WGA Strike Primer: The Endgame
In the beginning was the word - yet the word most heard these days in Hollywood is not about the beginning at all, but the end. What is the "endgame" to stop the strike? Ultimately, that's the only thing that matters. And with the AMPTP corporations negotiating instead with a guild not on strike, there's just one endgame people are most-wondering about -
Are the AMPTP corporations willing to scuttle the 2007 TV season, drop the pilot season, lose the 2008 TV season, wipe their slates of all movies for the next two years and put a nuclear missile-laser on the moon to blackmail the world's governments? (This latter seems far-fetched.)
Certainly, scuttling is possible. Indeed, it would be a powerful endgame strategy that would rock the Writers Guild of America. Only one thing argues against it.
It makes absolutely no sense.
For this Scorched Earth endgame to work, it means - 1) the AMPTP corporations would throw away countless billions in income and ad revenues. 2) TV networks would risk losing their audience to the Internet, Xbox, books, CDs and sex. 3) Movie studios would cut their distribution pipeline to theaters. And 4) the CEOs would forego their $25 million bonuses.
Add one other reason that my friend Mark Evanier notes. 5) The AMPTP would be willing to have writers, actors and even directors on strike at the same time, creating their worst nightmare when all contracts are up for re-negotiation simultaneously in 2011.
All this to avoid paying a tiny percentage of something they say is not worth anything.
It makes no realistic sense. Zero. The Wall Street firm Bear Sterns has said the impact of what the WGA is asking for is "negligible."
Importantly, for this AMPTP endgame to work, actors would end up on strike, directors likely, too, all crews would be out of work, all production staffs, most corporate employees let go, the L.A. economy would be in a shambles and the AMPTP corporations would crash into a heap of dusty plaster and torn gaffer tape.
It would he horrific for everyone. But it would be the death knell for the Hollywood corporations. Remember: for the most part, the AMPTP corporations don't actually make any product, they finance independent contractors. Writers, actors, directors can create their work for anyone. Venture capitalists, Internet companies, European film studios. Empty movie theaters will be desperate for product, whoever distributes it. Stream webseries on New Media. Sell original movies and series direct-to-DVD.
So, it makes no sense for the AMPTP corporations to have this as their endgame. That doesn't mean it won't happen. But - the CEOs understand reality. They know they'll keep making billions with a fair contract. But not with Scorched Earth.
So, that means perhaps there's another possible endgame.
Like: drop scary hints that the AMPTP may Wipe Out All Humanity, which gets some people flibberty-gibberty. Wait to see how solid the WGA support stays. Negotiate instead with the Directors Guild. Make a really mediocre offer and get them to cave early like they always do. And then hope writers and actors will break into dissension and fold like a wet suit of dominos. (Hey, I'm on strike, metaphors get mixed.)
Except there's a massive risk to the AMPTP in this endgame of mediocrity, too. First, WGA members are deeply solid, fighting for their Guild's future and therefore their livelihoods. Second, whatever the DGA board negotiates, 1,400 directors are also members of the Writers Guild, and not guaranteed to vote for what they perceive is a bad deal for themselves as writers. Third, the DGA spent $2 million studying New Media and could balk if the deal is too lousy, even by DGA standards. They've figured out the Internet is real. Fourth, if the DGA membership rejects the really mediocre offer and the strike continues, TV networks will end up paying billions in ad "give-backs". And finally, a really mediocre deal would not set any pattern for long-striking writers, who'd reject it. Which would later get rejected by actors. Which gets the AMPTP corporations right back to that nonsensical Scorched Earth Theory.
This means that of all the possible endgames for the AMPTP, only two make sense:
1) Eliminate the terrible risk of a long DGA negotiation blowing up in your face, and settle with the WGA by the end of February.
2) Make a good offer to the DGA, to show you can negotiate with "reasonable" people, because no one can negotiate with those "crazy" writers (unless you're David Letterman, United Artists, The Weinstein Company, MRC and Spyglass Entertainment...) - which is perfectly fine for writers. They've said they'll happily take a good deal wherever it comes from, especially after setting the groundwork for one.
None of this is a prediction. It's only a look at the possibilities and what makes sense. And what doesn't. But the DGA negotiating committee does have a history of caving to lousy deals, just to make a deal. And the AMPTP corporations will choose to do whatever in the world they fricking want. They've walked away from the table. Twice. Amidst an industry shutdown, they're negotiating with a guild that isn't striking. When they want to sit back down and negotiate a good offer and reasonable settlement with the Guild that's actually on strike, they will.
In the meantime, the writers are busy calling venture capitalists...
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Briefly on the issue of "shills". Nikki Finke reported at www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com that the AMPTP and/or their $100k/month publicity firm has people blogging in these comments sections specifically to try and create dissension amongst the writers.
I don't know that Corymac is a shill for the AMPTP or working for their PR firm, but when I hear someone say, the writers should take whatever deal the directors negotiate, that's the first conclusion I jump to. Why should writers act like lemmings? Can't writers think for themselves?
The other reason I think Cory might be a shill is I've read fundamentally the same statement, practically word for word, in other comments sections on other blogs where WGA writers participate. Now when I taught English and two students turned in substantially similar papers, I knew what was going on. It's no different here.
The shills have long been on notice over at DLD and other blogs, and the shills are officially on notice here. You're free to blog (because we cherish the First Amendment, which protects all sorts of heinous speech as well as Mark Twain and Kurt Vonnegut), and we're free to call you out.
I don't work in the entertainment industry and so I'm probably not aware of everything involved in this dispute but to me it just represents what is happening in our country.
Most corporations have a tiny, elite (mostly white men) number of people who make way more than anyone else in their company and they sacrifice integrity for profits. The studios are now owned by corporations and the people running them only care about profits. They don't respect writers and don't won't compensate them fairly for their contributions although they deserve it.
The writers are also to blame because some of them are selfish and are only looking out for themselves. The reality is strikes are hard. They're very hard. People struggle. People worry about money. People lose health benefits. It's horrible for everyone. But you have to stick together. If you don't then you lose your right to belong to the union.
The writers on late night talk shows should be ashamed of themselves for getting paid right now. I'm not surprised Harvey "any actress who wants to work with me has to wear my untalented fashion designer wife's clothes" Weinstein is willing to hire writers.
But the writers should all support each other. At least publically.
I'd typed a reply to elizaW suggesting, perhaps indelicately, that he/she is not, as he/she contends, a writer but rather a studio wonk hired to scour the blogsphere and parrot managements opinion regarding the strike in an attempt to erode the WGAs faith in their elected leaders and the strike. Deadline Hollywood Daily and United Hollywood alerted us all to this practice and after reading elizaW's various posts, I don't think it's paranoid to suggest that he/she is working for the congloms. For some reason my reply was not printed so I'm trying again. This is not an attack. I'm simply pointing out the possibility. His/her posts sound suspiciously pro AMPTP.
Here is a excellent response to Ridley going Fi-core in case anyone missed it:
http://unitedhollywood.blogspot.com/2008/01/frank-pierson-john-ridley-is-wrong.html
petegif, yes, the stars are highly unlikely to take a pay cut. but, if you go back to crazy ross perot and whip out the pie chart, you see clearly what the amptp is trying to do, and why. it's all about: where in this pie chart can we increase our income and decrease some other participants? they're clearly attacking what they see as the weakest point because they've made an internal decision that the coming delivery system is huge and currently unregulated and if they stay with the current model of compensation they can't sustain growth.
you have to understand, these people HATE paying residuals. Hate it! I had a conversation with a producer once, at the time a friend, who expressed utter disdain for commercial actors when they went on strike. the producer was under the misapprehension that they were "striking so they can make 100 grand from a commercial instead of 75 - why should I give a shit about that?" I quickly disabused her of the notion, and let her know that most commercial actors will audition for, say, 50 commercials in a year, if they're really lucky, get one, which, IF it runs, may pull in 25 grand, in rare instances, a bit more. I said "you then add in that off-broadway play at 600 dollars a week, and the 2 day role in that reese witherspoon movie." that's it. that's your year. if you're LUCKY. do the math. 40 grand? maybe. alan rosenberg of SAG testified that the average member makes LESS than the 60 grand the WGA head testified the average WGA member makes. this producer rolled her eyes. the feeling is "why am I PAYING these people? I've PAID them!" the whole union concept of sharing in revenue for something you helped create is anathema to the people who paid for it, or helped find financing for it. when those profits come in, it KILLS them to cut you a check, and the studios are no different. I know my "solution" will happen when pigs fly, but, nonetheless, the current take of a majority of wga and sag members wondering "why?! how could they be so unwilling to negotiate? they're evil people?" is perhaps mitigated by the observation that they are simply ruthless businessmen who are attacking what they think is the weakest point to offset what they view as their coming vulnerabilities with content via the internet.
the strike could drag on because they are clearly putting all their chips on a "scorched earth" policy as mr, ellisberg puts it, and if the dga acts true to form and makes a deal light on residuals and new media, it will only further inflame the situation. my suggestion that the AMPTP re-think the huge output to stars to simply make it a bit less hug-er (?) may be pie in the sky, but they certainy have the power to do it, they are simply currently choosing not to because they view keeping the star actors, agents, show-runners and directors happy, they view those "relationships" in a "relationship business" as vital to their self interest. but what I'm saying, simply, is: where does it say universal HAS to pay Jack Nicholson his "price?" if the amptp ALL got together on THAT, boom - strike over, cause when jack's agent goes to paramount and paramount says "sorry we LLLOOOVVVE jack, but 15 million and a piece of the net," and that becomes the new model all over town, all over the industry, what exactly is stopping them from doing that? the rich still get filthy rich, and they free up enough money to make themselves comfortable going forward into the internet age of content delivery, agreeing to a small percentage of profit participation for the WGA, SAG and the DGA for original use and re-use. what they're doing now is trying to further solidify a two-tiered system, and, as I've said, make it "the stars, and the wal-mart employees, who are forced to do whatever the fuck we want."
A little announcement from Steve Jobs today should be all the motivation writers' needs to stick to their demands.
This is taken from a tech blog:
Consider this scenario: On Jan. 15, as the writers’ walkout drags into its eighth week, Jobs will take the stage for a keynote at his annual Macworld conference. He’s expected to announce that at least two — and possibly as many as five — studios have signed up to offer their movies for download to Apple’s video iPod and Apple TV products. That will no doubt generate big headlines — everything Jobs announces at Macworld does — and could make the notion of downloading movies from the Web a hot topic after years of false starts.
In doing so, Jobs could also put a Hollywood-style klieg light on the major issue separating the writers and movie moguls: how to cut in the unions for a share of the revenue from a new market that the studios have insisted isn’t yet big enough to share. “It could validate everything that we’ve been saying,” says WGA Assistant Executive Director Charles Slocum. “If he also announces that it will be in high-definition and you can order from the TV, it will mean the creation of a whole new market.”
Most writers (journeymen included) work in spurts, with long dry spells in between. Seeing that green residual envelope in the mail, just when you need it, is a blessing. As long as someone is earning money from your intellectual property, you should be, too. And with Jobs' announcement today, that 2.5% might one day put your grandchildren through college. Patric Verrone and David Young have been gracious, and perhaps overly generous to the AMPTP, but I think they understand the potential residual flow from the future of internet sales. It's vital that we continue to give them our support. Or, like animation writers, watch studios earn millions on their product without receiving a dime in residuals.
"First, WGA members are deeply solid, fighting for their Guild's future and therefore their livelihoods."
really? read any other posts? the dissenting voices are clearly growing louder.
check this out from bill simmons from espn.com (and writer for jimmy kimmel). he's a very good sports humorist, but doesn't find wga leadership very funny.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/links/080115
As this recent New York Times piece tells us, the writers' strike is heating up and more and more writers (like the guy from Artful Writer) are openly questioning WGA leadership as the Directors Guild closes in on a deal without ever playing the strike card. In retrospect, maybe negotiating without a real negotiator, going on strike without any real leverage, costing members more money than they ever would have made in 50 years in Internet or DVD residuals, repeatedly antagonizing the people you're bargaining with, signing head-scratching interim deals with smaller studios that splintered the union, bullying any member who disagreed with the game plan and completely underestimating the TV industry's willingness to rely on re-runs, reality shows, movies and sports wasn't such a great idea.
Here's what I don't get about the Writers Guild, other than that the most successful writers aren't the ones leading this strike (this is like Brian Cardinal and Chucky Atkins convincing every other NBA player to walk): How does it make sense that one union covers late-night comedy writers, sitcom writers, soap-opera writers, screenwriters, daytime talk show writers and TV drama writers? Can you think of six groups of people with less in common? For instance, this strike is basically about Internet and DVD residuals. How does that help a soap opera writer or a daytime talk show writer? Why would a screenwriter care about Internet residuals? Why does someone who writes for a crappy sitcom care about DVD residuals? Having one union cover every writing profession is just as short-sighted as having one union cover every professional athlete, isn't it?
"4) the CEOs would forego their $25 million bonuses"
No way. Get real!
Yes, they are. But, the reason i have written that SAG is potentially the most powerful union, but they don't USE that power is: the AMPTP can't live without star actors. I mean no disrespect to writers, or directors, I'm both a writer and director myself, as well as an actor. But, SAG is joined at the hip with the WGA ONLY because they see clearly that the AMPTP is going after the WGA first, and SAG second. They are going after the unions that represent the biggest threat for them down the road in terms of residuals and new media. They will WILLINGLY continue to service the star actors, star show-runners and star directors, by giving them an obscenely disproportionate share of the pie, but they will go to WAR to further deminish the long diminishing costs they contractually owe to the rank and file. The WGA is first, that's the only reason they're going to war with them. But the WGA is small, SAG, however, is big.
Big in numbers. You have to pay 1 director,1, maybe 4 writers in perpetuity on a film or TV show. You have to pay 30 actors. The MBA for writers is being attacked and people are scratching their heads wondering "why? why are they being so mean? Bear Stearns says the costs are negligible." Yeah - NOW. But 10, 20 years from now, if they have to pay the rank and file of WGA and SAG real money, it comes out of one of 2 places: their ass or the star actors, show-runners and directors asses. And this is the choice they've made; we can't piss off the star actors, show-runners and directors - we HAVE tp pretend to be happy to pay them the sun and the moon, but we ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to take it out of our end. We'll take a huge short term hit, and all the bad p.r. you can throw at us to avoid that. To them, it's along term strategy survival. Again, if we all could get a look at the budget of a Hollywood movie, it woud be right there in bl;ack and white. But, they will NEVERR show that to you. It's where the bodies are buried: the sums going to them, the stars - 50% of the money, more? And what goes to everybody else. There's a reason you don't see, say, Jim Carrey bringing this up .Or ANY star actor, show-runner or director. They are well aware where their bread is buttered and have zero interest in a fairer ditribution of wealth. Some one wwrote they disagree when I wrote SAG has become a microcosm of the country. I think that's exactly wrong: SAG has become EXACTLY like the rest of the country: the rich get richer, and the working man and women have trouble paying their bills. That's the truth.
What I would say to squooshy and petegrif is simply this: it seems to me the bottom line on this strike is the AMPTP is going after the rank and file. They are looking to turn the "union" in to a relative handful of mega-stars, who get paid that way, and a huge majority of Wal-Mart workers who take what they're offered, and shut up about it. We seem to be in a situation where a line has been crossed: the WGA is rightfully claiming the moral high ground, and SAG recognizes it's own neck is next. They have been FORCED to strike. If any of the ant-strike bloggers would like to explain how you agree to 4 cents a dvd, $0.00 for original content on the internet (the content delivery system not just of the future, but, let's face it, the present)and $250.00 per year for reuse, I'm all ears. Has it occurred to ElizaW and others that there's a reason the AMPTP made that "offer" and then pitched a hissy fit and walked away from the table? Because they are invested in (for now anyway) a long term strategy to incur big losses for an eventual gain that will bring them multiple billions in added revenue down the road if they just stick to their guns.
You can't make a fair deal with people who have no interest in making a fair deal. Period. And what I suggest about the business model for film and TV is the reason why: the AMPTP has simply decided they need to change the equation to continue as a growth industry, and they're going after the weakest in the herd - the non-stars.
What I am saying is the stars seen to be waking up, but they have to do more than go to bat for their union brothers and sisters, they need to sit down and say "look. we're a big part of the problem - us - the top producers, actors, directors and show-runners. We're paying ourselves ungodly sums of money, then pretending it's 'all for one and one for all,' (the star actors at least) when we KNOW it's about a severely inequitable distribution of wealth." That's why a strike like this is so fascinating to watch: issues begin to clarify, and it's pretty clear a resolution will take an acknowledgment that the WGA and SAG and DGA have a handful of members relative to their overall membership who have consciously put the business model so far out of whack that the AMPTP has finally decided to go to war - against their union brethren! - when it's the stars and their agents and managers and lawyers and publicists who are creating the imbalance in the first place! Do I have an answer? Sure! Do the right thing for the common good! Be fair! Be honest! Be LIBERAL! But, we're talking about an industry that lives on lies and power plays and deception and take-no-prisoners. What I'm saying is the WGA, SAG and the DGA are in this up to their necks, and by refusing to confront the truth, that they are "unions" of a few "haves" and a vast majority of "have nots" they are, by definition, not really unions at all.
I still find it fascinating that people ask, "When are the writers going to get back to the table and make a deal? Instead of, "When are the major corporations going to stop being so disgustingly greedy and make a deal that compensates those who create their product?"
Fact is, no one likes a strike. I read some of these comments and people seem to think the writers are loving this strike. Not all of us are wailing at the sky like a few posters here (some making comments would benefit more from therapy than a WGA/AMPTP deal) but none of us are enjoying this, getting rich from this, or doing this for any reason other than we see what the future could be if we cave in to the AMPTP.
The future of this business will change. It already is. The Internet is still the wild, wild, west, and as hard as corporations try and change it, it will morph like a virus to accomodate and since it's global it will be very hard for the mega-corps to own the whole thing as hard as they may try.
The DGA will make a deal. Residuals and Internet usage aren't a big deal for directors making millions up front and the rest of their members don't get money from secondary plays of the product. The WGA won't make the same deal and the actors - the majority of which live off their residuals and money from secondary usage - certainly won't. So, we're still clawing our way through this. And when the mega-corps want to control it all, it's awfully hard to get a deal - at least a fair deal - for the creators of their product.
Writers, do yourselves a favor: Take whatever deal the DGA gets. It seems like everyone in Hollywood is sick of this strike. The only people who are not sick of this strike is the general public. They don't even seem to be aware that there is a strike. They are too busy watching American Gladiators, The Biggest Loser, Celebrity Apprentice, Terminator: The Sara Connor Chronicles (I watched this last night, it was really good!), and American Idol (the premiere is tonight...yahoo!!!). You guys over-played your hand. Scripted shows are not the only game in town, anymore. Reality shows and game show are players at the table too, now. And they are more than willing to take the air-time you guys are willing to give up. You guys can't act like you can "shut down Hollywood" anymore because, as this strike has shown, you can't. You can hobble it a little bit but, after everything is said and done, the writers (and everyone else who works for the studios) will be worse off than the studios, themselves. You guys need to make nice with the studios. And don't give me this, "We'll just go around the studios and offer our stuff to the public via the internet" mess. That did not work for musicians trying to go around record companies to offer their music on the internet (right, Prince?) and it won't work for you guys. Just like the studios make sure that musicians cds are heavily advertised, that musicians cds are in every Walmart, Target, and other big chain stores, and that musicians videos are played on MTV, so do networks make sure that your shows are heavily advertised, that your shows have great lead-ins to increase viewership, and that the dvds of you shows are in every Walmart, Target, and other big chain stores. Financially speaking, the internet can't come close to doing for you guys what the networks can do for you guys. So, again, make nice with the studios. It will make your lives easier, in the long run.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
