Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Wait a minute.

Isn't 2.5% of "not significant money" not significant enough money to hurt the company if you fork it over?
They currently receive nothing from the use of their content on the Internet; and they are asking for a flat percentage of 2.5% of revenue. The AMPTP wants to pay .3%, and they claim that it's too soon to tell if they can make significant money from offering content on the Internet. Writers and much of the known universe understandably find this a little absurd, especially as members of the AMPTP continue to tell their stockholders about the millions to be made from new media.

6 comments:

  1. I have not yet talked to a single person who is not on the side of the writers. The executives are talking out of their ass and can't figure out why everyone else is holding their noses.

    The one good thing to come out of this? Steve Carell is now my personal hero. The Office was forced to stop production when he called in 'sick'. He is reportedly suppering from Enlarged Balls. I swear to god.
    http://unitedhollywood.blogspot.com/2007/11/office-down-for-good.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ryan -- That kicks ass.

    Once management caves, I need to start taping the Office.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I've been headthunk'ing over the discussion thread over at Television without Pity where there are people popping up to express antipathy towards the WGA. Some of the arguments include the classic "I don't feel much sympathy for them, entertainment doesn't contribute to society like teaching and it's not like they're mining coal." (Great, if being concerned about how people in television are compensated is trivial don't be visiting a TV message board.) There's also, the "Wouldn't TV be better if there were no union and writers could compete freely, letting talent win over union membership?" And, of course, there's "If they make more money than me then I think they should take a crappy deal!"

    Okay, obviously I needed to vent since we're not allowed to be directly mean to other posters, just be indirectly grumpy while sticking to the topic.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The writers make a couple of hundred grand a year. Not bad money certainly, but the studio guys make MILLIONS of dollars a year.

    So pooh on them.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Some writers make a couple hundred grand a year. Some make more. Plenty of them make much less.

    ReplyDelete
  6. SallyP, that "$200K/year" figure is a tricky one because it's the average earnings for an "actively working" writer and comes from the studios fighting the WGA. The WGA says the figure the median annual earnings for their membership is around $44K (IIRC) and, looking at how they talk about it, I'm pretty sure the studios are using a selective definition of "actively working" to pump up the number, by dropping the writers who didn't find a lot of work that year (which is a fact of the kind of freelance work the WGA does and one reason why residuals exist).

    ReplyDelete