Well there goes Phase One, AFTRA votes to go it alone...

Well there you have it.
Hollywood Reporter is reporting (it's what they do) that AFTRA will be negotiating contracts on its own from now on.
i agree with comments that this move doesn't seem to be for the benefit of the actors involved with both guilds, but political.
SAG has been making A LOT of noise of late, but recently been backing off, even pulling plans to institute bloc voting and pressuring AFTRA for a more accurately representative split at the bargaining table.
With upcoming contract renegotiations, it leads me to think AFTRA is making a play for AFTRA contracts to be the preferred contracts. Why wouldn't actors want a unified front at the negotiating table? Much like previous contracts (video games for example) I think we'll see a guild ready to expend as much energy negotiating with producers as it will be expending in undercutting rival guilds.

Could we be witnessing the beginning of buy out contracts? This would worry me as both guilds are notorious for setting ridiculous minimums for scale. Combine that with losing residuals, and I just have to wonder how much further we can de-value performance...

Story @ Hollywood Reporter

SAG Watchdog: Aftra Killing Residuals?

someaudioguy some audio guy AFTRA, SAG, Negotiations, Contracts, Phase One, Rogue

Is AFTRA doing away with actor's residuals?

Sent in from my friend David, SagWatchDog.com is posting contracts, which prove that AFTRA will be cutting residuals from up coming negotiations with studios.

If you don�t believe AFTRA�s current leadership doesn�t want you see these contracts, let me exhibit a letter and contract that AFTRA sent me after considerable pressure on my part.

It is the �It�s a Laugh Productions, Inc.� agreement between Disney and AFTRA leadership. As, you read it, remember it sacrifices actors livelihood to a company that reported annual revenue of THIRTY FIVE BILLION DOLLARS--a significant amount that Disney credited, in the press, to such highly successful AFTRA cable shows like Hannah Montana and others.

You�ll notice the use of intimidation in the letter to persuade me to NOT reveal the contracts content to you. Sorry, guys, it ain�t gonna work on the Ol� Dog.

You can read the rest of the post, and see copies of these contracts here.

some audio guy someaudioguy aftra voice over voice acting guild actors contracts business commercials residuals

Warburton talks to Kotaku - has funny voice - is big guy

Reading through Kotaku's interview with Patrick "Puddy-The-Tick-Brock-Sampson" Warburton, I just can't shake his voice. It's just plain funny.

Anywho, if you haven't figured it out, Warburton is a pretty accomplished voice actor, and while the interview is pretty interesting, I found this bit to be the most telling:

"Videogames are fun to do," said Warburton. "I don't really see how you could make a living off of it. These games can make jillions of dollars, but the piece of the action that actors get is really miniscule compared to what these things do. But any paycheck is better than a kick in the pants. It's fun to work on them and be part of them."

This guy is most certainly making bigger deals than scale, and even HE thinks video game voice actors are underpaid. It really is time for videogames to start paying out residuals.

READ THE WHOLE INTERVIEW HERE @ KOTAKU

P.S.

Jerry: So, Puddy, this is a pretty good move for you, huh? No more "grease monkey".
David Puddy: I don't much care for that term.
Jerry: Oh. Sorry, I didn't know...
David Puddy: No, I don't know too many monkeys who could take apart a fuel injector.
Jerry: I saw one once that could do sign language.
David Puddy: Yeah, I saw that one. Uh... Koko.
Jerry: Yeah, Koko.
David Puddy: Right, Koko. That chimp's alright. High-five.

HIGH-FIVE!

Well Said! Clear simple viewpoint on WGA Strike - "Why We Fight"

It's amazing what four cents can do...

"Why We Fight"

Studios and Writers getting closer to a deal

I really hope WGA doesn't strike. I just don't see how it'll actually help things right now.

That being said, it looks like we're one step closer to preventing that from happening.

Story going up everywhere (I just happened to catch it first on the Wall Street Journal), it looks like the AMPTP withdrew one of its residual proposals:

The move by the Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers
marks the first concession from either side in contract talks that have
become increasingly hostile in recent weeks, increasing the possibility
of a walkout by the 12,000 voting members of the WGA on Nov. 1. The
AMPTP withdrew a controversial proposal to withhold the payment of
residuals until after a specific television show or film had recouped
its cost.

It's kinda funny to me as this is exactly what I've been asking for for video game residuals...

I guess it's reasonable to be weary of the bookkeeping given fairly recent shenanigans, but I'm glad to see at least one major point of contention fall by the wayside.

Read the rest here (@WSJ Online)!

NPR Podcast: "Video-Game Actors Seek a Bigger Share of Profits"

OK, I know the title is kinda "duh". Of COURSE performers are going to want a bigger share of profits, but NPR does a really decent job of explaining why.

When you examen the economies involved on video gaming, it's getting harder to deny that actors should receive either a better buy out or some small residual pool.

I know it's an extreme example of success, but Halo 3's sales are indicative of where "block buster" money is going (since it's not going to movie studios).
*First Day estimates of $170 Million (Spiderman 3 did 150 it's opening WEEKEND).
*First Week Sales of $300 Million (or roughly three times the total box office).
*Drove console sales, resulting in an average doubling of XBox 360's sold week over week.
*Estimated 4500 years of man-hours spent on XBox Live.

So what did the actors get paid?
Well outside of those on the IMDB page for H3, most likely some derivative of scale.
Best case being maybe 3x scale, or about $2100 per four hour recording session, and I doubt that many were paid that well.

And that's it. Nothing else.

One of the big arguments against residuals is risk. Game producers are never guaranteed revenue, and with budgets now approaching and exceeding movie budgets, it can be a scary proposition to put out a game that people might not buy. Production also claims that there wont be additional revenues like movies have (from theatrical, to cable, to DVD, etc).

Fair enough, but I think games do enjoy additional revenues. They're all just game related. Halo 3 is currently a $60 game exclusive on the XBox 360. If MS is smart they'll cut prices on the game around the same time as a big PS3 game comes out (so we should see a brief surge). Next we should see a three game special edition box set with all of the Halo games, so we can re-buy all of that content. After a couple months the game should be ported to Windows PC's, where we'll see another small market surge for the game. So, even if Halo 3 had a $100 million production budget, it was already into profit territory in the first day, and we'll probably see about a year's worth of sales.

I mean even the Wii will play old original Nintendo games at about $5 a pop, so I'm not sure how that's not additional revenues...

Now to be fair, Halo 3 is the exception not the rule. Halo was also made by Bungie, which is owned by Microsoft (well not any more, but at the time), so all of that profit is probably being rolled back into the fact that MS sells it's console at a loss (as does Sony, but not Nintendo).
However, all that being said, I still feel like there is some room to start including baby-step residuals into these contracts. Why not set up the pool after production costs have been met? Basically anything to further reward products that do well, which would attract more talent, probably improve the product, sell more games, attract more talent, etc, etc, etc.

Anywho, here's the link to NPR's story. Give it a listen.

MAN, that was A LOT of typing...

Powered by ScribeFire.

Bout Time the Unions Got Pissed! FIX RESIDUALS!!!

I know, they're technically "guilds"...

Out of the Hollywood Reporter yesterday, Borys Kit writes up a quick article about the WGA possibly hooking up with SAG and the DGA. I've been hearing grumblings of possible strikes happening, but lately it seems that the heat might be turning up soon.
While it would suck for the company I currently work with, I can't say I blame the unions.
Writers, as well as Actors and Directors, were hosed on home video, cable, DVD, interactive, and look to be getting screwed on VOD and "new media". I'm actually surprised that they didn't consider working together sooner...

"Unwilling to go on record for fear of staking out positions that haven't been officially sanctioned by the guild, a number of writers agreed to step forward on the condition of anonymity. Many already are getting their financial houses in order, others are writing furiously to finish scripts for companies that are stockpiling. But one theme comes through loud and clear, and it's a heated paraphrase of the great writer Paddy Chayefsky: Scribes are mad as hell, and they aren't going to take it anymore."I think writers in general are getting sick of being kicked around. There's a lot of fury out there," says one screenwriter who writes for A-listers.
The big issue is money -- specifically, money as it relates to new technology such as Internet downloads and VOD."The model for Internet downloads shouldn't be any different than the model for pay-per-view, or the model for DVDs, or any other means of watching entertainment. What the fuck is the difference how someone watches it? If they're watching it and I've written it, I should get paid for it," the writer says."

Read the rest Here!
someaudioguy some audio guy voice over SAG aftra voice acting auditions work business career guilds demo production audiobooks radio tv commercials