BAFTA Awards: What ‘Artist’, Dujardin, Streep … 
64th BAFTA Awards Winners: ‘The Artist’, Meryl … 
BAFTA 2012 Preview: Very British Affair Takes On … 
RECORD-BREAKING WEEKEND! 4 Films Open $20+M: ‘The … 
Remembered: Jennifer Hudson To Perform Whitney Houston … 
Live From NY, It’s Jean Dujardin On 
R.I.P. Whitney Houston 
TOLDJA! Indomina-BET Buy Sundance ‘LUV’ 
Midnight Madness For ‘Breaking Dawn’ DVD 
Saoirse Ronan Bigger Teen Action Queen 
WME Signs Writer-Director Jon Kasdan 
‘Glee’s Jane Lynch Joins Indie Film Comedy 
Universal Revives ‘Dracula Year Zero’ With … 
Jodie Foster Sending Mel Gibson Film ‘The … 
‘Roseanne’ Reunion: John Goodman To Co-Star In … 
UPDATE: Closing Arguments Conclude In Golden Globes Trial; … 
Series Adaptation Of ‘Legion’ With … 
Lionsgate Calms Investors With Talk About Charlie Sheen, … 
Ridley Scott Commits To Next Direct McCarthy’s … 
Marvel Studio’s Tim Connors Defects To Legendary As … 
UPDATE: Warner Bros Lawyers Dig In Garbage Over ‘The … 
The Writers Guild Of America just sent this email to members:
December 4, 2007
Fellow Guild Members:Rumors, half-truths, and misinformation about what is actually happening at the bargaining table fly across the internet, are posted on blogs, passed across picket lines like a game of telephone, and appear in stories and advertisements in the trade papers.
So, to clarify exactly where we are, we have prepared a report and analysis, which you can read in its entirety [here].
In the meantime, here’s a brief summary:
The latest WGA proposal would cost the companies $151 million over three years. It is reasonable, serious, and easily affordable. For instance, it would cost Sony only $1.68 million per year. Paramount and CBS would each pay only $4.66 million per year. MGM would pay only $320,000 per year.
The AMPTP claims its proposal would give us $130 million over three years. Our analysis – and again, please visit the website to see for yourself – tells us their offer is worth only $32 million. But if you factor in the companies’ regressive proposal on “promotional use” (streaming TV shows and feature films in their entirety for free) writers could potentially lose $100 million in income over the course of this contract.
So while we don’t see how their proposal adds up to anywhere near $130 million, we greet their public willingness to make such an offer with real interest. If the AMPTP is serious about this figure, the WGA is confident we are closer to a deal than anyone has suggested, and we are hopeful that the companies will respond positively to our proposal, which is a serious, reasonable, and affordable attempt to bridge the gap between us.
Sincerely,
John F. Bowman
Chair, WGA Negotiating Committee
Loading ...
Well, this is certainly more positive than the last one. And than many of the “this is all a ploy” comments over at United Hollywood. Yeah, maybe it is. But if we never give it a chance, there will never be. . .well, a chance. Don’t assume anything either way. Sounds like the negotiating commitee is going to see what comes of this. Seems the best strategy right now.
Thanks Nikki,
The link lays it all out… Our Counter Proposal clearly states where we stand on the numbers and what we consider fair. The question is, when will the AMPTP be ready to bargain in good faith and agree to a fair contract? We haven’t seen it yet, whether this latest round of negs is part of their phased strategy or not.
Does this mean progress is being made? Maybe, an acceptance of our tier streaming proposal may be a good first step. It all depends on how they respond to our counter proposal.
But that may not come any time soon. We shall see…
I just read it. DVDs are still off the table. Which means I will not vote for any contract that grows out of this, nor, I’m confident, will anyone else on our writing staff.
Yes, the internet may indeed be the future. But DVDs are the present, and we’re being cheated out of those residuals NOW.
A fair reuse formula for DVDs needs to be in this contract.
How and why is Bowman sending this email out to members at the time he did? Shouldn’t he be inside the room bargaining???
And what exactly was the point of the letter? Was it to tell us that they’re making progress? Or to tell the public in advance that the AMPTP hasn’t budged one bit in today’s talks. I couldn’t at all get a sense of hope from his note.
We should find out an actual date for when the AMPTP will seriously begin to negotiate because then and only then will we have any kind of sense of when this strike will end, which unfortunately won’t end for some time…
Don’t copy off of AMPTP test sheet in math class unless your teacher also works for them.
pb, not a fan of fuzzy math
If you want to really help things forward, post the WGA spreadsheet breaking down the numbers and then ask the “moguls” to provide you with the same info. Then, when they WON’T/DON’T… it will be clear to all that a deal will be reached when they decide to stop stalling.
I’m an 11 year member of the WGA and I absolutely refuse to vote for any contract not including an increase in DVD residuals. I am losing money TODAY because of a grotesquely unfair pay formula for DVDs. The money I will lose from a deal that neglects Internet streaming is murky at best.
I know John Bowman and think he is a very smart reasonable guy. I believe his tone, unlike that of David Young, is constructive and beneficial to the process. Personally, I don’t know why the AMPTP would not offer something on streaming for promotional use, especially on films, as it doesn’t seem to make sense that they would ever stream a movie in its entirety for no fee. I’m sure I’m not understanding that portion of the deal. Maybe someone here can give a clear explanation.
I do think there are some issues in his statement that should be looked at from the other side:
The increases in costs to the studios seem small but, when the increases are multiplied through the other 3 union contracts, they become much more onerous.
He says that Warner Bros. will pay 11.2M more per year. When multiplied by a factor of 9.5, as described in Jonathan Handel’s very interesting and pro-WGA blog on Huffingtonpost, you see that it becomes 106.4M. The Warner Film Entertainment division of TW had a profit of just under 600M for the first 9 mos this year. Say they make a billion next year (a very sizeable increase), they would be taking a 10% haircut. Even if you factor in taxes, it is probably 7% or 8% (I don’t know their tax rate). Given that this is a public company and its share price is tied to earnings increases, that much of a drag on earnings is very substantial. Share price is a factor of future earnings.
Also, consider that the WGA analysis pegs the increase in their payments to studio revenue, not profits. General Motors has tons of revenue but not much profit. Microsoft has much smaller revenue and much larger profit. Microsoft is worth much, much more. The fact is that the movie business is not more profitable than other businesses. The costs of movies and TV shows keep rising, as do the marketing costs, eating up profit. This stuff is transparent and available by looking at their earnings reports. Much of the profits of these companies don’t come from filmmed entertainment but things like cable (meaning the pipe) and theme parks. The fact is that writer’s earnings are keeping up with real earnings for the rest of the workforce. Certainly, they have with the share prices of TW, Disney, and Viacom, which are well below their highs of the period shown in the WGA chart. Yes, it would be fun to believe that share prices and profits don’t matter but these are businesses and they do. When profit targets aren’t met and share prices stagnate, wall street demands that the executives be thrown out. That’s how it works.
Nobody really knows how much money will be earned by promotional streaming. Making the claim that the overall contract is reduced in value by an estimate of a new revenue stream that is not really knowable seems specious to me. I’ve said, I think the studios should give some on this and I don’t understand why they haven’t (maybe that is the closer they will offer after another round of negotiations) but the real value in this contract, or any other, is in the minimums writers are paid to write scripts. That is what the people on the bottom can rely on. They get that money, even if the projects don’t get made. Unmade projects aren’t downloaded or streamed. Those on the top of the movie writing business make huge fees and, sometimes, profits. Those who create hit shows become gigantically wealthy. The most important part of the guild’s negotiation has to be the minimums for scripts and staff positions on series.
And, having to average in 5 years of individual earnings to come up with a low number to describe the earnings of a typical writer doesn’t make sense. That means they are saying that someone who sold one feature five years ago and never worked again is a working writer. Sorry but that is a person who couldn’t make it or is a part-time screenwriter. The average for 2006 of $200K is much more valid and a better descriptor of the working members of the WGA.
Another note about DVDs. Taking the proposed increase off the table in Nov, then stating it was a “one day offer”, then restating it was an option, then removing it quietly in this latest round is NOT a good thing.
Many writers will have a problem with this I imagine. Assume we write 15 Feature Script Specs, maybe a few get into development and maybe ONE or two get made. It sometimes can take over 10 years or longer for this to happen and if that one Film is successful, it is all we have as Feature Writers to realize residuals from.
Another point: DVDs are NOT past, they will always be an integral product for consumers worldwide… AND when this blu-ray HD format product platform gets resolved and one becomes the Consumers choice, there will be a spike in sales as many will upgrade their Home Vid Libraries so IT IS IMPORTANT now.
I have been very disappointed with how our guys handled this aspect of the negs. Of course, it has to be voted on, BUT we’ve been getting the short end of the stick for years now. Consider the Studios net 1100 cents per DVD sale and we are getting 4 cents. This is clearly STILL unacceptable for many Feature Writers I can assure you. It doesn’t look like DVD formulas will be back on the table now and I hope it is not overlooked because it could come back to haunt us.
Rex and Fly on the wall…
You are sadly off the mark here in making DVDs your litmus test as to a vote of yes on a contract.
1) DVDs aren’t mentioned because everyone that knows where we are headed doesn’t included DVDs. As a matter of fact DVDs will go the way of 8-track and cassette tapes in the not too distant future.
2) The Internet is NOT THE FUTURE, the INTERNET is now. And pretty soon will be the only distribution system there is. What do you need a DVD or CD for when everything will be instantly downloaded.
3) The time for DVD residuals passed with John Wells as your President, stop living in the past, embrace the present, and fear the future unless the digital distribution is your #1 priority.
I’m confused. That Financial Times article Finke linked to said that streaming advertising is valued about $130 million a year currently. The WGA proposal linked to in this post says that the estimated annual value of the residuals the guild is asking for is $29.3 million (see line 8.) So, we’re asking for around 25% of the projected revenue? *before* pattern bargaining, which would push that up to, um, 225%? Or is the WGA claiming that streaming advertising revenue is actually 10x what that article says, so that $29.3 million is actually $2.5 percent?
polone, no one cares what you think, much less 6 rambling paragraphs
Dearest Darling Sweet Gavin:
The AMPTP says their offer was worth 130 million over three years. The WGA offer is 154 million. If the AMPTP didn’t have a problem with their figure (and one can assume that they thought about the other unions) I’M SURE we can find a number in between… right… right?
So, one of two things is happening. Either their offer wasn’t REALLY worth 130 million (meaning all the math they give you is a pile of crap) or all those numbers you were spouting don’t worry them.
Please look up at the guys who operate your strings and tell us what they tell you to say next.
“And, having to average in 5 years of individual earnings to come up with a low number to describe the earnings of a typical writer doesn’t make sense.”
Are you kidding me? Writing in Hollywood is feast and famine. You sell your first feature and live off it for three years trying to sell your next, or bouncing from meeting to meeting, or languishing in option and development hell.
You get your first staff job on a new series that gets yanked after one episode, and manage to pull in 20K after taxes and commissions. Have fun making that last until staffing next summer! Or you make it a full year but don’t get staffed the next year. And so on, and so on.
Feast and famine, Gavin. Feast and famine. Did you really get so far in the business knowing so little about the life of a writer?
Dude, Gavin Polone.
You’re a smart guy. But there’s a reason why they use five years to figure out the average writer’s salary — Many writers don’t work consistently. That’s the nature of this business — and you should know better than to say: “Well, that’s the business they chose, and if they can’t work consistently then they should go do something else.”
Many writers entered into the business because that’s how the business has been set up. The last thing we want to do is lose intelligent, creative writers to other businesses. Many of these people COULD do other things. They chose this because they love it and because they believe they can make a living doing it. The studios cannot make it more difficult for writers to survive. As it is, there are hardly any original voices in Hollywood. Do we really want to drive away more people? And the same is true for actors. Take away those residuals and most “working” character actors will not be able to survive. Imagine your casting session — as it is, you see the same 20 people over and over again. What happens when they are only 10? This is not where you skimp on the money.
You have to use the five year period because that’s the reality. Why is it five years? Well, it’s kind of arbitrary I guess. Except that it seems clear to me that if you haven’t worked in 5 years, you should try something else.
love,
Gavin Polone, Jr.
What do you think the chances are of either side being honest and saying “Everyone who works in TV is fucked ’til, at least, Feb. 08/”
Per Gavin Polone: “Also, consider that the WGA analysis pegs the increase in their payments to studio revenue, not profits.”
Except I do not wish to be a profit participant with the studios, especially given their accounting practices. No, handle my fee as an expense. Calculate it at 2.5 percent of revenues derived from my work — that sounds about right.
Feature writers are definitely screwed if they don’t get anything for dvd’s. What do the studios have to lose if they pay more for dvd’s? If they are the way of the dinosaur, then ask for $.25 each, then see what happens.
February ’08 seems early. I think we all (meaning writers) need to mentally and emotionally prepare ourselves for a long-lasting strike and eliminate hope and wishful thinking. I think it’s safe to assume that the AMPTP will not seriously negotiate until at LEAST a few weeks from now. It would be especially helpful if WGA leadership tells us that the AMPTP is not at all serious at the moment, unless they are = but we know they’re not.
I am so tired of this producer mantra, that was cited above by Jerry Mahoney…or Gavin Polone…I forget. Simply put, no one is buying your “no one knows” argument about the internet. For one, people do know. That’s what cookies are for. How much will it pay? How many millions will the studios reap? Here’s my question…there have never been guarantees on the sucess of a feature film. Ever. Yet residuals are paid. And somehow, there’s a penny or two left over for the Gavin Polone’s of the world, even after Peter Chernin landscapes his mountain in Montana. To be fair, he only owns half. But c’mon. Nothing is assured, and yet we find equitable systems for everything. How much did Gavin Polone make on “Emily’s Reasons Why Not?”
AgentAtAnotherAgency,
It may well be that the internet will some day be “the only distribution system there is,” but it won’t be “soon.” Until then, DVDs of our work will continue to be sold without our being compensated for it, unless we win redress NOW. As long as DVDs are still being sold in any quantity, we deserve to be paid.
As far as my ultimate ratification decision goes, DVDs will not be “litmus test” for my vote, as you so snidely put it, so much as a tentpole, one of many.
Internet royalties is Priority #1. DVD royalties is Priority #2. They won’t be gone for two or three years — and DVDs are as much of an issue for TV writers as feature writers, unlike the ’88 strike.
I wrote a feature in 1999 that has sold hundreds of thousands of DVDs and video cassettes; I’ve gotten about three hundred bucks from the sell through and, of course, NOTHING for all of the hundred of thousands of home viewings by people who rented the tapes and DVDs.
If Guild negotiators think DVDs can go away unaddressed because “that train has left the station,” they’re in for a shock from the membership.
Wow… Gavin’s all over DHD now. Nikki, maybe he’s trying to get hired.
One more thing: how can $100M be deducted from the total compensation under “promotional” but not be included anywhere on the WGA spread sheet? Wouldn’t that line item have to also be included as a $100M add to the WGA proposal for it to be something lost in the AMPTP proposal? Nobody is getting paid for “promotional” now, so it can’t be something that is lost, just something that would be added in the contract. In their memo, they say “writers could potentially lose $100 million in income over the course of this contract.”
You can’t have it both ways. Either the WGA proposal has to include “promotional” and add $100M to the total, or the AMPTP proposal is $100M better than the WGA says.
Compare the to spread sheets: http://www.wga.org/subpage_member.aspx?id=2628
Ouch.
Ah, Gavin, convenient of you to ignore the $2.3 billion dollars Time-Warner made in television when writing your post. That’s another $3 billion for the year, bringing the total up to $4 billion. Suddenly it’s not so much a haircut but a trim.
Oh, and then there’s the additional $2.3 billion they’ll be making from their AOL division, where WB has already started streaming TV shows.
So, now we’re really talking about a very small percentage of their income. It’s even a small percentage of their top executive’s salaries.