Quote: Lazzard @ July 28 2010, 3:24 PM BSTAnd of course the 70% of the profits is a non-starter.
Absolutely.
No point in doing a deal on the back end unless you've got your hands on the cash flow - or unless you can feed yourself without it. And what are 'profits'?
Quote: Matthew Stott @ July 28 2010, 3:34 PM BSTAbout six and a half grand or so, split three ways. Our cash, from what I can tell, mainly went towards things like catering and transporting actors.
That might sound like a lot of money but never underestimate the cost of feeding and transporting a crew for 4 days. In any case, the first of any money that might come back goes towards paying off our investment.
Quote: Marc P @ July 28 2010, 3:39 PM BSTSeems like a fair deal, and prod values look good!
Hiring Shepperton alone without the deal our prod manager struck up would have cost at least that amount of money. That £6.5k was stretched an awful long way!
And then we won $10,500 which helped ease any financial pain.
Quote: Griff @ July 28 2010, 3:51 PM BSTNice quotes around "talent" by the way. It's a useful indicator as to your opinion of writers.
I thought that too. Not the greatest salesman, this guy.
Quote: Ben @ July 28 2010, 3:50 PM BSTAnd then we won $10,500 which helped ease any financial pain.
Yeah, that did work out real nice.
Quote: Lazzard @ July 28 2010, 3:39 PM BSTYes.
It's certainly a possibility.
Quote: Marc P @ July 28 2010, 3:39 PM BSTSeems like a fair deal, and prod values look good!
Which was @ Mattheew and co, by the way.
Quote: Lazzard @ July 28 2010, 3:24 PM BSTAbout the ONLY good thing about making your own stuff rather than getting paid for it, is you get control.
If you lose that I'm not sure why you're doing it.
Fair point.
I wouldn't say we necessarily had 100% control - maybe 90%? The director changed a few things and actors added others, but on the whole it was mostly democratic.
This thread's a real rollercoaster. Barney started as the bad guy. Then he was sort of the good guy after a Bussel intervention. Now he's the bad guy again.
Quote: Ben @ July 28 2010, 4:06 PM BSTI wouldn't say we necessarily had 100% control - maybe 90%? The director changed a few things and actors added others, but on the whole it was mostly democratic.
True, there were changes but I'm very happy with all of them. To my mind that 10% 'loss of control' covers a bunch of ideas I welcome readily. What's important is that none of them were foisted on us without our consent.
Michael jacob used to come here and offer advice for free. He got a hard time so I don't see why hornswogglers shouldn't as well. But like I say, Barney is a good name.
Quote: chipolata @ July 28 2010, 4:06 PM BSTThis thread's a real rollercoaster. Barney started as the bad guy. Then he was sort of the good guy after a Bussel intervention. Now he's the bad guy again.
I'm trying not to judge Barney one way or another, just saying that perhaps there's some validity to a version of his production model.
Quote: Marc P @ July 28 2010, 4:10 PM BSTMichael jacob used to come here and offer advice for free.
Yeah, I always felt kind of bad the way so many bitter anonymous writers
jumped down his throat.
It's just that on the face of it it's like winning a Nigerian lottery.
I haven't read the whole thread and I see Barney has only posted twice. (I didn't see his second one)
Quote: David Bussell @ July 28 2010, 4:11 PM BSTYeah, I always felt kind of bad the way so many bitter anonymous writers
jumped down his throat.
They're bitter because they're anonymous.
Quote: Lazzard @ July 28 2010, 4:37 PM BSTThey're bitter because they're anonymous.
Quote: Lazzard @ July 28 2010, 4:37 PM BSTThey're bitter because they're anonymous.
Too true.