drotto

Not in hand yet, but it is very nice. It will likely make an appearance in the Silver Age section, when I get it. I do have several other 4 digit books already, so it is not a bad idea anyway.

Apparently, they were trying to make some regional content for India and it did not go well. Very expensive with very low revenue per user. They initially did well when they had the cricket streaming rights, but they lost those a few months ago, and the subscribers plummeted. There are now reports they want to sell or find a partner for the Indian division.

The website looks similar to those sites. Likely just re-skinning it and doing it again.

Hard to make money when you are spending $200 plus million for 6 to 8 episode TV shows. Plus thr amount of cloud storage, computers, bandwidth, and personal to keep that all running is very expensive. Plus, not all subscribes are paying equally. That 150 million is worldwide. About 40 million of those are in the US paying that $12. Even a portion of those are getting the service for "free" through promotions or cellular carriers, so less then 40M subs are at that value. Now in India the average monthly subscription fee is less than $1. So every market is different. The end result is they are taking in far less then $1.5B per month, it is more likely in the $500M range. I am sure it has been in an earnings call somewhere. Now you can argue start up costs etc, but Disney + has been reported losing between $600M to over $1B per quarter since they went live.

Anyone have? Who do you use? Just bought my priciest book ever and wife's first response was do we need a safe or something for that? She is ok with me buying it, and understands the potential investment aspects of the hobby. She is just worried about if something happens to it, or is it a target to get stolen.

Few years back when I had it hanging up.

Your right, here is the actual cover. This photo was from right before I packed it.

Just a notice to any art buyers. Last month I sold the original cover to X-Men Legacy 274 by Mark Brooks. The wonderful USPS delivered the package to the wrong address in Florida in mid September. The local post office admitted the error and said they were unable to recover it, and after some delay they have honored the insurance on the piece. I am still waiting for the check and will be refunding the buyer. If it crops up, be aware that person should not have that art.

Not seen it listed yet, but this is 100% fake on eBay. Tells you to go to to Rarecomiccollectors.com has a full website that is automated to look active. Comic shown is from Heritage auction that ended 2/28/2021. I have reported it. There are multiple other comics likely also swiped from Heritage on that website. https://www.ebay.com/itm/404564710981?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20180105095853%26meid%3D45773a3f74c74640a093794719ce4334%26pid%3D100903%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D20%26sd%3D404564710981%26itm%3D404564710981%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2332490&_trksid=p2332490.c100903.m5276

But, what is a reasonable work standard? Under, the current contract scale for 1 day of work is $1082. Pay for a 1 hour drama for 1 full episode is 8 days of work and that is about $9522. A 1/2 show is abound $5951 for that 1 episode. I am sure these are going up in the new contract. Obviously, experienced actors, and stars will get more than this. So to make a reasonable salary an actor must be in 10 episodes per year (preferably a 1 hour show) and likely more given that taxes and agent cuts must come out of that. So say to be a full time actor you must be in 15 epsidoes per year, which is working 120 days per year. That 15 would mean you net 89000 to 143000 per year. There is clearly not enough work for the vast majority.

Nothing in any of these contracts will change the fact that 86% of their members make less than $26000 per year. This came out during the strike and the number of people who hit the cap to receive benifits. Heck with fewer shows being made, that will probably go up. There are just not enough parts, regardless of the overall industry revenue, for the vast bulk of members to make a sustainable living. That is just reality.

But what they asked for was not a residual. It was outright we get a cut of every subscription fee. Profit sharing would be much closer to traditional residuals where cratives get a cut of profits based on the performance of the show. Asking outright for a piece, regardless of performance is much different. I do agree studios have been hiding streaming numbers, but I think it is because the average shows numbers are terrible. The studios are trying to hide that they would be in trouble from both sides. Not paying the residuals they should, and answering to investors concerning what the heck they are paying for. I suspect, most of these shows are losing a lot of money, which would anger investors. Again, this is why the number of projects are being greatly reduced, period. Even when this gets resolved, actors are going to find there is much less work available. The days of everything being greenlit, are over. Studios are going to be under much closer scrutiny when it comes to profitability, and that belt tightening is already trickling down. More shows are going to be bought and outsourced to countries not bound by SAG agreements to make things even more complicated. I have heard predictions that the number of shows being made could be cut in half. So again, the top tier talent will be fine, the people already struggling are going to get crushed, regardless of the contract.

The leagues that use this the players get a percentage based on the total profit. With the NBA, NHL etc, if the league makes less money, or if they loses money, the amount to the players is adjusted accordingly. It is true profit sharing. What was proposed by SAG was a fixed amount based on subscription numbers not on a percentage of profit, so there is no risk to SAG, and they get money regardless if the streamer is making money. The studios must take all the risk. Even if the studios are losing billions, they still must pay and this is potentially unsustainable. If it was a percentage based on profit, this would be feasible, but that is not what was proposed.

Sorry, SAG-AFTRA took it a step too far. It is being reported they asked for 57 cents of every paid streaming subscription. Then, a trustee, not the studio, would determine how that money is doled out as residuals based on a formula pulling from viewership numbers. It is very hard for the studios to commit to a more or less hard percentage like this based on fees not profit, especially when all streamers (except Netflix) have not figured out how to turn a profit. The studios what basically the same deal the writer got, where they would report numbers and pay residuals based on performance. The union presented this approach as non negotiable. That is when the studios walked. Also, the Halloween rules just made them look silly and petty. https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2023/10/17/actors-strike-drags-on-as-union-and-studio-feud-over-500-million-streaming-pay-ask/?sh=54fa79ce4858

Best show I have seen in some time. Generally very upbeat and fun, unlike many streaming shows they really make every minute count. Not really any filler. Seems to respect the characters and source material. Has a lot of very positive messages including; friendship, honesty, following your dreams, standing up for the less fortunate, and positive role models. Very well shot. Most importantly, Fun.

Even before the strike, the studios were signaling they were going to significantly cut back on content. This gave them the excuse the terminate contracts on projects that had already been greenlit. I would agrue however, that most streaming shows lose money, and it is very difficult to quantify how mid to low level content drives subscribers. The streaming model is fundimantally flawed, and the strike has exposed this.

But, it was never an ability everyone could use, and even if you could use it, there was wide variation in ability. It just seems now all the primary characters have force ability. Part of why I liked Mando so much is seeing a non force side of Star Wars. It seems now that Disney has thrown all of that away.

I love Raiders, it is a valid point, but the rest of the movie is brilliant so I can forgive it. This not so much.

Not saying there has not been some good stuff. I really like Mando seasons 1 and 2. But to me this series fall pray to the same issues that the MCU series do. They are movies stretched out to 6 hours of content that basically go nowhere. After 8 episodes we get 1. Ezra back home 2. Ahsoka stuck away 3. World Between Worlds introduced 4. Sabine is a Jedi 5. Thrawn is back. That's it, not a lot for that amount of time. Also, the story of finding Thrawn is pointless because he essentially won, and despite what Ahsoka and crew did, they did not change him getting home. They had no effect on this story, he would have gotten home if they never showed up. It is also just another bridge series. If you did not have working knowledge of Clone Wars and Rebels you would miss tons here, and there was no story resolution. They series can not stand on its own, it provided no endpoint. Just hey watch the next thing to see what happens.

I know this will not make me popular, but this series to me destroyed the force. Making Sabine force sensative, makes the force and force users no longer special. She should not be a force user period. This idea that anyone can learn to use the force is terrible. In a world where Order 66 occurred, there are far far too many pseudo Jedi around. Also, the light saber is now the most worthless weapon in the universe. It does not kill, and only cuts where the plot absolutely needs it too. I know I am in the minority here, but I felt this series was mediocre to bad.

I suspect the loophole in the court decision would be a producer using AI to generate a -script, and then a person doing edits and small rewrites on that. Now that tweeker could claim the copyright, since they altered the material and the AI has no standing for that claim. Thus relying heavily on AI, and allowing the studio to maintain copyright status.

Not saying I follow the AI rules 100% either, but it does seem to follow a recent court decision. That decision ruled that an AI, and therefor AI generated content, can not hold a copyright. It seems that would make it very hard for companies to use 100% AI created material, if they can not claim copyright on that material. It must therefor have human involvement to insure that the IP remains protected. The language in this contract is, for now, in the best interest of the studios also.

It's likely they were contractually obligated to put her in the trailer, so this is what you get. Have a feeling she is going to only be included where essential story wise then edited out of the rest.

Think SAG will get settled within 2 weeks if this goes through. They will use whatever is outline here for residuals and AI and slightly adjust it for the actors, which will likely be acceptable. Plus, the studios will be able to point to this agreement and say, it is good enough for them, it is what we are basically doing for you.

I continue to disagree with the staffing requirements, because a larger writer's room does not garentee success either. There are many formulas that can work, and it should be the showrunner that determines what is needed, not somewhat random formula in a contract. Forcing somebody to hire people they don't want and feel the do not need, will not inherently make a show better and may make it worse. Only the showrunners and other creators know what their peocess is, what they need, what the flow of their writers room is, and how the different people slot in. It only , likely in a token manor, creates a small level of job security, and has little to do with the creative process. Other than that, I have little disagreement with WGA's demands. You can not gartentee your members job security in the current market. It is a shrinking market, and some members are going to get left out, and there is nothing they can do to stop that.