|
OldSenileGuy posted:Back to work, everyone: mcmagic posted:Yesssssssssssssss, bring me
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 02:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:47 |
|
|
At last Tim Burton can finish filming Beetlejuice 2. Hollywood is completely devoid of creativity
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 02:17
|
|
|
I'm holding out until SAG confirms
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 02:25
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Yesssssssssssssss, bring me the shows  I've ran out of things to watch. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 02:26
|
|
|
Bob Iger saying the strikes cost has been negligible for them so far and that he's optimistic do not inspire me but what do I know. Is it normal for a strike to be called off before members even know the terms to vote on? And are people returning to work not going to need new contracts?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 02:30
|
|
|
Khanstant posted:Bob Iger saying the strikes cost has been negligible for them so far and that he's optimistic do not inspire me but what do I know. Is it normal for a strike to be called off before members even know the terms to vote on? And are people returning to work not going to need new contracts? I think the way it usually works is that membership will vote soon, so people can just get back to work immediately, but if it’s not ratified by the membership then strikes back on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 02:35
|
|
|
That's exactly what WGA did when they got their agreement. Strike ended September 27, they only started the ratification vote on October 2, and officially ratified on Oct 9th.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 02:36
|
|
|
VorpalBunny posted:I'm holding out until SAG confirms https://twitter.com/sagaftra/status/1722441057571684724
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 03:54
|
|
|
Really glad for them, hope there aren't any traps/bullshit in the new contract but it sounds like it worked out pretty well. Yay Unions! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 13:12
|
|
|
Khanstant posted:Bob Iger saying the strikes cost has been negligible for them so far and that he's optimistic do not inspire me but what do I know. Is it normal for a strike to be called off before members even know the terms to vote on? And are people returning to work not going to need new contracts? Nobody's gone back to work yet, though, because they don't have a contract yet. Membership still needs to see the actual offer and then they vote on if they'll accept the contract. If they do, then they've got a contract and they go back to work. If they reject it, nobody goes back to work, but the strike doesn't auto-restart, because the union hasn't called for a new one yet -- strikes are a negotiating tool, not an automatic trigger. But contracts being rejected is vanishingly unlikely, because the union is not going to accept an offer they don't think they can sell their members on. If it actually happens, I don't know what happens next except that everything is all hosed up because the union will clearly have misread its members and completely lost their trust.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 22:30
|
|
|
Back to work will probably happen after SAG-AFTRA's board, not full membership, approves the contract. People will be working under the new terms even if the contract hasn't been ratified yet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 22:41
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:I don’t think even the studios meaningfully know whether their projects are turning a streaming profit. It’s a whole science to attribute subscription revenues to specific pieces of content. I mean, I have to assume the streaming services have analytics tools to see how many man-hours of viewing time any given piece of content has. It just does them no good to open that up to the studios and creators and to keep the whole thing as obsfugated as possible. Like, royalties on streaming don't necessarily work 1:1 on streaming like they did in legacy media, and in that regard moving to more of a profit sharing model makes sense over traditional royalties. If Netflix or The Mouse own the show on streaming, they aren't selling licensing to UPN or TBS or USA to rebroadcast the show. I, however still 100% do not trust the streaming companies to be up front and honest about viewership time, engagement, or any other metric they might use in whatever a 2024 royalty / profit share model looks like. I worry that they are just going to continue wontonly loving over the actors as hard and as fast as they currently were, just now they will have some new bullshit stats to justify it now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 22:48
|
|
|
I wouldn't even be that confident they do have a good way of actually tracking viewership hours accurately. Even ignoring they have immense incentive to fudge numbers and no accountancy for what they say at all (and possibly even more incentive to fudge numbers if select WGA members get curated peaks at their shady data), I just see a lot of the streaming services to be so poorly functional on so many various devices, it's hard to think they have their backend infrastructure and tracking all sorted out. Wouldn't be surprised if they just pay some company that claims to handle all that and themselves not really wanting to give accurate numbers either. CapnAndy posted:Yeah, it's very normal. T Gotcha. I think hearing the "just give us your ai rights and make it even easier to use em when you die" being the last bit of detail I'd heard before "strikes over, deal made!" just has me skeptical.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 23:09
|
|
|
Just got word the official restart for production on Abbot Elementary is 11/29, I imagine that is in line with the majority of on-lot productions spinning back up. I'm most excited to see whatever pay increases we have to look forward to! I know my friends in post have been back to work for weeks now locking down episodes, so ADR sessions will be at a max for the next few weeks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 23:17
|
|
|
DeathSandwich posted:I mean, I have to assume the streaming services have analytics tools to see how many man-hours of viewing time any given piece of content has. It just does them no good to open that up to the studios and creators and to keep the whole thing as obsfugated as possible. The entire point of the problem, the reason that it's hard, is that "streaming minutes" can't be directly translated into revenues. Up until now, revenues have been directly attributable to pieces of media: movie tickets, selling commercials during ad breaks, selling movie rights for TV broadcast, selling series in syndication, rentals on iTunes. The accounting was pretty simple: someone was paying the studio directly for a specific piece of content, so the revenues could be easily attributed to that project. (This isn't 100% true, HBO was an exception, but it was a rare one!) Now, you've got two decisions: the consumer gives you money, and the consumer decides what to watch. Those things don't happen at the same time, and you don't even really know in which order they happen. Maybe the consumer is already subscribed to Netflix so they decided to throw on Cook At All Costs as background noise, or maybe the consumer wanted to watch Picard so they subscribed to Paramount+ to watch it. In both of those cases, it's not obvious to the streamer how they should allocate the revenue. Maybe you just operate like "yeah, I have a Netflix subscription" and you keep it regardless of whether there's anything you want to watch in a given three month period. Did Netflix make any money from you by producing Cook At All Costs? Maybe not, even though you watched it. If you subscribe to P+ for two months to watch Picard, but you also binge a few seasons of The Good Wife while you're at it just because you're subscribed, how should the streamer allocate the revenue? You may have watched 3x the minutes of TGW than you did Picard, but you only subscribed to watch Picard. The studios don't really care about "minutes streamed", they care about "what will make people spend money on the platform, start subscribing and keep subscribing". They should probably allocate all of the revenue to Picard, and none to The Good Wife. Except, they don't know why you subscribed. They can see when you subscribed, and what you watched after you subscribed, but those are only weakly related to your decision making. They can only look at your behaviour and try to form the best-educated guess possible. The studios are for the first time getting into a business where they don't actually know what their consumers are purchasing from them. They have a lot of data, but the data is only sorta-kinda related to the actual question of "what made us money last quarter", let alone to "what will make us money next quarter". It's not because they're fudging numbers, but just because the numbers they're seeing are "what are people watching", but they're really interested in "what are people paying us to watch". They're not the same question! The dream for them is probably something like "build a content library large enough that people feel they have to subscribe to us, and any quarter-to-quarter or year-to-year decision we make doesn't affect profitability that much so we don't have to worry too much about the specifics", but that's obviously not working for anyone but Netflix.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 23:19
|
|
|
Tracking watchtime isn’t a hard thing and I think even the crappier apps will have it nailed down. The problem is that traditional creatives, I think, will be hugely uncomfortable with apportioning royalties using just watchtime. For creatives, it heavily skews incentives. It drives you to make bloated 2.5 hour blockbusters instead of lean 1.5 flicks. For actors it likely means TV or miniseries will be more lucrative than movies. For platforms it’s also a poor way to attribute subscription revenue. A million people might join to watch the latest Christopher Nolan blockbuster. A thousand people might rewatch Parks and Recreation on loop. The two might end up having similar watchtime, but the former is clearly far more of a revenue driver, at least in the short term. Netflix has presumably thought about this endlessly so their internal metrics for attributing revenue are likely complex as heck. Traditional creatives won’t understand or agree with them. They have every reason to be skeptical. It’s not a solved problem. That’s why many in the industry are in favor of streaming companies going back to having ads. It’s a straightforward way to attribute revenue. e: yeah whatever the person above said
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 23:22
|
|
|
The studios have whole bunch of correlation and no hard causation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 23:23
|
|
|
When should we expect the proposed deal to be fully available to the public?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 23:23
|
|
|
Regalingualius posted:When should we expect the proposed deal to be fully available to the public? "Full details of the agreement will not be provided until the tentative agreement is reviewed by the SAG-AFTRA National Board." They're meeting tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 23:35
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:It’s not a solved problem. That’s why many in the industry are in favor of streaming companies going back to having ads. It’s a straightforward way to attribute revenue. How do ads not create the same problem? Presumably the more ad breaks you cram into your work the more revenue you make - incentivising longer movies and shows in the same way. It's not like there are limited timeslots to be negotiated over like with regular TV.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 23:39
|
|
|
stev posted:How do ads not create the same problem? Presumably the more ad breaks you cram into your work the more revenue you make - incentivising longer movies and shows in the same way. It's not like there are limited timeslots to be negotiated over like with regular TV.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 23:52
|
|
|
If these market incentives are so "perverse", how come they delivered onto a grateful watching public the five act structure for TV dramas?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2023 23:57
|
|
|
Hopefully the AI poo poo was the only sticking point, and the studios blinked before the union did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2023 01:55
|
|
|
If both unions caved to the AI poo poo for a short-term pay raise, they've signed their own death warrants. Really hoping that didn't happen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2023 02:02
|
|
|
When do we get a look at what the deal was? The WGA revealed their deal a day later IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2023 02:55
|
|
|
Yeah, i want to see what the rank and file get. Considering how long they were out of work, i hope it was worth it
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2023 03:43
|
|
|
Deadline is reporting that SAG-AFTRA will likely only send out details of the agreement to members on Monday, one day ahead of the start of the vote. It's unclear if they intend to post the document publicly like the WGA did, but the union is so big you have to think we'll have a PDF pretty rapidly.quote:An 80-page summery of the full agreement, which has not been made public, will go to eligible members of the guild November 13, I hear. Ratification voting on the agreement starts November 14 and runs until the first week of December for the eligible members of the 160,000-strong guild.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Deadline is reporting that SAG-AFTRA will likely only send out details of the agreement to members on Monday, one day ahead of the start of the vote. It's unclear if they intend to post the document publicly like the WGA did, but the union is so big you have to think we'll have a PDF pretty rapidly. Reports say SAG isn’t getting streaming revenue which is probably why. That’s a major concession.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
They sure seem to be acting cagey with the contract deets for something you'd think would be an easy Yes from the enthusiastic yet vague way they've been talking it up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 20:06
|
|
|
Justine Bateman is unhappy
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 20:31
|
|
|
Tree Reformat posted:They sure seem to be acting cagey with the contract deets for something you'd think would be an easy Yes from the enthusiastic yet vague way they've been talking it up. That and the cheery way execs seem to be like "teehee sag practically got everything they asked for!" just feels like they pulled a sneaky.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2023 20:36
|
|
|
fart blood posted:Justine Bateman is unhappy She went over some of the specifics of the AI stipulations on Twitter and it is Not Great https://twitter.com/JustineBateman/status/1723505358227042601?s=20
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 03:29
|
|
|
Oof yeah, that all sounds pretty bad 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 03:38
|
|
|
When I think protections against AI I think more in line with "don't do it" and this is just a faulty mesh of easy loopholes to not even need consent to use body doubles, and no consent or compensation of your ai double is used for parody, criticism, etc. greenlight on having AI actors instead of people is also pretty gross. Like drat bare minimum Id think you'd need consent 100% of the time but this isn't even close. Without further clarification just seems like a poison pill. Why wouldn't studios just refuse to hire actors who won't accept whatever cheap rear end agreement for a digital puppet of themselves? A puppet they can also make look however they want, say and do stuff you would never agree to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 03:40
|
|
|
Considering how unhappy I’m hearing a lot of actors are, I wonder if we get a rare case of the actors voting against the deal
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 04:34
|
|
|
Yeah, I was kind of thinking something was up when SAG-AFTRA wasn’t rushing to get out a public summary of the deal. If it really is like that, I’m wondering what their idea is: hope that the members overwhelmingly vote against, then turn around and point to that for the studios to tell them to come up with a better offer?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 05:28
|
|
|
I am hoping they say no and turn the screws as much as they can while they can, especially after this round of execs being like "strikes were barely an inconvenience" poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 05:33
|
|
|
I wonder if the bigger stars leaned on the union to cave in. They’re not really gonna be affected by these new rules anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 05:44
|
|
|
Happy Landfill posted:She went over some of the specifics of the AI stipulations on Twitter and it is Not Great She's been such a voice on this too, so if she's unhappy then the actors have a real decision to make here
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 05:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:47 |
|
|
What percentage of sag members have to agree for the agreement to pass?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2023 07:24
|
|