Future # 1: It's dead, Jim.

There will be no more Star Trek stories on television or in the movies. Paramount believes the Star Trek name is toxic. The public at large considers it a nostalgic throwback, and won't support new stories, while the fan base has become more trouble than it's worth: Aggressive and impossible to satisfy, able to destroy projects well in advance based on rumors, they are nitpicking scholars who examine every story for heresy according to the holy writ of canon, and issue their edicts through the Inquisition of the Internet.

Today’s audience isn't interested in a hopeful model for the future; they want violence as the realistic solution, neocon empire building and high tech warfare. Basically reactionary and lazy, they don't have the patience to follow intelligent stories without video-game violence.

They aren't interested in how humanity gets better and preserves its soul in the face of technology and the unknown, they want revenge fantasies and variations of evil, fear, envy, hatred, etc---all the wonderful qualities on display in the world today-- and simplistic superheroes to save the day.

They don't want "What if?" stories that provoke thinking and examination of today's human behavior, or serious science fiction; they want good v. evil (meaning us v. them) fantasies with vampires, evil spirits, vast digital armies of insect aliens and other characters that are more visual effects eye candy than substantive or meaningful beings.

It's been a great run, but even in the story of the boy who cried wolf, the wolf finally came. It's over.

Of course, Paramount will want to continue making money from the franchise, so it will keep and enforce its licensing of the Star Trek name. They could simply copy the most successful warfare-in-space show and call it Star Trek. However, a slight variation on this leads to scenario # 2: