XPost: alt.startrek, alt.tv.star-trek, alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise   
   From: Vetteguy@Driving.Corvette.nz   
      
   "Elvis Gump"  wrote in message   
   news:BBFBE5B6.27269%elvisgump@NOhotmailSPAM.com...   
   > in article fFtBb.817$5t3.781@nwrddc01.gnilink.net, Eric Furniss at   
   > e.furnissfam@verizon.net wrote on 12/9/03 6:20 PM:   
   >   
   > > If we're not looking at the death of Trek, it's at least on Medicare,   
   > > collecting social security, and living out it's final days in an   
   assisted   
   > > living care facility in Florida. Short of us raising the cash to buy   
   Paramount   
   > > to run Trek ourselves, I sure as hell don't know what we can do to bring   
   it   
   > > back.   
   > >   
   > > Eric   
   >   
   > If Trek is on Medicare, why do I as a fan feel like I'm in the leper ward   
   of   
   > Tijuana charity hospital eating questionable looking refried beans and   
   > feelin' leery of drinking the water?   
   > --   
   > "All generalizations are bad, including this one."   
   >  -- Mark Twain   
   >   
   Actually, the irony is that it's not PARAMOUNT's fault. Lots of money was   
   sunk into Star Trek by Paramount,   
   which made paramount very attractive to Viacom. you want to point a finger,   
   look to Viacom   
   even though it was Star Trek that got paramount through the early 80's,   
   Viacom is the company   
   turning the cold shoulder to the franchise. it doesn't help that Enterprise   
   is being totally out FXed by   
   Andromeda and outclassed by Stargate SG-1   
      
      
   VG   
   --   
   Your Mileage May Vary   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)