Re: I am sorry, my apology to MWSM
Paulo Joe Jingy
> I am sorry. I apologize to everyone on this group whom I've offended.
You're having loads of fun, aren't you?
Jacques E. Bouchard
> I am sorry. I apologize to everyone on this group whom I've offended.
>
> And that thing called karma just bit me on the ass.
>
> I was so happy to have somebody validate my work as a writer that I
> kinda' blindly signed with Gallagher Literary. I barely read the
> contract. When I saw ten percent I assumed I was getting a deal
because
> most managers charge fifteen percent. I didn't read what it actually
> meant.
>
> Now he owns ten percent of my screenplay and I owe him re-writes if I
> ever hope to get him to send it out and hope for sale.
>
> And if I walk away from this agency he still owns ten percent of my
> screenplay. Tick Gallagher now is latched on to my life blood, sucking
> ten percent off for infinity.
>
> Does anybody know of anyway I could get out of this contract?
>
> Maybe I should just tell him to shove off. Burn the screenplay.
>
> But more importantly I do apologize to the group. They stood by me
when
> I asked my stupid questions, and all I did was turn on them.
>
> I apologize and ask the group's forgiveness.
>
> I'm sorry.
Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us.
Luc Besson doesn't look so bad now, I'll bet...
jaybee
Paul W. Tenny
Hash: SHA512
scott...@yahoo.com wrote:
> I am sorry. I apologize to everyone on this group whom I've offended.
>
> And that thing called karma just bit me on the ass.
>
> I was so happy to have somebody validate my work as a writer that I
> kinda' blindly signed with Gallagher Literary. I barely read the
> contract. When I saw ten percent I assumed I was getting a deal because
> most managers charge fifteen percent. I didn't read what it actually
> meant.
>
> Now he owns ten percent of my screenplay and I owe him re-writes if I
> ever hope to get him to send it out and hope for sale.
Am I reading this right? You are claiming the contact you signed gives
the agency 10% ownership of the script itself? I don't believe it. I
want to see this contract. Redact personal information if you wish, but
I refuse to believe it until I see it.
Paul William Tenny
http://bitch-what.blogspot.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)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=wgTa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Ron
wrote:
> I got fucked.
Assuming you're telling the truth ... which I kind of doubt.
You might be able to talk them into tearing up the contract if you
haven't started working with them yet.
-Ron
Paul W. Tenny
Hash: SHA512
scott...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Go here
> http://tinyurl.com/e8qpt
> to read all about "Tick" Gallagher and how he sucks 10 percent off you
> forever.
> I don't know how I would post the contract here. Maybe a scan? I will
> do it if there is a way.
It's fine, no need, I believe you. I didn't until I read that. Crazy..
> But I was so nervous when I was signing that I just glanced over it and
> the ten percent thing just whizzed by. I didn't know I was giving him
> ten percent of ownership of my screenplay.
Well, live and learn I guess. Could be worse, could have been 50%.
> Today, I couldn't find a bar that was open, so I have a twelve pack of
> Coors Light I'm gonna start on right now.
No sense in letting it drag you down, just get to work an another
script and work out the frustration through it. Write a story about a
guy like Gallagher that screws someone over, and then gets royally
fucked over in return. Who knows, might turn out to be really good.
Paul William Tenny
http://bitch-what.blogspot.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)
iQCVAwUBRGoclvNVdJOJBjCcAQpa8AQA7mD8xwlefdSCEwtqqhTZ8eb5vngfJrvl
lD8bAFofxWM3Efo+X2SAu8IBjuPWmV2sFOgkJbXcEVmAx4VCe5LrU/qHselUHh95
2Ku4V/4nkIZznpPrpGRhcrQWAJTUTbq78AbPGhIgIsfWS8D+GlpzOsIHVRzVbS1W
s0UYqf0xsc8=
=Br0K
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Otto Mation (Caroline Freisen)
news:e4cr2t$kve$1...@reader1.panix.com...
>I am sorry. I apologize to everyone on this group whom I've offended.
>
> And that thing called karma just bit me on the ass.
>
> I was so happy to have somebody validate my work as a writer that I
> kinda' blindly signed with Gallagher Literary. I barely read the
> contract. When I saw ten percent I assumed I was getting a deal because
> most managers charge fifteen percent. I didn't read what it actually
> meant.
>
> Now he owns ten percent of my screenplay and I owe him re-writes if I
> ever hope to get him to send it out and hope for sale.
>
> screenplay. Tick Gallagher now is latched on to my life blood, sucking
> ten percent off for infinity.
>
> Does anybody know of anyway I could get out of this contract?
>
> Maybe I should just tell him to shove off. Burn the screenplay.
>
> But more importantly I do apologize to the group. They stood by me when
> I asked my stupid questions, and all I did was turn on them.
>
> I apologize and ask the group's forgiveness.
>
> I'm sorry.
>
Scott, you've done so much dancing and posturing that I'm not sure whether
this is just a new version. Cry wolf to often and people doubt you.
Nevertheless...
No. The agent does NOT "own" ten percent of your script unless:
1. He sells it.
2. Someone else sells it to someone he has pitched it to first.
Point two is the one you seem to be up in arms over. The easy way around it
is to insist that he notify you in writing of everyone he shows it to or
pitches it to. This is commonly called a paper trail. It protects you
from having him jump up and insist he's shown the script to just anyone a
subsequent agent sells it to.
Now, I don't know anything at all about this agent, but why are you so
distressed over an agent -- any agent! -- getting 10%? The real value of a
literary agent comes at the negotiating table when he negotiates the sales
contract for a script. An agent can't close a sale without your approval.
So if you're an informed writer, and you have an agent who works well with
you, what's the problem? If you can't work well with this agent, what's the
problem? Can you fix it by talking it through?
You really need to grow up if you truly want to be "a writer." Being a
writer has to do with who you are, how you think, and what you do with it.
Having an agent won't make you any more of a writer, but it is a critical
avenue to making a sale if screenwriting is what you want to do. All of
this "Ha ha, I've got an agent" stuff from you make me think of a few
"screenwriters" I knew years ago. The ONLY reason they wanted an agent was
so that they had someone to blame for their work not selling when they got
together for coffee of a morning at Farmer's Market. Never occurred to them
that maybe their writing wasn't all that marketable and that their agent was
the guy with the short end of the stick.
Hope the apology is sincere.
Caroline
Otto Mation (Caroline Freisen)
news:e4de6f$l7d$1...@reader1.panix.com...
>
> Nope.
>
> I wish I as lucky. I didn't sign with an agent. I signed with a
> Literary Managment Company and "Tick" (Rob) Gallagher has a clause in
> my contract that says he OWNS ten percent of my material property.
> Material Property being the screenplay I submitted to him. I WILL NOT
> write him another!
>
> And I have to do free rewrites till he thinks my screenplay is ready to
> send out.
>
> Regardless I signed away TEN PERCENT of my ownership in the property.
> That means I only own 90 percent of my screenplay in exchange for who
> knows what. Free rewrites? Arghhh..
>
> Check the link in my previous post if you want all the ugly details.
>
> When I was signing with him I was nervous and fumbling and just kinda
> scanned the contract the best I could. When I saw ten percent I didn't
> really read what it said, as I was just happy to be signing with a
> manager that only charges ten percent.
>
> Well that ten percent it defined as OWNERSHIP of my screenplay.
>
> I'm totally fucked.
>
> I got snowed.
>
> The guy is a blood sucking tick!
>
> Scott
>
You know, you seem to be having such a wonderful time lying on the floor
crying over how rough your life is that I should probably stop raining on
your parade, but hey... Buy an umbrella.
You think you've been had? Most managers charge 15%. This guy only wants
ten. And what if, just what if he actually knows what he's doing? What if
he helps you polish your screenplay and increases its marketability, then
sells it for you? Poooooor baby!
Go throw your crying towel in the laundry and find out what he wants in the
way of rewrites. Then do them. Make him earn his ten percent!
Caroline
Jacques E. Bouchard
news:e4dhbt$qm2$1...@reader1.panix.com:
> You think you've been had? Most managers charge 15%. This guy only
> wants ten. And what if, just what if he actually knows what he's
> doing? What if he helps you polish your screenplay and increases its
> marketability, then sells it for you? Poooooor baby!
>
> Go throw your crying towel in the laundry and find out what he wants
> in the way of rewrites. Then do them. Make him earn his ten percent!
Caroline, you do know that this is 10% of *everything*, not just the
initial sale, right?
The conflict of interest inherent in someone trying to fill the shoes of
agent and producer at the same time should have been enough for any
reasonably smart person to walk away.
jaybee
Jacques E. Bouchard
> But what if he goes out with it and it doesn't sell. Years pass and I
> end up at another agency.
>
> Then what happens when I sell it?
>
> He comes out of the woodwork and gets 10 percent forever on all
> incomes generated by the property.
>
> It is a totally sucky deal.
Read the contract again. Usually, they get 10% of the sale of *anything*
you write while signed with them - even if you sell it ten years down the
line.
jaybee
Ron
"Jacques E. Bouchard" <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> The conflict of interest inherent in someone trying to fill the shoes of
> agent and producer at the same time should have been enough for any
> reasonably smart person to walk away.
Indeed. Had Scott not been such a prick when I offered him useful
advice, I would have pointed out that you need to move VERY carefully
when you're dealing with a manager. There are a lot of people who call
themselves managers because they see it as a way to control material, to
leverage themselves onboard as a producer.
This sort of attachment can kill a script. Brad Pitt wants his manager
attached as a producer, that's one thing. Joe unknown writer? That's
something else.
I'm writing this for everyone else out there who might be considering
signing with a manager. PROCEED WITH CAUTION.
Normally, the way a producer works is that, if you and he agree on a
story to work on, he get's a development fee ($12.5k) and you get your
writers money, then you go off and write for a while and come back. If
and when the movie gets produced, he gets the rest of his devlopment fee
(another $12.5K) as well as his producer's fee.
So, just for starters, your manager is essentially taking a loan of ten
percent of your writer's fee against his producer's fee - assuming he
ever gets a producer's fee.
But it's worse than that. Because, of course, if a producer and I talk,
agree on a project for me to write, I get paid. If my manager and I
talk, agree on a good project for me to pursue next, and I go and write
it ... I get nothing. Not unless he can set it up.
There are managers out there who are worth their commision, absolutely.
If a company like Management 360 or Brillstein-Grey wants to sign you,
you'd probably be dumb not to.
There are even small, one-man management companies which add value, and
can help you open doors, or can help you develop your material.
But, of course, those companies aren't trolling the internet for
clients. They also don't attach themselves as producers to everything
their clients do - because they know that's not in their client's
interest.
Of course, at the very least Gallagher admits that he attached himself
to all of his clients' work as a matter of course. A lot of managers
deny that they do, but a little research reveals otherwise.
I was extremely put off by his tone in the wordplayer forums (even
admitting that Pogue can be almost as ornery as Jaybee) - but
mapquesting his office shows another reason not to sign with him: he's
not in Los Angeles. He's about an hour out of town. And while I'm not
going to be so snobby to say that if your rep isn't in Beverly Hills,
you're screwed (I know some excellent companies in the valley) since and
agent or manager's lifeblood is regular, face-to-face contact with both
clients and producers, being in Calabasas is - to say the least -
counter productive.
-Ron
In any event, I suspect that Scott is full of it, and just looking for
drama. I only posted the above because it may be useful to someone else.
Otto Mation (Caroline Freisen)
news:e4difh$e1p$1...@reader1.panix.com...
My understanding is it's 10% of everything for that specific script. The
one thing I'm not clear on is whether the "manager" is a guild signatory.
If he's not, then Scott should have his head examined. But that's a hard
argument to lose, no matter how you slice it. I really don't have a lot of
empathy for these "writers" who don't know how to read well enough to read a
damned contract before they sign it.
Caroline
Blair P. Houghton
Possibly. If Gallagher's legit and you explain with some humility
(because you know you weren't paying attention) you thought he was just
an agent, and maybe he didn't explain the "producer" angle.
However, I don't get it.
A real agent would take 15%. Gallagher's only taking 10%. Of one
screenplay.
Are you locked in for 7 years or something like that? Can you sell your
next screenplay without giving him anything?
Does he not promise to act as a producer (which to me implies a lot
more work than an agent; and especially implies creative input that an
agent wouldn't supply; and could involve some monetary input in the
form of risk capital)?
Is that extra 5 points going to be a lot of money? Would you expect to
get part of the net? And if you do get residuals of some sort, will
Gallagher's status as a producer and apparently a somewhat successful
one not be responsible for the fact that the residual value even
exists?
I'm not so sure this is a bum deal, given the facts at hand.
However, producers usually pay cash for interest in scripts, so this
guy got a piece of yours for $0. But you don't have to pay an agent,
now. Just this guy, who would be earning a profit off your work
anyway. Only this way, you know how much.
It's a different business model. I wonder if the WGA approves. I
wonder if you can go on strike if he demands a rewrite.
Any objection to scanning and posting the contract?
--Blair
Hammonds
Hammonds
him, big deal. He's listed as a producer on Dan O'Bannon's project
"They Bite." You may have heard of Dan O'Bannon. Or maybe not. In
any case, if he suggests "free rewrites" and they'll make the script
better, do them. Then let the guy try and sell it. If it doesn't
sell, big deal, move on. I doubt this contract gives him ownership of
your material in perpetuity.
G
Blair P. Houghton
In most states, and I'm assuming California, in order for there to be a
contract there has to be some means of gauging performance both ways.
If in the terms he has promised nothing that can be shown to happen,
and you've promised a completed screenplay, then there's no contract,
and with a little litigation you can get it nullified.
Then you'll own your script outright again and he'll have no claim at
all.
In fact, you could take the risk of waiting until he makes a claim
against you before you bother to have it nullified. But you should
probably throw a few Benjamins at a lawyer to confirm that as the right
course of action. Because IANAL.
--Blair
"I am, however, a Boston Legal fan, and how
freaking hot is Parker Posey?"
Otto Mation (Caroline Freisen)
news:e4dkf1$vo$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> then i got what was comign to me, huh?
Pretty much. Except for the part where I have serious doubts you've ever
completed a screenplay in your entire life! But things have been quiet
around here, and as trolls go, you're a pretty amusing fellow, so... Carry
on! '-)
Caroline
Otto Mation (Caroline Freisen)
news:e4dnqp$5t4$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> Gallagher's not an agent, Caroline, he's a manager.
Yes. I "misspoke." So to speak.
Sammyo
that this is a fine troll, it's a topical troll. But so what? Do
you have a produced script? An in with Tom? So busy
you wouldn't be doing a rewrite due to a buncha other
projects going green?
Do the free rewrites.
10% is peanuts if you get produced.
Everyone else, re-read Ron's post.
Jacques E. Bouchard
news:e4djta$bs2$1...@reader1.panix.com:
> I was extremely put off by his tone in the wordplayer forums
(even
> admitting that Pogue can be almost as ornery as Jaybee)
Dude, I'm standing right here!
jaybee
Schlockhack
time, a day or two, in which contracts may be annulled without penalty.
I don't know, but it's worth a shot.
Alan Brooks
> My understanding is it's 10% of everything for that specific script. The
> one thing I'm not clear on is whether the "manager" is a guild signatory.
> If he's not, then Scott should have his head examined.
Scott's just trolling, so I don't care about him and his issues, but as far
as managers...
There's no such thing as a WGA "signatory" manager, is there? One of the
reasons people move from agenting into managing is that they don't have to
limit themselves to 10% deals.
Alan Brooks
---------------------------
A Schmuck with an Underwood
-- ProducaManagaAgenting
MWSM FAQ: http://www.panix.com/~mwsm/faq.html
Filtering Trolls: http://www.panix.com/~mwsm/trolls.html
Alan Brooks
> Does he not promise to act as a producer (which to me implies a lot
> more work than an agent; and especially implies creative input that an
> agent wouldn't supply; and could involve some monetary input in the
> form of risk capital)?
There are other issues besides: An agent is contractually obligated to look
after her writers' interests. A producer is obligated to look after the
interests of the project. When those interests clash -- as they always do
-- the alleged producer/agent is *not* going to be able work properly on her
client's behalf.
The reductio ad absurdum (and yet possible) scenario here would be to have
your own agent yank you off a gig in favor of another writer who can provide
what the project "needs".
Alan Brooks
---------------------------
A Schmuck with an Underwood
-- Thanks, could we get back
to you just not returning
my calls now?
Otto Mation (Caroline Freisen)
news:e4e491$jc4$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> "Otto Mation (Caroline Freisen)" <otto....@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> My understanding is it's 10% of everything for that specific script. The
>> one thing I'm not clear on is whether the "manager" is a guild signatory.
>> If he's not, then Scott should have his head examined.
>
> Scott's just trolling, so I don't care about him and his issues, but as
> far
> as managers...
>
> There's no such thing as a WGA "signatory" manager, is there? One of the
> reasons people move from agenting into managing is that they don't have to
> limit themselves to 10% deals.
>
> Alan Brooks
> ---------------------------
> A Schmuck with an Underwood
In the troll's case, who knows? I don't know about "managers," but I don't
know of any reason they couldn't be WGA signatories *if* they meet the
credits criteria. Producers are often signatories. Producers, prodcos,
creative entities can all be guild signatories. In fact, it works to their
advantage if they are. In fact, if "Gallagher Literary" is real, I'd be
surprised if they're not.
Caroline
nmstevens
Producers are signatories of the guild -- as producers -- that is,
they've signed on the line where it says "Management." Agents,
likewise, who are signatories have signed the Guild Agency agreement,
where it says "Agent."
One of the requirements of signing the agency agreement is that you
can't then be a producer on the material in question, for reasons that
have already been stated -- it's an obvious conflict of interest. Your
agent wants to get you as much as possible for a script. The Producer
wants to pay you as little as possible for the script.
That's why managers who do both (as many do) aren't signatories of
anything. That is why, in principle, a manager cannot do the things
that agents do -- like shopping your project or making deals on your
behalf (although, in practice, they do).
Guild signatory agents have to be bonded, they have to agree to certain
terms and conditions. In order to be a manager, all you have to do is
say, "I'm a manager." Not even out loud. You can say it to yourself.
Generally, managers will make deals with other production entities that
*are* guild signatories -- so, in principle, the money is flowing,
contractually, from guild producer to guild writer. It also happens to
be flowing from Guild Producer to non-guild producer/manager, either
directly or through the writer.
Clearly, not everybody who is a "producer" needs to be a guild
producer. Often those credits can go to lots of different people. The
person who, say, acquired the rights to the underlying property. Even
my wife got an associate producing credit and some money on "Hellraiser
- Deader." Believe me, she isn't a signatory of anything. It's just
part of the deal.
NMS
BROUGHCUT
> I don't know about "managers," but I don't
> know of any reason they couldn't be WGA signatories *if* they meet the
> credits criteria. Producers are often signatories.
Studios and certain producers and prodcos are signatory to the WGA Minimum
Basic Agreement (MBA).
Signtory Agents are signtory to the WGA Artists' Manager Basic Ageement
(AMBA), which came into being in the mid 1970s, long before lit managers
existed. It doesn't actually have anything to do with managers.
Remember, lit managers have no legal status in California - studio BA execs
will not negotiate writer's deals with them, it is illegal.
AFAIK there is no reason why a manager couldn't also be a signatory
producer (managers are producers, after all), but it would make little
sense from the "managers" pov.
Few producers are actually WGA sigs, and the bigger producers have little
reason to be (the MBA would just tie their hands) - they set up deals and
leave the studios to contract with writers.
BROUGHCUT
@reader1.panix.com:
> A real agent would take 15%.
Real agents and managers take 10%.
> It's a different business model. I wonder if the WGA approves. I
> wonder if you can go on strike if he demands a rewrite.
Would be an idea to check if *he's* on the strike/unfair list before doing
paid rewrites (most unlikey, I know).
>
> Any objection to scanning and posting the contract?
Good idea. I think some choice extracts were posted on Wordplayer back in
the day.
>
> --Blair
>
BROUGHCUT
Newsgroups: BROUGHCUT:misc.writing.screenplays.moderated
To: "Otto Mation (Caroline Freisen)" <otto....@verizon.net>
"Otto Mation \(Caroline Freisen\)" <otto....@verizon.net> wrote in
news:e4dch3$dn0$1...@reader1.panix.com:
unless it's Rob Gallagher. If I remember corretly, his (likely
unenforcable) management contract does in fact try to lay claim to 10%
of the script,
BROUGHCUT
> You think you've been had? Most managers charge 15%.
No, they do not. NO lit manager worth signing with takes 15%.
When lit managers first broke out, 15% was certainly not unheard of - but
that was quite some time ago.
You do more harm than good posting 'advice' like this on the internet.
Please stop.
Skipper
<brou...@sk.com> wrote:
You're not exactly right about this because (like there being no CA law
governing managers) they vary. I know a number of managers who get
people work who charge 15%. Gotham Group, for example, my managers, who
are pretty much the 800-pound gorilla in town with animation (Sponge
Bob folks et al.) and family entertainment, so much so that the
Hollywood Reporter did a two-page spread on them a while back.
So lay off the "please stop, I know better than you" advice, unless you
can be specific as I just was.
The fact is, managers take the time to groom writers now whereas agents
rarely do. It's unfortunate.
BROUGHCUT
@reader1.panix.com:
> You're not exactly right about this because (like there being no CA law
> governing managers) they vary. I know a number of managers who get
> people work who charge 15%. Gotham Group, for example,
I very much doubt that.
BROUGHCUT
just to clariy - your *lit* manager at Gotham is taking 15%?
Skipper
<brou...@sk.com> wrote:
Er, had you quoted my full post, which you so conveniently snipped,
you'd see that I said that. Most people on this group know I'm a
writer, not an animator.
BROUGHCUT
news:e4fh95$pfi$1...@reader1.panix.com:
I know you sell screenwriting books, wasn't sure about screenplay part.
You are getting screwed.
If you can demonstrate all their writers (not just the ones they can try
it on with) are routinely commmissioned 15%, I'll donate $50 to a
charity of your choice.
You can't justify 15%, not when the manager's legal position
necessitates that the writer use a lawyer or agent on the deal - which
pushes overall commission to 20-25%.
Put in extra work developing a script? Then they should attach to
produce - that's why they're managers and not agents, afterall.
Skip Press
<brou...@sk.com> wrote:
> Skipper <skipsp...@charter.net> wrote in
> news:e4fh95$pfi$1...@reader1.panix.com:
>
> > In article <e4fgn5$3i6$1...@reader1.panix.com>, BROUGHCUT
> > <brou...@sk.com> wrote:
> >
> >> BROUGHCUT <brou...@sk.com> wrote in
> >> news:e4fgc8$ati$1...@reader1.panix.com:
> >>
> >> > Skipper <skipsp...@charter.net> wrote in news:e4fg48$ioj$1
> >> > @reader1.panix.com:
> >> >
> >> >> You're not exactly right about this because (like there being no
> >> >> CA law governing managers) they vary. I know a number of managers
> >> >> who get people work who charge 15%. Gotham Group, for example,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I very much doubt that.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> just to clariy - your *lit* manager at Gotham is taking 15%?
> >>
> >
> > Er, had you quoted my full post, which you so conveniently snipped,
> > you'd see that I said that. Most people on this group know I'm a
> > writer, not an animator.
> >
> >
>
> I know you sell screenwriting books, wasn't sure about screenplay part.
>
> You are getting screwed.
Well, I don't feel that way. I pay Craig Nelson, my literary agent (for
books) in New York the same amount, and this is a guy who repped John
Lennon, Lily Tomlin and a few other famous folks so that it is odd to
see my name with theirs on his site.
I pay my lawyer 5% here in town.
But here's the catch - I only pay these people on work they are
involved with, and that's fine with them. Usually that means I come to
them when I have a deal and they line up the particulars, protect me,
discover when I'm being cheated, etc.
When I had an agent I paid 10% of everything I sold. I think it was
even in one of the contracts I had. Now, if I sold a TV series (like I
thought I would with Grammnet recently), and I talked Jessica at
Endeavor into reading that script she asked me to send her, had I met
with Steve and Chris and Kelsey and hammered something out, and Jessica
was interested, I would've signed with Endeavor even though I'd be
giving away 10% for something they didn't really set up. Why? Because
both Gotham and Endeavor would then be able to tout me as someone very
hot and, even though I wouldn't have time with a series going, I'd have
some heavy money thrown my way for other projects that I wouldn't
otherwise run across on my own.
> If you can demonstrate all their writers (not just the ones they can try
> it on with) are routinely commmissioned 15%, I'll donate $50 to a
> charity of your choice.
Well, that's kind of rude, because why would they tell me that and why
would I ask? It's not my business. Peter's never lied to me about
anything else, so why would I think he'd live a lie about that?
>
> You can't justify 15%, not when the manager's legal position
> necessitates that the writer use a lawyer or agent on the deal - which
> pushes overall commission to 20-25%.
Both top managers and agencies have "business affairs" which are
lawyers who handle things and you don't have to pay a lawyer extra.
And here's a justification for you on 10% vs. 15%. I recently
discovered that Alpha Books was selling an electronic version of the
Complete Idiot's Guide to Screenwriting on Amazon. I had been told
about it, hadn't received a copy. I wrote my editor and said "What the
fuck?" He said "Oh, that's just a thing Amazon is doing to let people
read a few pages. He didn't even bother to check out the URL I sent
him. So I sic Craig on it. He was dumbfounded at the response I got.
Not long after, boom, royalty check. So if I didn't have someone of his
experience and expertise, what would I do, get the Authors Guild to
complain? I'm happy to "justify" the 15%.
> Put in extra work developing a script? Then they should attach to
> produce - that's why they're managers and not agents, afterall.
Well, most managers DO produce. The not so good ones take their 15% and
then get an extra producing fee, contributing to the Producers Guild
credit fiasco of recent years that cut someone who deserved it out of a
Best Picture Oscar for "Crash" (at least as I see it). And I know
agents who have QUIT being agents to become managers because there's
less hassle. OK, sure, they might be bending the law if they negotiate,
but um, this is California, after all.
(I answered this with my full name just in case anyone is reading an
archive later. This is important stuff for writers to understand.)
--
When right, I shall often be thought wrong by those whose positions will not
command a view of the whole ground.
-- Thomas Jefferson
Blair P. Houghton
> Er, had you quoted my full post, which you so conveniently snipped,
> you'd see that I said that. Most people on this group know I'm a
> writer, not an animator.
Some of us think you're an animation.
--Blair
"What's it like, living off-camera in
Bikini Bottom?"
BROUGHCUT
news:e4fl83$q3u$1...@reader1.panix.com:
>> You are getting screwed.
>
> Well, I don't feel that way. I pay Craig Nelson, my literary agent
> (for books) in New York the same amount, and this is a guy who repped
> John Lennon, Lily Tomlin and a few other famous folks so that it is
> odd to see my name with theirs on his site.
>
> I pay my lawyer 5% here in town.
Books are different, and I assume he's a licensed agent and can
therefore cover all the bases.
When it comes to lit management, 15% is highly anomalous and widely
frowned upon - but it's one of those things even established managers
can get away with because a lot of writers still assume 15% is perfectly
normal and proper.
>
>> If you can demonstrate all their writers (not just the ones they can
>> try it on with) are routinely commmissioned 15%, I'll donate $50 to a
>> charity of your choice.
>
> Well, that's kind of rude, because why would they tell me that and why
> would I ask? It's not my business. Peter's never lied to me about
> anything else, so why would I think he'd live a lie about that?
Why not ask your lawyer. It's your business because 10% is the accepted
industry standard and I would be very surprised indeed if all Gotham's
clients (and McHugh's, for that matter) are paying fifteen.
>>
>> You can't justify 15%, not when the manager's legal position
>> necessitates that the writer use a lawyer or agent on the deal -
>> which pushes overall commission to 20-25%.
>
> Both top managers and agencies have "business affairs" which are
> lawyers who handle things and you don't have to pay a lawyer extra.
>
At the moment, you are paying 5% extra.
If using the manager's lawyer, the writer will be asked to sign a
conflict of interest waiver - there's a reason for that, depending on
the circumstances it may or may not be significant. If the manager is
attached to produce then there's always the possibility there will be
some give and take between the respective deals, and it may therefore be
prudent for the writer to use their own lawyer when it comes to the
money.
Agents don't need to use an attorney - they have their cleint's proxy in
negotiations, as the person's legal agent.
>> Put in extra work developing a script? Then they should attach to
>> produce - that's why they're managers and not agents, afterall.
>
> Well, most managers DO produce. The not so good ones take their 15%
> and then get an extra producing fee,
Double dipping - doesn't get any worse than that. Fortunately, it's not
a practice any writer has to stand for.
The unwritten rule should a manager attach to produce: commission is
rebated from development fees.
> contributing to the Producers
> Guild credit fiasco of recent years that cut someone who deserved it
> out of a Best Picture Oscar for "Crash" (at least as I see it).
I think that's a separate issue. Haven't the Producers Guild introduced
new criteria for credit that requires producers to be active during
development, production, post, as well as do publicity?
Attaching to produce goes with the territory, it has its disadvantages
but the extra money means managers can afford to spend more time with
writers.
The worst thing a lit manager can do is impose themselves on development
once the script is set-up. When managers attach to a project, the
understanding is normally that they will disappear from the picture and
go back to managing their writers as a manager should. If a manager gets
a reputation for inappropriately leveraging his attachment in order to
segue from management to actual producing, well that's when doors may
start closing on the manager's specs....
> And I
> know agents who have QUIT being agents to become managers because
> there's less hassle.
They quit to earn more money - but from studios, not writer's pay
cheques.
> OK, sure, they might be bending the law if they
> negotiate, but um, this is California, after all.
>
Studio BA execs bend the law and negotiate writer's deals with managers?
I find that doubtful.
> (I answered this with my full name just in case anyone is reading an
> archive later. This is important stuff for writers to understand.)
>
Which is why I go after the 15% myth when I notice it being perpetuated.
Skip Press
<brou...@sk.com> wrote:
> Skip Press <skipsp...@charter.net> wrote in
> news:e4fl83$q3u$1...@reader1.panix.com:
>
> >> You are getting screwed.
> >
> > Well, I don't feel that way. I pay Craig Nelson, my literary agent
> > (for books) in New York the same amount, and this is a guy who repped
> > John Lennon, Lily Tomlin and a few other famous folks so that it is
> > odd to see my name with theirs on his site.
> >
> > I pay my lawyer 5% here in town.
>
> Books are different, and I assume he's a licensed agent and can
> therefore cover all the bases.
You could assume, or you could Google and find out.
> When it comes to lit management, 15% is highly anomalous and widely
> frowned upon - but it's one of those things even established managers
> can get away with because a lot of writers still assume 15% is perfectly
> normal and proper.
You're just generalizing. I've given you specific examples of specific
people and specific situations. All I've seen you do is posture and
pontificate without anything specific except your opinion.
> >
> >> If you can demonstrate all their writers (not just the ones they can
> >> try it on with) are routinely commmissioned 15%, I'll donate $50 to a
> >> charity of your choice.
> >
> > Well, that's kind of rude, because why would they tell me that and why
> > would I ask? It's not my business. Peter's never lied to me about
> > anything else, so why would I think he'd live a lie about that?
>
> Why not ask your lawyer. It's your business because 10% is the accepted
> industry standard and I would be very surprised indeed if all Gotham's
> clients (and McHugh's, for that matter) are paying fifteen.
Well, you'd be surprised. Go ahead. Be whatever you want to be.
> >>
> >> You can't justify 15%, not when the manager's legal position
> >> necessitates that the writer use a lawyer or agent on the deal -
> >> which pushes overall commission to 20-25%.
> >
> > Both top managers and agencies have "business affairs" which are
> > lawyers who handle things and you don't have to pay a lawyer extra.
>
> At the moment, you are paying 5% extra.
No I'm not. I explained when I pay. I'm doing fine with who I have.
> If using the manager's lawyer, the writer will be asked to sign a
> conflict of interest waiver - there's a reason for that, depending on
> the circumstances it may or may not be significant. If the manager is
> attached to produce then there's always the possibility there will be
> some give and take between the respective deals, and it may therefore be
> prudent for the writer to use their own lawyer when it comes to the
> money.
>
> Agents don't need to use an attorney - they have their cleint's proxy in
> negotiations, as the person's legal agent.
Are you saying Business Affairs departments don't exist in major
companies?
> >> Put in extra work developing a script? Then they should attach to
> >> produce - that's why they're managers and not agents, afterall.
> >
> > Well, most managers DO produce. The not so good ones take their 15%
> > and then get an extra producing fee,
And did I say they did? Why don't you (for once) give me a specific
example of a writer you know who got "double-dipped" by a specific
manager over a specific project that you personally know about, not
just something you read about online or in the trades.
> Double dipping - doesn't get any worse than that. Fortunately, it's not
> a practice any writer has to stand for.
>
> The unwritten rule should a manager attach to produce: commission is
> rebated from development fees.
And the good managers I know do that.
>
> > contributing to the Producers
> > Guild credit fiasco of recent years that cut someone who deserved it
> > out of a Best Picture Oscar for "Crash" (at least as I see it).
>
> I think that's a separate issue. Haven't the Producers Guild introduced
> new criteria for credit that requires producers to be active during
> development, production, post, as well as do publicity?
Go look at the ongoing Crash situation. I'm not generalizing like you.
I mentioned a specific situation that is endemic to an ongoing problem.
The reason the PG did what they did is because of the very thing we're
discussing and the producer/manager evolution.
> Attaching to produce goes with the territory, it has its disadvantages
> but the extra money means managers can afford to spend more time with
> writers.
>
> The worst thing a lit manager can do is impose themselves on development
> once the script is set-up. When managers attach to a project, the
> understanding is normally that they will disappear from the picture and
> go back to managing their writers as a manager should. If a manager gets
> a reputation for inappropriately leveraging his attachment in order to
> segue from management to actual producing, well that's when doors may
> start closing on the manager's specs....
>
> > And I
> > know agents who have QUIT being agents to become managers because
> > there's less hassle.
>
> They quit to earn more money - but from studios, not writer's pay
> cheques.
Well, duh. Yet they still charge 15% of people they rep.
> > OK, sure, they might be bending the law if they
> > negotiate, but um, this is California, after all.
> >
>
> Studio BA execs bend the law and negotiate writer's deals with managers?
> I find that doubtful.
When it hits that level you know how it works if you actually know that
kind of stuff, but what gets said and what is in writing and whose name
goes on things is different.
> > (I answered this with my full name just in case anyone is reading an
> > archive later. This is important stuff for writers to understand.)
> >
>
> Which is why I go after the 15% myth when I notice it being perpetuated.
>
If go after means state a bunch of generalities and act like it's
gospel, then you're fulfilling the definition well.
--
There is a certain enthusiasm in liberty, that makes human nature rise above
itself, in acts of bravery and heroism.
-- Alexander Hamilton (The Farmer Refuted, 23 February 1775)
Skipper
<blair.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
I challenge you to a starfish duel at half a pace.
Distortion
>
> Now he owns ten percent of my screenplay and I owe him re-writes if I
> ever hope to get him to send it out and hope for sale.
>
Ouch. You should have seen that option deal I recently rejected; making
hygienic tissue or maybe a mouse-nest out of that paper would have been a
more worthy use of it.
Skipper
<skipsp...@charter.net> wrote:
And furthermore, you are but a pale shadow of the rat half of "Pinky &
The Brain," you animation wannabe!
And to answer your question, if you haven't lived near a Bikini Bottom,
then your tongue's not tired.
BROUGHCUT
@reader1.panix.com:
> Are you saying Business Affairs departments don't exist in major
> companies?
>
>> >> Put in extra work developing a script? Then they should attach to
>> >> produce - that's why they're managers and not agents, afterall.
>> >
>> > Well, most managers DO produce. The not so good ones take their 15%
>> > and then get an extra producing fee,
>
> And did I say they did? Why don't you (for once) give me a specific
> example of a writer you know who got "double-dipped" by a specific
> manager over a specific project that you personally know about, not
> just something you read about online or in the trades.
No, I didn't say that. You just quoted back and replied to yourself.
:-/
Jeez.
Here's what I said in reply:
"Double dipping - doesn't get any worse than that. Fortunately, it's not
a practice any writer has to stand for."
The scenario YOU mentioned above is something to watch out for but a
highly unlikely one because the managers with the experience and
contacts to get a producing fee know better than to cross that line.
This is why you said, "The not so good ones take their 15% and then get
an extra producing fee", and not me...
So... did YOU base that comment on a specific example of a writer who
got "double-dipped" by a specific manager over a specific project
[/sigh] that you personally know about? Thought not.
BROUGHCUT
@reader1.panix.com:
>
>>
>> Why not ask your lawyer. It's your business because 10% is the accepted
>> industry standard and I would be very surprised indeed if all Gotham's
>> clients (and McHugh's, for that matter) are paying fifteen.
>
> Well, you'd be surprised. Go ahead. Be whatever you want to be.
>
Here you go.
Gotham and 10%:
You are being screwed, don't drag other writers down with you by pretending
it's acceptable. If you want to help people, here's a chapter for your next
book: "TEN PERCENT OR BUST!".
BROUGHCUT
>> Agents don't need to use an attorney - they have their cleint's proxy
>> in negotiations, as the person's legal agent.
>
> Are you saying Business Affairs departments don't exist in major
> companies?
I'm saying agents don't need to use a lawyer in negotiations,unlike
managers. Also, there is no conflict of interest if an agent uses an
attorney because agents are forbidden from producing on their client's
projects - commission is their only remuneration, so it's always in the
agent's interest to get the writer the best possible deal.
Paul W. Tenny
Hash: SHA512
BROUGHCUT wrote:
[...]
> Here you go.
[...]
> http://tinyurl.com/nawhk
Damn, who is that in your avatar, and where's the link to the big pic? :p
Paul William Tenny
http://bitch-what.blogspot.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (MingW32)
iQCVAwUBRGw5tPNVdJOJBjCcAQr19AP9HgalUpkF4Y0oL2203C9smQizJfI4b1I7
6/55A48EcgRYWTQQlZ/2JhQUfEc12uoUaOqsdYZJkvqOgrjSpLcDk2EXnV9PPyHq
VS/Ft4u0uX7T+QYNVMKd6VVeTbQ/Bg6ud2CY3U3UWT3I02dBB7aorCHqHMWew5Ko
nz11inbFVpw=
=BHF7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Skip Press
<brou...@sk.com> wrote:
Well, it's wild you have such a jihad going on this, but the URL you
quote is still just chatter from anonymous natterers like yourself. For
me it's real simple - I can ask about it at Gotham and see what they
say.
--
The most practical kind of politics is the politics of decency.
-- Theodore Roosevelt
BROUGHCUT
@reader1.panix.com:
> Well, it's wild you have such a jihad going on this, but the URL you
> quote is still just chatter from anonymous natterers like yourself. For
At least I don't natter with myself. You have such a firm grasp of the
subject matter that you didn't recognise your own words and blamed ME for
posting misleading supposition!
> me it's real simple - I can ask about it at Gotham and see what they
> say.
Let us know how you get on.
Distortion
> then i got what was comign to me, huh?
>
I'd give you advice, but you're reminding me of myself.
Distortion
>
> Pretty much. Except for the part where I have serious doubts you've ever
> completed a screenplay in your entire life! But things have been quiet
> around here, and as trolls go, you're a pretty amusing fellow, so...
Carry
> on! '-)
>
> Caroline
>
Why are you being so harsh on Scott Drake?? At worst, he was being a little
silly. If's just about one script, I probably would have let Gallagher try
to produce it, why not.
Otto Mation (Caroline Freisen)
news:e4ia86$mnr$1...@reader1.panix.com...
Adam, signing a contract without reading it, then reading it, then going on
the internet and bitching to the world that you've sexually violated by the
guy you signed the contract with *without* talking to the guy about it first
is a hell of a lot more than "being a little silly" in my book.
But you're kidding, aren't you? '-)
Caroline
BROUGHCUT
> Adam, signing a contract without reading it, then reading it, then
> going on the internet and bitching to the world that you've sexually
> violated by the guy you signed the contract with *without* talking to
> the guy about it first is a hell of a lot more than "being a little
> silly" in my book.
The Luc Bresson thread was silly.
Talking to RG about it would have invited obfuscation. There's a link to a
Wordplayer thread here, suggest you find it - the contract in question is
notoriously screwy.
Distortion
> snip
> I was so happy to have somebody validate my work as a writer that I
> kinda' blindly signed with Gallagher Literary. I barely read the
> contract.
Hmmmm...Is the info at this link up-to-date?
http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=studiosystems&ss_view=s_s_person&participant_id=706693