Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 3881033" data-attributes="member: 2525">That's exactly what I have been trying to do.  I posted two of them now, and I am trying to articulate some of the combined stuff I have seen in some financial docs and other places. I will look for more articles, but that was my whole point - has anyone read any good articles from the other side on this and if so can they please post them?First, that whole four cents thing is a bit inaccurate.  On a standard 1 million unit sale of a DVD, a writer garners at least an additional $64,800 beyond initial compensation (on 5 million units at least $324,000; on 10 million units $648,000, etc.).Second, my "more complicated" was directed at the online issue and not the DVD issue.  The DVD issue is relatively easy.  My understanding is that during the last negotiations the WGA withdrew the DVD issue.  It's the online and "new media" issue that is the complicated part of this dispute.If people copy the online content and distribute it themselves to their friends, causing those people to not watch the actual show at all whereas they would have previously watched it, then it's costing them money.  In addition, putting it up online costs money, and not just in bandwidth.  There is an army of guys right now dealing with online issues at the studios, they make decent money, and right now those departments are not considered profit centers but "potential future profit centers".  In other words, they are a write-off right now.  Like Eisner said, it's their own darn fault for talking up the online stuff before it was making money in order to impress investors, as it had the unintended result of actually convincing non-investors like the writers that it really was currently profitable when it's not.Right now, as far as I can tell, they are not profitable.  While you cannot skip over those ads, it's very hard to even convince advertisers to place them and pay well for them, and sometimes the ad you are seeing is actually a FREE ad attached as a special to an TV ad deal, which serves essentially as a placeholder to try and show that the advertising in that media can work.If you have any evidence that the online shows are making a profit, could you link to it?  Given how worthwhile it would be as information for investors in those Studios, and how the disclosure requirements for public companies require announcing material profit centers of the company, it should be out there.  Right now, as far as I can tell, it's not.  And, that's because they are not right now turning a profit, but are buried in advertising and promotional costs as a negative and not a positive.Here are some additional facts from the AMPTP site:1) As the WGA knows and its own records will attest, writers are paid residuals on permanent digital downloads. 2) As the WGA knows and its own records will attest, writers are paid residuals on pay-per-view digital downloads.3) When the WGA went on strike, an offer to pay writers for Internet streaming was on the table.</blockquote>

Verification