Agencies Say Actor Royalties Threaten New-Media Ads

from the spuds-mackenzie-never-complained-like-this dept

Mon, Apr 17th 2006 12:16pm — Carlo Longino

The Wall Street Journal's got a page-one feature talking about how the online ad market is looking up, thanks to increased interest from consumer-goods companies whose spending drives the advertising business. But buried inside is a story talking about a downside of new-media ads: the increased royalty payments ad agencies have to pay actors. Deals with unions see actors get residuals every time an ad they're in runs, and with the growth of ad slots on on devices like iPods and mobile phones, or in online video, agencies say they simply can't afford to keep paying on the same scale. All this is happening amidst the backdrop of an expiring collective-bargaining agreement between the agencies and the actors' unions, so there's some pre-negotiation posturing going on here. But it's from both sides -- the unions saying the agencies are just being greedy, with one actor complaining he could make more bartending than he does acting in commercials (no word on how good an actor he is, or how often he works, of course). In any case, it sounds like the marginal costs of new-media ads could pose a threat to them -- whether it's simply a threat to ad-agency margins or something more is anybody's guess.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

11 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

EH, 17 Apr 2006 @ 1:46pm

Actors and bartenders
I would imagine that a very high percentage of 'actors' could indeed make more money bartending.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Axe, 17 Apr 2006 @ 1:53pm

Bartending...
I believe most actors should take up bartending instead of acting. They may be better at it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
CG, 17 Apr 2006 @ 2:02pm

What's the difference?
Um, most actors in commercials *are* bartenders.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
EdB, 17 Apr 2006 @ 2:13pm

It's not easy to act like a bartender or bartend like an actor.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
anonymopus coward, 17 Apr 2006 @ 2:23pm

This is summed up in "pre-negotiation posturing". Actor's unions aren't going to stop new media advertising, they just to keep their piece of the action. Just like those plumbers that are trying to stop flushless toilets.

Unions and patents. Two great legal ways to extort money.

We're just lucky there isn't a patentholders union. Those guys would make the mob look like Carmelite nuns.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Apr 2006 @ 2:25pm

Re:
The problem is, why should you be set for life because you do one commercial? This just adds to the cost of everything. Pay a lead man 20 million for one picture and then wonder why you have to pay $10.50 for a ticket to see that movie.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
the future, 17 Apr 2006 @ 2:35pm

Who says actors should make more than bartenders, anyway?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
UCFmethod, 17 Apr 2006 @ 3:18pm

Its official
Nobody cares about actors, they already get too much money as it is. How about paying actors the salaries of the special effects teams, and paying the special effects teams the salaries of the actors.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
theatrelvr, 17 Apr 2006 @ 4:02pm

This is just another reason all characters will someday be CGI. The director gets exactly what's needed - and programmers aren't nearly as infantile or ego-centric as actors are.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
James, 17 Apr 2006 @ 4:06pm

Actors Are Whiners...
I know a number of actors. They are like pro sports athletes. Athletes that aren't the stars make a huge amount of money [top 2% income in US]. Even the lowliest actor gets paid an inordinant amount of money [scale] for the little work that they do.

If they can't get work, how is that my problem?

And do they really think they're going to get paid for each Web banner impression that they appear on?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nipsey russell, 17 Apr 2006 @ 7:45pm

why the actor bashing
why all the actor bashing, this seems to be a positive? "Wahh, we cant afford to advertise more!!" Um. good? I dont need more marketing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]