The strike thing is getting out of hand

[JRy]

Filmy, you summed it up perfectly.

The strike is by-no-means getting out of hand. You have to understand that this strike will go down as being one of the most important... even possibly the most important turning points in the entertainment industry.

As of now, almost no one but the studios themselves are getting a cut of online profits. The studios claim online downloads don't make them any money -- when they know it's a bold face lie.
Seriously, how can you not make money from selling a digital product on iTunes and similar services? There is no manufacturing, no physical product, just a digital download that probably costs them less then $5 once Apple has taken their cut. When you sell a download for $10-$15, they make a larger profit than selling a physical DVD.

Then there are studios putting up TV episodes and films online to stream for free, they claim it's just promotional and they make no money from it... When they sell dedicated (and very expensive) ad space -- both banner ads on the webpage and commercials during the video.

The thing is, the studios want to to trick everyone into believing there's no money to be made online, so when the Internet becomes the main distribution platform -- they will already have everyone locked into unfavorable contracts.
The writers aren't stupid, they know the Internet is the future, hell -- cable television as we know it today probably won't exist in 5-10 years. It will all be on demand via the Internet... Same with movies, you won't have to go out and rent movies or wait for Netflix, you'll just select what you want to watch with your remote (I'm aware you can already do this with certain technologies, I am merely pointing out it will become the new standard).

Quite simply, this is a war we can not let them win. The WGA, SAG, DGA all need to band together and make sure they come out on top -- no matter what it takes.
They aren't fighting for just themselves, they are setting the path for all future filmmakers and everyone involved. I am eternally grateful for their efforts.

 

[knightly]

There is overhead in Digital downloads. The servers and the bandwidth take millions of dollars of hardware and telecommunications connections. If you consider the sheer scope of iTunes and that they house all of the content available to most everyone on the freaking planet for download at any given point in time, you're talking many Terrabytes of storage (if not Exabytes).

More than likely, that kind of bandwidth needs at least a OC1 (thick internet pipe) if not larger to handle the 1amount of traffic and the size of the files being transferred. The connection alone costs 10-20k per month. Downloads come from real places, not some the magic ephemera of the internet, so the distribution chain has lots of cost associated with it...and more downloads means more cost, just like in traditional distribution.

So the writers (whom I support) wanting more money cuts into that as well...and as I understand it, the internet distro is the big deal item for this strike. With contracts coming up as mentioned for the DGA and SAG, They want cuts of the internet downloads as well as their current contracts don't cover download at all...they were penned before that was a reality, therefore not considered at all in the contracts. Right now, the studio gets it all form downloads.

 

[directorik]

Whoa man, take off the tin foil hat. I don't know what Variety supports I just read their RSS feeds.

Tin foil hat? You think I'm crazy?

Variety has been very anti WGA from the start. They, too, feel as
you do. That the directors and writer have a lot more to bargain
with than the writers. And that's why the writers are playing
hard ball. The producers also think the directors and actors have
a lot more to bargain with than the writers.

I guess the reason I thought you weren't natural is because of
your "greedy" statement. That seemed to indicate that you have a
negative feeling towards unions.

What if the AMPTP gives the WGA 2.5% for new media? Then SAG and DGA and who else will come forward and request 2.5%. Is that fair? Can anyone even calculate how much might be left for the producers, most notably the ones who actually put up the money, and the distributors should that happen?

Yes, I think it's fair. And yes, people can calculate how much is
left over after 7.5% is given to the guilds.

IF the directors ask for 2.5%. Since most of the DGA members
aren't directors and don't share in the profits, the DGA isn't
going to ask for a share. What the producers are worried about is
the SAG asking for a share.

But I do understand that as a fan of several of the nominated
actors you feel bad for them. I do too. I also feel for the
writers who won't be able to go up to the stage and accept their
award. I hope that this action by both unions will bring the
producers back to the table so a deal can be worked out.

But then, I'm still wearing a tin foil hat.

 

[JRy]

Knightly, that's why I mentioned Apple probably gets around a $5 cut for each download, maybe more, maybe less. But they are definitely making enough to cover their expenses. And bandwidth/storage is constantly expanding and becoming cheaper.

Take a look at Amazon S3 for example:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html?node=16427261

5 years ago, I would have never believed those prices would have been possible. $0.15/month for a gig of data and another (avg) $0.15 per GB transferred, all misc expenses like the connection pipe are included.
Imagine someone like Apple coming in and getting a wholesale discount, they'd probably pay $0.10/month per GB of storage and $0.10 per GB transferred. So, roughly $0.40 for each 4GB DVD quality download that's sold for $10-$15 (~$5 cut for Apple). Television episodes through iTunes float around 250MB, a cost of roughly $0.025 per $1.99 download -- that's a considerably high profit margin on both accounts.

I'd say it's safe to assume Apple doesn't own a majority of their own storage hardware, it's more economical for them to use server farms all over the world. They pay for storage and transfers, and split the backbone connections (most likely OC-48, 2.488 Gbps) with other businesses within the same farm. It keeps their costs as low as possible.

Man, we've gone horribly off topic. I apologize, everyone.

 

[WideShot]

Tin foil hat? You think I'm crazy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin-foil_hat , I was making levity of your lumping me in with Variety. Apparently the reference isn't as well known to you.

I guess the reason I thought you weren't natural is because of
your "greedy" statement. That seemed to indicate that you have a
negative feeling towards unions.

I do feel unions become greedy after they've corrected any unsafe working conditions. And they will continue to do so until they run the industry right out of business. That is their job, its what they get paid for, to create a better environment for their members, regardless of the effect on the industry or the employers. It is the same with all unions.

Yes, I think it's fair. And yes, people can calculate how much is
left over after 7.5% is given to the guilds.

IF the directors ask for 2.5%. Since most of the DGA members
aren't directors and don't share in the profits, the DGA isn't
going to ask for a share. What the producers are worried about is
the SAG asking for a share.

My question was, if the reasoning for the strike and the union solidarity was that if they didn't AMPTP would be able to shut out all unions on new media or other requests, then it follows that the AMPTP must be thinking the same thing regarding giving the WGA 2.5% of new media, that the other two can request such and threaten a strike if they don't get it.

Now my question to you is, is that 2.5% for SAG as a whole on a picture or is that 2.5% per agreement?

 

[directorik]

That's kinda what I thought. People who wear tin foil hats are paranoid and crazy.

I'm crazy, but I'm not sure that lumping you in with Daily Variety
makes me paranoid.

And that's why I don't see you as neutral. You believe something
about unions that I see as bias against them - something I think
is incorrect. Certainly incorrect from my (not neutral)
experience. None of the unions I belong to want to run the
industry out of business. You feel that way, and I won't argue
your point. But it doesn't appear to be a neutral stand.

Of course the AMPTP is thinking that. They shut out the writers
from home video revenue in 1988 and reaped the benefits. They
hope the WGA backs off on their demand so they can keep more of
the revenue. That's good business. And if they give in to the
WGA, SAG is going to ask for the same thing. 5% of new media
revenue going to writers and actors is something the studios do
not want to do.

But in the eyes of many - including Variety - it's greedy for the
writers to want a piece of the action. Something as both a writer
and producer, I don't understand. And I admit I'm not neutral on
the subject. That 2.5% is going into someones pocket. The
producers want it in theirs, the writers want in in theirs.

Where I am neutral is I see both sides. The producers take the
financial risk so they want the largest share. The writers see
their contribution as essential and worth not only a fee up
front, but a percentage on the back end.

Greedy? Maybe.
Trying to run the industry out of business? Not from my POV.