detail the split. While I'm sure MGM and iTunes have a specified contract, it does give you some idea about the split cost:

70/30 for Digital Downloads
You keep 70% of the retail price of your film for all Electronic Sell Through (EST) sales on iTunes. 30% of the retail price is retained by iTunes. For example, if your film was priced at $9.99 for purchase, you would early $7.00 for each sale on iTunes.

60/40 for VOD Rentals
For VOD rentals on iTunes, you keep 60% of the rental price paid by customers. 40% of the rental price is retained by iTunes. If your film rental was priced at $4.99, you would earn $3.00 for each rental on iTunes.

I never said you get charged less for Origins. I said that if they made their service available in territories where they were currently unable to put Sg-1, Atlantis, and SGU up due to exclusive syndication deals, they would likely charge less for what remains (Origins and the interviews). People, not always, but generally understand (or will understand if explained to them) that content available through third-party distribution deals are going to cost more. Nobody is going to understand MGM charging more for less on their own service.

And I was saying that putting the "retail" price at the same level as what all-access members pay for everything, we still get less for the same price. One film as opposed to all the series and the extra stuff.

I would gladly pay, say 15$, for all of it, minus the series and the films (excl. Origins) on Command. But I'm not paying 15$ of all that gets me is a lousy digital download without extras. That's even too expensive for a DVD (for me).

I don't know what the significance of this is. Could you elaborate as to why you are bringing this up?

Had to go back and check what the topic was but you spoke of site maintenance, and my reply was about the owners of the template and the manner in which Stargate Command exists as a website. TopFan is the company behind the template upon which the site and app are build. They deliver everything from server space to datamining, to maintenance and site registry.



Thank you to you and Nivao for clarifying that. Again, I'm not interested in subscribing to MGM's service or watching only part of Origins, so I do need help with some specifics from time to time and try to make that clear. My analysis is based purely off of following industry news about how studio and other digital platform business models have worked. Upon request I can link to articles backing up specific claims, such as the reasons for how and why Netflix and CBS All Access also similarly took time to expand into all markets.[/QUOTE]

[Xaeden]

I think they have full ownership of Epix, which is a digital channel already populated with original MGm programming, and more to come.

You think they'll be as smart as CBS who basically put Discovery on their digital channel to promote it, and their entire library in one go (although, that already existed on their digital platform).

The difference is that Discovery was made possible because of a financing deal with Netflix in exchange for the international airing rights. The show costs about $8 million per episode, of which Netflix pays $6 million. CBS would not have been able to justify financing such a high cost program itself for its fledgling digital service. Similarly, MGM can't justify a long form, big budget science fiction program on a cable network that has only recently started building original programing if they want to be able to get a solid return on their investment.

I'm not sure how far away Epix is from being able to do that with Stargate. Their push into original dramas will get an extra boost next year with the release of a trio of buzz worthy shows that include a couple of named actors. Their budgets have not been revealed, yet, however. They also have thus far put out Berlin Station, Get Shorty, and Graves, but I can't find budget information for them. Also problematic is that they are creating a certain tone with these shows that means their audiences are not necessarily inclined to be attracted to a Stargate show. Next year's release of Pennyworth looks to be their first real effort at diversifying their lineup, but it's a slight nudge as despite it's comic book origin, it doesn't look like it will be as fantastical as "Gotham" was. It could surprise, though. We'll see.

Btw, not to rehash too much of what I said when we talked months ago, but another reason Discovery worked for CBS (besides it being a better known franchise) was because they had a huge platform to advertise it on. That decision to air the first episode in prime time on CBS and then point people to All Access attracted a lot more people to it than the standard news articles and promos that MGM would have to rely on.

Understand -- no, they are doing exactly that with The Handmaid's Tale so I'm sure there's at least one smarty pants running around in that company.

Perhaps it's the nature of stargate as a "scifi" show that holds them back on investing, or holds other production companies back on supporting the costs.

Yes, but Hulu was willing to license "The Handmaiden's Tale." That doesn't mean there is anyone willing to license Stargate right now.

Vanishing Angle was the production, i.e. money, company behind Stargate Origins. MGM is listed as distribution company, i.e. not the money.

Do you have a source for this? Is that how the show credits are setup? The articles I read listed MGM as co-producing the series, meaning they formed a partnership with a smaller studio to split financing costs, which is a not uncommon practice.

Nope, they are second parties...

Sorry, misunderstood.

No worries. Yeah, MGM is the first party as the one looking to sell a product. The consumer is the second party. The third party is an outside business that the first party tries to sell their product through and the second party goes through to buy that product. So the second party is you.

And I was saying that putting the "retail" price at the same level as what all-access members pay for everything, we still get less for the same price. One film as opposed to all the series and the extra stuff.

I would gladly pay, say 15$, for all of it, minus the series and the films (excl. Origins) on Command. But I'm not paying 15$ of all that gets me is a lousy digital download without extras. That's even too expensive for a DVD (for me).

I agree that you're getting less for more right now, and I hope their rollout of full services comes to you soon. I'm just saying I understand why it's taking some time.

Had to go back and check what the topic was but you spoke of site maintenance, and my reply was about the owners of the template and the manner in which Stargate Command exists as a website. TopFan is the company behind the template upon which the site and app are build. They deliver everything from server space to datamining, to maintenance and site registry.

Okay. I was confused because I was really just saying it was cheaper to run and host a regular site that downloads text and some flash to a user's computer than to host an expansive video platform. I wasn't asking where the templates came from. Thanks for being thorough, though.

[Falcon Horus]

The difference is that Discovery was made possible because of a financing deal with Netflix in exchange for the international airing rights.

188 countries to be exact.

Do you have a source for this? Is that how the show credits are setup? The articles I read listed MGM as co-producing the series, meaning they formed a partnership with a smaller studio to split financing costs, which is a not uncommon practice.

How about Vanishing Angle themselves -- Mercedes Bryce Morgan is one of their hired directors and is listed as executive producer. And VA is a producing company.

I agree that you're getting less for more right now, and I hope their rollout of full services comes to you soon. I'm just saying I understand why it's taking some time.

I'm fairly certain it won't. More empy hook-dangling on their part... but that's okay, Disney and Lucasfilm more than make up for what MGM's lacking in my part of the world as far as fan-stuff goes. And there's season 2 of Discovery to look out for.

[Platschu]

This thread still exists if you want to share any thought about the old/new SG:C app.

[Falcon Horus]

This thread still exists if you want to share any thought about the old/new SG:C app.

I think everything we didn't want, they put into the new lay-out.

* locked quizzes and polls
* locked discussions
* extra swag for all-access which most of us can't have due to being in the wrong region so we're all punished for that (seriously, that's how it feels)
* factions dividing the place up
* restricted topics of discussions in a franchise that's not even on TV will inevitably lead to a slow and painful death of the place
* Superfans are still missing in action and come on... this can't be what they would have suggested, right? How selfish are you?
* no notifications
* no friends -- unless that's what factions are supposed to be
* no ignore-feature

I have 2 positive things to say:

* I like the lay-out -- it loads slow on computer but it's actually a lot better than the old TopFan webpage.
* ...

I forgot my second point...

...oh, I remember...

* no down... wait... no nevermind... I accidently took an upvote off yesterday... nevermind.

[Chaka-Z0]

Suggestion : Shut it down.

[Platschu]

They will introduce monthly a Superfan as a "featured fan". Even it would be a weekly "extra", it would take 10 weeks.... And I don't want to hurt their feelings, but the app is about Stargate not about ego boost.

What could a Goa'uld wish? Let the Replicators find you, SGC...

[Chaka-Z0]

What could a Goa'uld wish? Let the Replicators find you, SGC...

Well considering there's only 26 select Goa'uld's, which seems appropriate for 500 potential Tau'ri slaves, we should just take over the SG:C and make them do quizzes for us. What about that

[Platschu]

I was expecting you will fight for an Unas faction? But then the whole thread would be about "Chakaaaaa".

[Falcon Horus]

Well considering there's only 26 select Goa'uld's, which seems appropriate for 500 potential Tau'ri slaves, we should just take over the SG:C and make them do quizzes for us. What about that

I'm screwed cause the good ones are all-access or AAP only.

They used to be free on the other site, which makes it even more ridiculous.

[Platschu]

I have to admit I have still checked the comments about the "stargate should be public" thread. I have got 11 upvotes, but maybe they don't miss me at all. I have noticed you tried again and again to speak with the leadership, but I have given up. It is hopeless and we are "safe" here. (As long as GW won't be deleted suddenly as well, but I shoudl not imagine such things before it happens...)

[Falcon Horus]

I have to admit I have still checked the comments about the "stargate should be public" thread. I have got 11 upvotes, but maybe they don't miss me at all. I have noticed you tried again and again to speak with the leadership, but I have given up. It is hopeless and we are "safe" here. (As long as GW won't be deleted suddenly as well, but I shoudl not imagine such things before it happens...)

I check too... and have noticed already a steady drop on new postings.

I'm generally ignored -- think I'm more or less used to it by now.
Same on twitter.

[Gatefan1976]

I check too... and have noticed already a steady drop on new postings.

I'm generally ignored -- think I'm more or less used to it by now.
Same on twitter.

Don't mistake an inability to answer with being ignored.
One is your failure, one is theirs.