
Disney TV Studios Eyes New Profit Participation Model - hhs
https://deadline.com/2019/07/hollywood-profit-participation-tv-deals-changes-disney-streaming-services-1202641423/
======
jedberg
Having seen what these negotiations look like from a technical perspective, I
can see why they want to do this. A lot of the old contracts are causing
issues when they want to go to streaming, because they aren't clear as to what
platforms the license is for in the first place. This is why sometimes some
music is replaced or a scene with a particular guest actor is cut from the
streaming version of an old show.

These changes are effectively future-proofing. By making these contracts apply
to all platforms now and in the future, including platforms that might be
impossible to maintain individual accounting for each show, it makes it a lot
easier for them to exploit the content in new ways in the future without
having to track down all the old actors, their estates, and their agents to
negotiate new deals.

It probably will also suck for the actors as it will limit their potential
upside while providing them with more money up front, so you'll have fewer
crazy rich actors but more middle class actors.

~~~
anon4242
> you'll have fewer crazy rich actors but more middle class actors

For me it has always seemed weird that for the last half century or so, the
people we pay the most are the entertainers: actors, musicians and sport-
stars. More middle class actors and fewer crazy rich actors sounds good to me.
I would rather have more people being able to make a decent living off their
craft than a few with more money than they know how to spend.

~~~
anbop
It's because entertainer's product can be distributed to infinite numbers of
people, each of whom have finite amounts of time. If I am going to spend 1
hour watching basketball, I am going to want to watch Lebron James. I'd rather
pay $5 to watch a basketball game where he is playing vs. being paid $5 to
watch a basketball game featuring absolutely excellent, but not world-class,
players. I similarly am very discriminating about movies, music, etc. and will
pay $6.99 to rent an Amazon movie vs. watching a free one on Prime because I
have such limited movie-watching time. The rewards go to the top because the
eyeballs go the top.

~~~
nailer
> If I am going to spend 1 hour watching basketball, I am going to want to
> watch Lebron James.

That's an excellent point.

\- Is acting ability as unevenly distributed as athletic ability?

\- Would Black Mirror be better if every episode had Jodie Foster or Jake
Gyllenhaal in it? Or is it possible that using less well known actors would
not negatively impact viewership?

~~~
mettamage
Whether it is or isn't as unevenly distributed, popularity is! Popularity is a
scale free network in fact. Simply check your Facebook friends (or that of
your aunt if you don't have FB) and you're quite likely to see a couple of
outliers.

I thought about this quite deeply and researched it a bit during my graph
theory & complex network classes. Whether it is routers redirecting traffic or
popularity, it is all scale free (ok not everything is, but a lot of things
are).

~~~
nailer
Good point & totally agreed about popularity. People may want to see a TV show
because someone popular is acting in it (using the Black Mirror example, Miley
Cyrus was in an episode of the last season).

I guess the question is: what value is popularity? If Miley Cyruses increase
in cost doesn't warrant the increase in revenue, then it's not worth it. If it
does then it is. It sounds like the market is re-calibrating a little.

------
ghostbrainalpha
I wonder if this move to create a fair payment model for actor/creators, is
simply to preempt monopoly criticisms before they launch there own
subscription service?

The mouse has an impressive history of playing Chess while everyone else
thinks they are playing Checkers.

~~~
ijidak
Disney's acquisition of Marvel, Pixar, Star Wars, and the better parts of 21st
Century Fox will go down as the stuff of legend.

I don't even understand how other media giants allowed this to happen.

Disney controls essentially all the most profitable global entertainment
franchises into the foreseeable future.

They are the Thanos of entertainment. Gathering the entertainment world's
infinity stones.

It will be interesting to see if this translates into streaming platform
success...

~~~
nvrspyx
Let's not forget that they have control of Hulu now too, although they're
still waiting for CNBCUniversal to relinquish their 33% to them before they
completely own it.

If the previous are the Infinity Stones, Hulu and Disney+ (and ESPN+) are
their Infinity Gauntlet.

