Apple TV wants to pay actors and producers based on how their content performs

[Cal Jeffrey]

A hot potato: Apple TV is considering a new way to pay actors and others involved with making a movie or television series. The status quo in Holywood is to pay for a movie or show as if its success is guaranteed. An internal document reveals that Cupertino wants to shake things up by switching to a performance-based model.

Bloomberg notes that the memo stipulates that if a movie or show is successful, the production staff will receive bonuses. The idea is to use a points system to determine the amount of additional compensation. Apple suggests basing the bonuses on three factors - how many subscribers the show brings in, the amount of time viewers spend watching, and the cost of production in relation to the number of viewers. The crew of a top-ranking show could share a bonus as high as $10.5 million.

To address the elephant in the room: A plan like this does not just come as an added benefit to the production crew. Apple will undoubtedly ask actors and other staff to agree to a lower base pay with bonuses as an incentive to bring their A-game. Hollywood's reaction to such a proposal is predictable, although the payment scheme would only apply to in-house Apple productions.

For now, the plan is in the early brainstorming stages. Apple has spoken with talent representatives and seeks feedback before developing anything solid. The Cupertino firm is not alone in its idea, either. Netflix and Amazon have reportedly worked on similar compensation terms for months, and Disney is already offering merit-based bonuses.

Show producers' and actors' knee-jerk reaction to such a payment scheme is rejection. They are used to being paid the same whether their work is a blockbuster or trash. However, not all in Tinseltown feel the same.

United Talent Agency chief Jeremy Zimmer and Producer Jason Blum have both made the same argument for merit-based pay: "When you get $10 million whether your show is good or bad, you have less incentive to do it well."

"The good news is everyone is thinking about it and talking about it," Zimmer told Bloomberg.

The idea makes sound business sense in most people's opinion. Decrease production costs by paying a smaller upfront salary and offering bonuses proportional to sales. Almost every production-based business operates this way.

That said, Holywood is a different animal. There are a lot of risks involved with movie and television show production. Taking a gamble on a movie to release in a theater can be much more rewarding than working for Apple for a small cut.

However, for any of this to work, streaming networks must be less tight about their numbers. Most VOD networks don't release meaningful statistics for people, especially producers, to compare. Industry professionals have to have access to these numbers, just as they have access to box office numbers, if platforms want the industry to accept their proposals.

"If we're going to have a new system, they have to give us real numbers," Zimmer said.

Permalink to story:

Apple TV wants to pay actors and producers based on how their content performs

 

[Zsoltblabla]

Imagine this for Hollywood. Most of their writers and producers would need to get food stamps after the woke garbage they made.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

Imagine this for Hollywood. Most of their writers and producers would need to get food stamps after the woke garbage they made.

- Better that Apple pay them than our tax dollars.

 

[toooooot]

Finally, a sign of sanity showed for these people. Pay them very medium wage, no crazy money.
But then if the thing is greatly succesful, pay much more.
I remember a writer complaining how little he got paid for a tv episode he wrote.
He wrote a SheHulk episode. For those unware, it is one of the lowest rated,
truly despised by most people who saw it episode. He got something like 300 bucks,
and that was way too much. What is unfair though, even after this change is that
certain politics and views so widely available througout movie industry comes from the top.
They make unwatchable things because of those politics often coming from above.
Then it means that really good people do not have a chance to earn good money.
And that in result would mean that there is no good money in this industry.
That would degrade the quality of tv even further.
There needs to be a change, and it needs to come from above.

 

[Gars]

I don't think the creativity works that way
for sure, this will shake a little the bloat coming out from the industry*
*cos its no longer "art"

 

[Dreadcthulhu]

That is going to be a hard sell for Apple to convince actors & production crew to accept this kind of payment. Hollywood studios have a long history of offering people profit-based incentives, only to use creative accounting methods to keep from having to pay out what was promised. Check out the wiki article on "Hollywood Accounting" for a bunch of examples.

That is why most actors & other people in the industry will be very adamant about being paid up front, and not having future payments based on something that can be gamed.

 

[RudyBob]

Absolutely the way to go. The problem that still exists is the folk greenlighting the content. If all content had an equal chance of approval I would be more enthused. What will come of this I fear is the woke trying to out do the woke into a state of utter _______. What is needed is content showing both sides and then I am pretty sure I know where the $ would go. People thirst for quality content not faded tattoos

 

[GhostLegion]

I’m not in favor of this, can’t wait to get more recycled garbage because nobody is willing to watch their compensation take a nose dive for gambling on something that might be good or might not. It’s the age of the sequel baby and if it isn’t a slam dunk, it’s a failure.

I hate everything about this.

 

[toooooot]

That is going to be a hard sell for Apple to convince actors & production crew to accept this kind of payment. Hollywood studios have a long history of offering people profit-based incentives, only to use creative accounting methods to keep from having to pay out what was promised. Check out the wiki article on "Hollywood Accounting" for a bunch of examples.

That is why most actors & other people in the industry will be very adamant about being paid up front, and not having future payments based on something that can be gamed.

It is so now. But what if this new approach attracted younger, hungrier actors and movie makers?
What if they did it for very little money but work much faster and more efficient than these fat slow Hollywood studios. I think Apple is up to something that might work.

 

[kiwigraeme]

Welcome to the gig economy . USA pay the waiters 25% BS

Americans always think you can get people to sing and dance for money. Quite soulless IMHO

So each actor is at mercy to the writing , Apples promotion , Apples budget and beancounter cuts , the post production etc

This assumption that talent or substance is obvious and immediate. that every band who wrote a hit song knew straight away that song would be a hit. that there is no such thing as a sleeper show

Must meet the 90 day profit for shareholders

The Boomers thinking this is great, that this actually works to motivate people are the same whining elsewhere about changes in other things, the lack of substance in some consumer stuff. yet the companies make bank

Look at video games, Companies making great bank with reskins , micro transactions yay for shareholders .

Also for those whining here this is wonderful. Are you so gullible. Crap shows are entirely Apples fault . They greenlit , they choose , they select.

Americans so easy to blames the the boom holder, the makeup artist , the employees an yet love the Corps .

You guys brought this BS lock stock and sinker. Maybe you need to be woke, to realised you are just money bags to be exploited, like amazon workers , gig workers. Corps don't care.

You will not be getting better shows with this BS , just a unwholesome satisfaction in better exploitation of your fellow man. thanks giving turkeys abound

Why am I not surprised?

 

[Jarenien]

This is exactly how everything in Hollywood should be. Imagine the last like ten Marvel movies if they were only paid on how well they did, I might actually like more than two of them...

 

[NumberNine]

This is not new. Just box office policies on streaming platforms.

 

[kiwigraeme]

I still don't see how this would work. Most quirky, experimental stuff comes from independants.

White male conservative boomers in The USA will not be considered in making Apple shows.

I just see Producers taking even less risk, paint by numbers , hit all the demographics . Give THE MAN what he wants

Also what is success? the most eyeballs. I have very little interest in mainstream TV shows.

Reality TV shows took off , as cheap and popular yay yay yay !.

Shows don't need beancounters or committees to be good.

The BBC in the 70s main interesting stuff , as they allowed a diverse range of shows to flourish from people with a passion and talent not interested in just money.

Hollywood is already risk averse.

Why not Apple call itself Hallmark Productions and pump out comfort shows/movies

As I said, Apple is 100% responsible. Nike etc are famous for focus groups , picking up on youth culture etc. Red bull has done the same from Xgames now to a massive operation.

Studios of old were Star finding, making machines

Complaining about Marvel movies etc - Well those scripts were signed off by the Studios, then the actors needed to work that stuff

You want to run a building/construction company, you want the best costing and project engineers

Apple needs to get best talent spotting, in tune with the future audience project selectors and talent spotters etc . Plus this is a numbers game. like a investment you want a portfolio of easy certs to high risk/reward

Are Tesla workers responsible for the cybertruck - look like crap from day one?

Can you people praising it, tell me how you will now get interesting shows that you will like?

Not expecting any meaningful answer, prove me wrong

 

[brucek]

The difference must be in the details, but pay based on audience, residuals (= how often aired = how successful), and box office target bonuses has been going on for decades in Hollywood. Until now when I've read about this it has been the streamers (esp. Netflix) who were resistant to sharing any data and therefore any of the older more traditional models based on that data.

 

[Watzupken]

There are variables that makes a show interesting for people to watch. So to penalise the actor for bad scripts or story line don’t make a lot of sense. I agree that the party that causes poor viewership should be penalised, but not everyone. Eventually, nobody wants to do any Apple exclusives because something are not in their control.

 

[fadingfool]

Worked out well for Sir Alec Guinness in Star wars....

https://www.celebritynetworth.com/a...points-instead-salary-star-wars-chose-wisely/

 

[dirtyferret]

Completely stupid idea as we would have no creativity whatsoever

all the people that think this would be a good idea are the same ones complaining about the current state of the theater movie business that releases one bad blockbuster sequel after another

 

[dangh]

Do the same with writers, maybe we will get some actually good stories and less crappy woke bs...

 

[ThrakazogZ]

That will never work. Now, if you spread the profits of a show or movie evenly among everyone (including the corps behind them) that would certainly change things. Then companies like Disney might be motivated to make actual movies and shows, instead of social PSA's.

 

[kiwigraeme]

Speaking of Movies it worked for Pirates, time to fly the high seas
Pirates had quite set rules for sharing the booty. But a "performance" had a definitive start and ending, less funny accounting. Plus the whole crew knew each other. Lots of people in making a TV show will never met or see the others involved.
Imagine it you worked for a super smart non-woke boss like Musk and he tied your income to the share price on take over.
You would be rolling in it , given now much for freedom to say what you really think of those people not like you.
You know your coding , IT skills will be what decides the advert revenue, the harder you work for Musk , sleeping like him on the factory floor the more revenue X will make a 1 to 1 correlation. Must be so rewarding and fulfilling money and helping freedom to say anything on X

 

[Cal Jeffrey]

This isn't about penalties or singling out actors or writers, directors or producers. It's about budgets. It's a collective incentivization. VOD company: Producers. We will give you $X million to make this show or movie. Use the money how you want. If your production is good and pulls in the viewers, you will get up to $X more. It's a hard sell to an industry used to getting huge budgets to produce dross. But I don't see how, say, Netflix is "penalizing" actors when it's the producers that decide how much of the budget they will spend on actors. Once a producer accepts an offer for production, compensation is negotiated between the company and the crew, and it is up to whoever does the casting and hiring.

That said, the idea is not foolproof or perfect. Unless streamers start giving up their numbers, there is no way to make it fair and equitable for all parties involved. Producers can't make an informed decision based on historical data on the platform during negotiations, and streamers can cheat the numbers post-production. So there's a lot of work that needs to happen before this type of model works with streaming, but like others have pointed out, it's worked for theaters, so there is no reason it can't work for streamers. Distribution is still distribution.

 

[Endymio]

I still don't see how this would work.

It's been already working like this for decades. All actors and producers (with a few trivial exceptions) receive residuals (royalties), meaning the longer and more times the film is shown, the more money they ultimately receive. And while most *film* actors still receive the bulk of their pay up front, highly successful big screen actors often limit or forego their salary in exchange for a percentage of film profits. And in the world of television, the opposite is true -- the stars of highly successful series can easily earn $50M, $100M, even $200M for their roles, while starring in a bomb nets you little to nothing.

Most quirky, experimental stuff comes from independants.

And most quirky, experimental stuff has a cast of newcomers willing to work for pennies in exchange for exposure, or bored big-name actors willing to forego their normal salary in exchange for a project they enjoy.

As just one of countless examples, consider the experimental Rotoscoped film 'A Scanner Darkly', in which big name stars like Keanu Reeves, Wynona Ryder and Woody Harrelson all agreed to work for the minimum SAG base rate, as they found the script interesting.

Not expecting any meaningful answer, prove me wrong

Done.

 

[kiwigraeme]

It's been already working like this for decades. All actors and producers (with a few trivial exceptions) receive residuals (royalties), meaning the longer and more times the film is shown, the more money they ultimately receive. And while most *film* actors still receive the bulk of their pay up front, highly successful big screen actors often limit or forego their salary in exchange for a percentage of film profits. And in the world of television, the opposite is true -- the stars of highly successful series can easily earn $50M, $100M, even $200M for their roles, while starring in a bomb nets you little to nothing.


And most quirky, experimental stuff has a cast of newcomers willing to work for pennies in exchange for exposure, or bored big-name actors willing to forego their normal salary in exchange for a project they enjoy.

As just one of countless examples, consider the experimental Rotoscoped film 'A Scanner Darkly', in which big name stars like Keanu Reeves, Wynona Ryder and Woody Harrelson all agreed to work for the minimum SAG base rate, as they found the script interesting.


Done.

You didn't really say anything new, as another better later post said the devil is in the details. Nor did you address my point -see below

Of course residuals is a known thing. see example above about the character playing the Darth Vader character

As I said it's how it's implemented, what are necessary eyes needed, otherwise just work on popular junk. How is the Boom holder going to make it successful , the make up artist etc.
In the Star Wars example actors got a choice. He took $7000 to live his life , maybe feed his family.

People here like have a valid point say for Directors, producers, writers , star actors

But I wouldn't trust Apple as far as I could throw them , or their funny accounting a Great Irish company for sure.

Apple gave 3 factors if they were laid out quite definitive . The third one bang for bucks should be quite important

Again Devil in details , It's a probably an accounting nightmare , same Hollywood, I gave examples of pirates up and about , their agreements were pretty clear. People die , leave the country, the program gets a big revive 4 years later. Apple says Nah . Ie you need a lot of bureaucracy to allocate points to hundreds or thousands involved, this adds infighting BS , Writer should get more - you just read lines - who decides how points divided - each production company ??

Your email said nothing new, nor DID it address my main point

Ie I don't see how this would work. Ie my whole contrention and I stated it numerous times . How will this ensure better programs , most people in the business already have a passion , My point about Americans think money can make things happen . Ie have people perform like singing dancing monkeys.

Residues is a win win for studios less cost for duds, hey we are making bank so you can have some. So really the motive is a insurance deal for Apple, not away to ensure a higher product . Most people happy to just work in the industry. Only a select few can pick and choose where they work .

Again common knowledge Actors wait on tables/pump gas between jobs. You said nothing new or interesting.


Plus big Stars get points based on sales, so they will always make money
1% for a Star of a Billion dollars of sales is good money

Again cherry picking stuff using it wrong , and saying nothing new

Yes Stars do freebies , go and do theatre for fun and joy of their youth . And knowing you are worth 100s of Millions already My point from firsts post , Money doesn't buy passion.
No different than a sports star playing a game as guest player for their local club in their home city. I'm sure lots of Irish footballers have turned out in amatuer league in their home town post career.

 

[Endymio]

Nor did you address my point...I wouldn't trust Apple as far as I could throw them.... My point about Americans think money can make things happen . Ie have people perform like singing dancing monkeys.

Your only "point" seems to be your hatred of American capitalism and Apple in particular.

Devil in details , It's a probably an accounting nightmare ... . Apple says Nah . Ie you need a lot of bureaucracy to allocate points to hundreds or thousands involved

Don't misrepresent what Apple said. And the metrics on viewership are already collected. Once SAG has agreed upon an apportioning schedule, the only "bureaucracy" required is something that one 1992-era Excel spreadsheet could handle easily.

Residues is a win win for studios less cost for duds, hey we are making bank so you can have some. So really the motive is a insurance deal for Apple, not away to ensure a higher product

If actors and writers know their pay is based on success, they will avoid obvious bombs and work harder and smarter on those they do associate themselves with. I've read countless interviews from actors who stated some variant of, "well I knew it would flop, but they offered me $X million to star in it."

As for your abhorrence for studios reducing their costs, I have yet to see an actor or writer lose money when their product fails. How about we require them to pay a portion of the losses when a film bombs?

 

[ZedRM]

Oh look, another bonehead idea from a company who vomits bonehead nonsense on a regular basis. What a shocker.