Too SMALL to fail? The next steps for SMALL ACCESS…

I love the SMALL ACCESS Facebook Group.  It’s become a wonderful part of my life, and the people in the group really get along and behave nicely (well, for the most part!), and share both a love of Star Trek and a camaraderie that can really be FANtastic.  I love the articles and updates they share with the group (what a great news resource!), and the members usually have some fascinating insights and observations.

In this way, I feel very strongly that the SMALL ACCESS group has succeeded in a big way.  We’re nearly 1,350 members strong, and it really is a wonderful Facebook group to belong to.  I don’t want to see that end.

But we do have to face a harsh reality.  We had a goal to convince CBS to revisit and revise the fan film guidelines by trying to limit subscriptions to their All Access subscription service.  We gave it a good try, but after a year, the SMALL ACCESS Facebook group is not going to be a factor in any decision CBS makes regarding the guidelines or Star Trek: Discovery itself.

Had we been 50,000 strong or 100,000 strong, we might have gotten their attention.  But if Discovery generates the desired 4 million subscribers, then 1,300 more isn’t going to matter to CBS one way or another.  And if Discovery fails to generate those 4 million subscribers, well, then a measly 1,300 more certainly isn’t going to matter to them either.

Therefore, our initial reason for existing unfortunately seems to be a lost cause.  It was worth a try, but with the Discovery premiere now just five weeks away and CBS’s marketing push in full swing, SMALL ACCESS is nowhere near their radar.

So what do we do now?

Personally, I’d like for the group to keep going.  But I think it needs some re-branding with a new name and a goal that doesn’t involve trying to financially impact CBS All Access (hence my preference for a name-change from SMALL Access).

However, I’ve never been one to rule with an Iron Fist (or any of the Defenders).  So over the next week, I’ll be asking the members of Small Access what they’d like to do: re-brand with a new name and goal (which we’ll discuss if this option is chosen), stay the course and keep the old name and goal, or close up shop completely?  And the majority will rule out.

Members can vote here.

14 thoughts on “Too SMALL to fail? The next steps for SMALL ACCESS…”

  1. Just voted to change the brand and keep the current goal of somehow convincing CBS to revise the guidelines – There’s got to be a way, someone just has to think of it is all… P

      1. lol I know, I’m saying we all can think of something – Might not happen over night, but we’ll figure something out as a team – Where there’s a will there’s a way… P 🙂

  2. It’s not the destination but the JOURNEY! Goals are not important but the message we bring to a wider audience on our journey together IS…

  3. Did the Small Access group ever organize/coordinate any Discovery viewing parties?Are there any sites that help people find viewing parties in their area? While I get what you are trying to do and more importantly the why behind it, looking from the outside the missing piece to the puzzle was actually setting up group viewing parties.

    1. I’d hoped we’d be large enough to do that. But alas, we never reached that critical mass. The members of Small Access are spread too far and wide. We’d probably be able to form a few viewing parties in places like the San Francisco area or New York City, but the majority are in states and areas where it’d be a multi-hour drive one-way to the closest Small Access member.

      1. To achieve the goal tat you have in mind would require no less that 500,000 members dedicated to the same cause. Yet with social media groups of 5 to 10K tearing themselves apart as political factions grow.

        So that’s a non factor, there is no point right now. Rest regroup and try something more Vulcan… otherwise your not gonna see them lose

        1. There’s no “lose” in this, Charles. There never was. We had simply hoped to get CBS’s attention long enough to encourage them to revise at least one of the guidelines (the “no ongoing series” rule). But it’s trues that we’re not large enough of a group to get onto their radar.

  4. There is a way. But you all been doing this wrong.

    For a start your unfounded attacks on CBS didn’t help. Like this:

    “December of 2015 followed by a call to Tommy Kraft of Star Trek: Horizon in April of 2016 telling him to shut down his new $250,000 Kickstarter for his sequel, Star Trek: Federation Rising.”

    Is a very misleading statement. First of all reflective of FFF’s pro Axanar/anti CBS stance, and also a lie. Tommy agreed to work with CBS on the film in line with the guidelines and there is no bad blood between them. he makes it sound like he was threatened. He was not.

    1. This is Tommy’s actual quote, as reported on Fan Film Factor on April 20, 2016:

      “Earlier today, executives from CBS reached out to me and advised me that their legal team strongly suggested that we do not move forward with plans to create a sequel to Horizon.”

      The guidelines had not been announced yet, and were still more than two months away.

      Please don’t use my blog to rewrite verifiable history, Josh.

    1. Looks like it’s staying. 90% of the members have voted for that.

      Sorry if that upsets you, Magic Man.

      (No, that’s a lie. I’m actually quite jubilant if that upsets you. Good Lord, please let it upset you.) 🙂

      1. The keyword that you excluded Jonathan was “participating” …
        So roughly 28 active voters out of the 1300 members voted to keep this train wreck “SMALL SIGNIFICANCE” going – well done!

        1. Why would you need to lie on my blog site, Anthony? I’m just curious.

          The poll is still live, and as of this morning has 145 respondents, of whom 133 have voted to keep the group going (obviously without you–the one person we ever banned for unacceptable hostility and insulting negativity to others–and your Facebook friend “Nikki Synder”).

          Hey, is the reason that you’re lying to everyone in your comment today because you really are resentful about having been the only person to ever be banned from our group by a vote of 95% to 5%? Well, Anthony, that’s really your own fault, isn’t it? If you’d simply grow up and stop acting like a cyber-bully–and stop using outright lies to try to support your inaccurate conclusions and wildly false beliefs–then maybe others wouldn’t mind being around you so much. But hey, if you don’t want to change, that’s fine, too. You just need to live with the consequences of that decision.

Comments are closed.