THE DEVIL MADE ME DO IT

"OK........ he let's out a massive sigh tinged with defeat."

I'm really struggling with what I'm about to write. On my right shoulder is an angel who wants me to encourage all comments, say everyone's opinion matters, clap my hands and say "good job" after my infant son pulls a bugger out of his nose. Then there's the daemon on the left. Jack Daniels in one hand, cigarette in the other who whispers "are you f*@#ing kidding me? Who's the kid off the short bus?"

I'm going with him this morning. Time for some tough love.

SNAP OUT OF IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Some of these comment read like part of Amy Adams' dialogue in the first act of Enchanted. It's in no way based in reality. I apologize for what I am about to write.

Delusion #1)"it shouldn't be based upon whether one is able to pay " Reality: first of all this is hypothetical to make you guys think outside of your preconceived notions, second "should" has nothing to do with it. "Should" is always how we would like it to be. "Is" is what matters, and currently there IS not a great incentive for representatives to read you stuff.

Delusion #2 "doesn't guarantee that the script has any more merit" Reality: Yes it probably would, as bad writers would do a better job of self-censoring for fear of losing money.

Delusion #3) "kind of like digging for diamonds. One is paid very handsomely once the perfect stone is unearthed.” Reality: Writer pay across the board at all studios is down.... SIGNIFICANTLY. Assume 2/3rds of that diamond just disappeared. Now that diamond sells for less than the average home in Southern California.

Delusion #4) "but that agent/manager is always on the lookout for new untapped talent." Reality: Why????? Why would a rep want to spend time looking at no-names rather than work promoting his clients who are proven $ producers?

Delusion #5 "if a writer knows in his/her heart that the script is truly marketable and profitable and sees the end product through creative as well as business eyes, then no money could possibly pay for what one believes in." Reality: Oh my god, did a blue bird just land on my shoulder, and are there butterflies in my office? Let me list of a few other "true believers" Gen. George Armstrong Custer, the Light Brigade, Soviet troops in Afghanistan, the Jamaican Bobsled team, and presently my alma mater UCSB Basketball team going to the NCAA's as a 15 seed. Most writers don't have the knowledge or experience to be able to accurately make that judgment call. And if they are wrong, they waste years of their life pushing a rock up a hill.

Delusion #6)"there is also something to be said about struggle and having the drive and belief in not only oneself, but in one's script." Reality: NO, there is not. It's really tough enough for writers already. We don't need to make it any harder.

Delusion #7) "everyone has heard of at least one Hollywood movie which was considered nothing ...and ... goes on to become a blockbuster and award winner.” Reality: Not really, blockbuster and award winner????? Maybe one or two, but that would be out of the universe of 100's of thousands or millions of projects people have attempted over the years. Do you want to base your career on a 1/million??

Delusion #8) "no one has a crystal ball as to how any project will turn out." Reality: Yeah actually we do. We use our experience working in the trenches to predict what will happen. And more often than not... we're right.

People, we, your representatives, are getting pounded out there on your behalf. It's the worst it's ever been since I got in the business in 1994. That year The Long Kiss Goodnight sold for $4 million. Today, that script would be passed on and the producer told, come back to the studio when you have Hugh Jackman. And even then the payday would be 350/500, not 4 million.

Please wake up. Help us, help you.



This discussion is not about the specific dollar amounts.......

Example, many writers can't or won't get their heads around this concept and yet would gladly work for a subpar producer at minimum wage or free in hopes of furthering their career. When you add up the lost income from working at a reduced rate in exchange for this producer reading your script after working there for months, the cost (in both $ and time) is vastly higher than anything I've suggested here.

This reminds me of a discussion I had in 2008 regarding why so few homes we're selling here in So. Cal. Buyers look to the future. They look at how the home will appreciate or depreciate while they own it. Sellers look to the past. They remember how their neighbor sold his home for $750,000 in 2005 and they are not willing to accept a penny less. This Seller has failed to acknowledge the market has changed and watches his overpriced home sit for two years until finally in an act of desperation reduces it to $695k, but it too late and the home goes into foreclosure.

Writers are doing the same thing. They are looking to the past for examples of what to do in the future without acknowledging that the market has changed and the old ways are no longer as effective as they once were.

As for the Ivory towers and telling writers not to pay. I'm guilty of being part of that chorus in the past, but I'm now screaming to the mountain tops for you guys to realize that times have changed and whether it's paying $ to a REPUTABLE group (I'm astonished by how many of you can't wrap your heads around the concept of paying for quality, ethical labor) or baby sitting for a directors kids in exchange for him reading your script and giving feedback, or getting it read via a website you build or making friends on LinkedIn or facebook or bartending where agents hangout or whatever, do whatever it takes. Stop judging on style and only look at results. If it’s effective, do it. If not don’t. Most of the people in Ivory Towers are decades away from the reality you face.

Yes the cream rises.... if it gets read. The exercise was the equivalent of saying you could take the stairs to the top of Mt. Everest to speak to an agent or ride the elevator for $, Alan, I'll take the elevator.

As for what it says about Agents and Managers, it says the same thing it always has that, with the exception of a few idiots like me who doll out free advice, they will always do what is in THEIR OWN self interest.

When David Geffen was recently asked why he had chose the music business, he said that it was simply because he liked to make money and in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s it was relatively easy to do in music.

I also have to point out that it's kind of sad that when I post information about surging red box sales, which is the WWII equivalent of the Germans capturing the British Isles and New York, there's not one comment. And yet when I pose a mere hypothetical about increasing cost for writers, comments and readership go through the roof. Trust me redbox, netflix and the like are a far bigger threat to you writers.

THE POLL RESULTS ARE IN!

The poll results are in!

If you are an unrepped, non-WGA writer, how much would you be willing to spend to have a known agent/manager (not his asst. or reader), immediately read your script cover to cover and consider you as a possible future client?

20% of you Zip!

15% of you $100

40% of you $250

10% of you $500

15% of you $1000

So 75% of respondents would only pay $250 or LESS!

So what this is telling us is that getting your BIG BREAK, getting your chance to get up on stage and show what you’ve got to someone who can launch your career and forever get you out from behind the figurative barista counter is only worth $250. Really?! Really?!

I knew people who jumped for joy when they got into USC, UCLA or NYU film school and the right to pay $50,000 or more to learn their craft. But this poll says these writers won't pay more than $250 to work at their craft and most likely get paid. Does this make sense?

What does that say about the writers who answered this poll?

What might it say about writers in general, or the system?

SHOULD IT COST $500 TO SUBMIT A SCREENPLAY?

This question rose from a panel I was on 3 weeks ago with a producer with over 1 billion in ticket sales, another lit agent, and the story editor at WME. The panel was specifically created to give this particular group of high level screenwriting students a "reality check" regarding the business and their material.
 One of the major points made was that far too many talented writers are wasting their time pushing material that will never sell or move their career forward.

With the advent of final draft, pdf’s and email the cost to writers to create and send a properly formatted screenplay have dropped dramatically. In economic and strategic terms this is referred to a low barrier to entry. And many people feel that since they can type and have seen many movies that all of a sudden they are screenwriters. If I applied this same mentality to myself I should be at the Vancouver Olympics this week on the U.S. Team….. because I can ski.

An outcome of this is many untalented writers pushing bad scripts and as a result we agents, managers and producers are drowning in crap submissions. This is the very reason why new writers find it so very difficult to get people to read them. 
When you ask someone to read you, they immediately think about the odds that your script is any good, and that’s not a function of you. It’s based on 100’s or 1000’s of scripts they’ve read in the past. It’s pretty simple math; odds that it’s good enough to sell or sign 3%, time to fully read 1hr -2 hrs. What would you say?

A major problem in the system is writers have no economic disincentive preventing them from simply throwing material at agents/managers/producers to see if it sticks. And, if there were a monetary penalty for submitting a bad script that waists everybody’s time, gumms up the system, and hampers quality material from getting through (say $500, if the script is deemed good then the writer gets their $500 back), the quality of material would probably increase dramatically as writers would not risk lousy submissions and b forced to better police their submissions.

Thoughts?

FIRST-EVER SURVEY OF SPECIALTY FILMS AND FINANCING COMPLETE

Though this information "feels" accurate, I have to note that I haven't personally double checked its data or methodology. Example, industry reports usually only include data from the largest agencies and management companies because its very difficult to capture data from the small ones... like us, and all those small companies in aggregate are meaningful. Regardless, the important takeaways concerning trends are probably fairly accurate, and I applaud Jeremy's work as it helps demystify the industry, which allows investors to feel more confident and therefore fund films.

Jeremy Juuso Consulting has completed the first year of its ongoing survey of the U.S. specialty film market and its financing traits.

Defined as any film released into 1,000 U.S. movie theaters or fewer on opening weekend, specialty films are comprised primarily of independent films with no studio ties.

Summary statistics for the 2009 U.S. specialty market are available to the public in “The A.K.A. Report” at www.jeremyjuuso.com/film.htm .

Individual statistics on over 400 films are also available to the public at the same web address.

Findings about the 2009 U.S. specialty market include the following:

OVERALL:
----- 403 films were released, excluding reissues and the Academy-nominated short films compilation.

FINANCING:
----- 43 involved studio financing.

----- 38% were private equity financed (i.e., private equity comprised more than 70% of the budget).

----- 18% were distributor financed (i.e., at least one distributor or its parent company supplied more than 30% of the budget).

----- 12% were private equity driven (i.e., private equity comprised 30%-60% of the budget).

----- 10% were European government supported as part of an international coproduction.

----- No overlap exists among the previous four categories.

STARS AND BOX OFFICE:
----- 137 films (34%) had at least one star, where a star is an actor who previously was a lead in at least one feature grossing $50 million or more domestically.

----- The average budget for star films released during Q1-Q3 2009 was estimated at $7.9 million (excluding P&A), with an average box office of $1.8 million for these same films.

----- The average budget for non-star films released during Q1-Q3 was estimated at $3.6 million (excluding P&A), with an average box office of $1.0 million for these same films.

----- Less than 15% of specialty films released in Q1-Q3 generated 90% of box office revenues for specialty films released in Q1-Q3.

----- Late Q4 releases are still accruing significant box office receipts.

FESTIVALS:
----- 344 films (85%) debuted at a film festival prior to U.S. theatrical release.

----- The top debuted-at festivals were Sundance (64 films), Toronto (43), Cannes (37), Berlin (21), Tribeca (19), Venice (17), SXSW (13), Slamdance (7), and Telluride (6).

----- 95 other film festivals had less than 6 films represented.

PRODUCER’S REPS:
----- 113 specialty films (28%) had hired producer’s reps to attain and/or negotiate their domestic distribution agreements.

----- The producer’s reps did not represent the films in the majority of foreign markets, if any.

----- Among the films released, CAA had been hired as a producer’s rep on 21 films, Cinetic Media on 20, Submarine Entertainment on 17, William Morris on 14, Endeavor on 11, and ICM on 8.

Further details on distributors, self-distribution, foreign sales agents, genres and languages, and day-and-date VOD can be found in “The A.K.A. Report” at www.jeremyjuuso.com/film.htm .

LAEDC Study Concludes Redbox’s $1 DVD New-Release Rentals Could Result in $1 Billion in Entertainment Industry Losses

Ripple Effect of Lost Revenues in Southern California Could Cost More Than 9,280 Jobs and $1.5 Billion in Economic Output, Along With Reduced Contributions to Guild and Union Pension Plans
Los Angeles – The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC) today unveiled a new economic study entitled “The Economic Implications of Low Cost DVD Rentals” which illustrates the negative impact that low cost, new-release DVD rentals could have on the Entertainment industry and the Southern California economy.
The LAEDC study, which utilizes the Redbox model of $1 DVD rentals available at the street date, shows the ripple effect of $1 billion in lost revenues to the domestic home video industry in the Southern California region – the entertainment capital of the world – would lead to an additional $500 million in reduced economic activity. The loss of motion picture production in and around Los Angeles would result in the loss of more than 9,280 jobs with annual earnings of almost $395 million, according to the LAEDC’s study.
“The economics of the motion picture industry are based on exclusive release windows which allow price differentiation - that is - some earlier transactions take place at higher price points," said Gregory Freeman, Vice President of Consulting and Economic Policy for the LAEDC. "Redbox, or any other distributor that weakens the release window model, could reduce overall industry revenues. Lower revenues will likely lead to lower production activity, hurting the Southern California economy.”
Of the 9,280 jobs, more than half of the losses will occur in the Information Sector, the LAEDC found. In addition to motion picture and sound recording industries, this sector includes publishing industries, radio and television broadcasting, telecommunications industries and Internet service providers. Other industries impacted will be retail trade, accommodation and food services, health care and social assistance, professional, scientific and technical services, and manufacturing, among others.

LAEDC Study Concludes Redbox’s $1 DVD Rentals Could Result in $1 Billion in Entertainment Industry Losses p. 2/2
The loss of production will also result in a reduction of up to $35.4 million in contributions to health and welfare funds for entertainment guild and union members. The LAEDC study found that the majority of this loss will occur in union plans for below-the-line employees because residuals paid to such employees are diverted into health and welfare funds.
Finally, state, county and local tax revenues could be reduced by more than $30 million, according to the LAEDC study. Earnings that would have circulated throughout the regional economy, generating taxable purchases and thus tax revenue, will be lost. Additionally, the state will lose income tax revenue and unemployment and disability taxes that would have been paid.
On top of the losses caused by Redbox $1 DVD rentals, the home video industry as a whole is undergoing transformational change, which is described in some detail in the LAEDC study. The current recession has adversely affected consumer purchases of discretionary items, technology is enabling digital delivery of content, and households are opting for other forms of entertainments. Nonetheless, the LAEDC study concludes, any loss of revenue due to the widespread availability of low-cost rentals, particularly if new releases are available for rent on the street date, can be characterized as an opportunity foregone, since overall revenues of the industry would be higher if these rentals were not available.
Redbox’s low-cost kiosks are challenging the traditional distribution and release model of the industry, which is built upon timed, sequential release into differentiated market segments through a variety of channels (box office, sell-through, rental, pay television and cable). According to the report, the financial success of a project (and its distributor) depends on a multi-phased distribution strategy. Although box office numbers are headlined in industry and popular press, revenues from this income stream account for less than twenty-five percent of the total revenues earned by distributors. Most movies are not immediate money makers and companies rely on sequential sales, such as in the home entertainment market to recoup their production and marketing investment.
Given the unpredictability of the studio agreements and litigation with Redbox, the LAEDC report finds that the economic impact of the spread of low-cost new release DVD rentals is uncertain. However, the report says film production will decline relative to what it would otherwise have been.
The report also points out that new forms of digital delivery will provide new streams for the industry, but the decline in DVD revenues represents an ongoing loss of an existing significant revenue stream, while the offsetting gains in revenue from digital delivery seem to be more uncertain.
To view the entire report, visit www.laedc.org.

About LAEDC (www.LAEDC.org) The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC), the region’s premier business leadership organization, is a private, non-profit organization established in 1981. Its mission is to attract, retain, and grow businesses and jobs for the regions of Los Angeles County. Since 1996, the LAEDC has helped retain or create more than 152,000 jobs, providing $7.5 billion dollars in annual economic impact and more than $128 million dollars in annual tax revenue to support local government and schools.

Report Sees Modest Increase in Industry Employment

LAEDC’s Entertainment Report Sees Modest Increase
in Industry Employment, Another Strong Year at Box Office
***
Despite a boost from California’s film incentive program, runaway TV/film production remains a significant threat
Los Angeles, CA — A new study released today by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation’s (LAEDC) Kyser Center for Economic Research predicts a modest increase in industry employment in 2010.
The report also forecasts another strong year at the box office, no foreseeable labor issues, and a boost in production from California’s film incentive program.
Other pluses include NBC’s programming of scripted series in the 10:00 p.m. primetime spot being vacated by Jay Leno and the ongoing investment in the entertainment industry’s infrastructure such as NBC Universal’s Evolution Project and the Disney/ABC Studios at the Ranch. However, key issues include changes in the business model, with an intense focus on costs. Run-away production remains a significant threat and changing technology, distribution, exhibition and marketing models are noted. The media industry will continue to struggle, reflecting a slow rebound in advertising and changes in the way consumers access information.
The LAEDC study recommends a renewed focus on entertainment as a serious business because it is a high-wage, high-multiplier activity. The study cited efforts by the cities of Los Angeles and Santa Clarita to become more “film-friendly.” It also recommends watching the state’s film incentive plan that has helped boost employment in this sector.

“The coming changes in how the industry operates also need to be monitored,” said LAEDC

Founding Economist Jack Kyser. “At the end of the day, content is still king and leaders need to be alert so that much of it is still produced in the County.”
Entertainment: The TV/film production industry had a good year at both the domestic and international box office in 2009. However, this box office bonus did not translate into jobs. In 2009, there were an estimated 9,000 industry job cuts, reducing the total from 141,400 in 2008 to 132,400 jobs.

The slump was blamed on the economic impact of lingering labor issues, run-away production and major changes in the industry’s business model.

Television (broadcast & cable): This sector is facing major challenges in its business model, due to changes in the way consumers access content and their willingness to pay for it. A declining pool of advertising dollars compounds the problem. According to the LAEDC study, broadcast TV employed 9,185 people in the County in 2008, while the cable and subscription TV industry had a local work force of 6,707 people. Employment in both sectors declined during 2009. A significant challenge for both broadcast and cable TV is the growing audience appetite for on-demand TV, and their unwillingness to pay for the content.

New Film & Media News Content

If you scroll down the far right side of the blog you'll now find film and media news from the LA times, NY Times, Financial Times, Nikki Finke's Deadline Hollywood, Daily Variety etc.

I hope it helps as a one stop news source.

Best regards,

Bruce