You are not a Trek fan or you would know that anything done when Gene was alive and creator/producer is canon.That ship is not canon and nither is that show.
This is why JJs Star Trek is not canon
I said what I said about the earning and I know I ma right if you debated with me again without me looking at my last post.You sure don't know much about the franchise or what went on.There are Starfleet Battle fans who aren't hard core fans of the shows that know more than you.
I can't prove the evidence because it is in print not on the net.Not eveything is on the net you know.
btw to all the Enterprise is not the flagship just one of the Stars as Gene didn't want it that way.it is like the General Lee of the Dukes of Hazard.
I really must thank you. You've provided me and my friends with much entertainment.
Not a Trek fan? Look in the mirror sir. No true Trek fan would seek to exclude anyone else from being Trek fans just because they don't subscribe to a narrow interpretation of "canon." The spirit of Star Trek is an inclusive one. People of different races and cultures working together for the benefit of all. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. You, sir, obviously do not understand that concept. I love all of Star Trek from "The Cage" to "Star Trek Into Darkness" and everything in between. True Trek fans respect that even if they disagree with it.
And did you notice how you contradicted yourself? Earlier you were harping on about how Data was dead, because his death was on screen in the movie and therefor canon. But wait, Nemesis was made many, many years after Gene's death, so how, by your definition, can it be canon?
I've still yet to see any evidence to back up any of your claims. What publication are you citing? What was the publication date? What was the issue number? Who was the author? What were the numbers? What experts did they quote? And btw, I tweeted Michael Okuda and asked him if the TNG movies made money. I think we'd agree he'd be in a position to know. He said, quite simply, "yes." Is that unequivocal proof? No. But it is interesting.
Back on topic: I think eldarion79 is right. Kirk probably goes in for that naval tradition that says "Any officer that commands a ship is a 'captain' no matter what their permanent rank, and there can only be one 'captain' on a ship."