DISQUS

Jim and Katherine,

While I agree with your frustration - I too have clients that use me as a foil at times, I disagree with your end game. Working with clients should never be a struggle between their view and your view but rather an acceptance of their point of view despite the wrong-headedness of it. At the end of the day, they have to live with (and I guess sometimes, live in) the results of the decisions that they make. The best you can do is cover your backside re your best advice in writing not so much to prove that you told them so but rather to ensure they don't revise history. There's nothing wrong with making a living off of someone else's mistakes or bad choices even if the mistakes come at a bit of a cost to your ego from a client not following your advice.

Rob,

Well said. I agree with your take entirely. Many thanks, Peter

True. Yet most if not all of us can think of instances where we simply don't (or can't) show up. I think that a new paradigm is required to break this kind of thinking. Basically, you have to start enjoying the trip (the process of breaking in the business; or staying in the business) rather than focusing on the destination.

Brett,

There’s always the concern of a slippery slope. What evolves today may become the abusive practice of tomorrow.

Given the fluctuation of negotiating power between the reps representing the Brad Pitts of the business and those representing just off the bus talent, I am confident that there will be a check on the most severe forms of this deal point. Time will tell.

Steve,

Smart money is no better or worse than dumb money. They each work best on certain types of transactions.

If you want capital investment with minimal interference then dumb money may be right for you. However, if you need the experience and oversight that only a financier can provide, then you may want to consider smart money. Smart money may also be more likely to make additional investments down the road.

Dorothy,

1. There are many types of illegal money; the most obvious being money from illicit activities such as money from drug dealers or organized criminal sources in which case there's a significant risk that the money is being "laundered" or cleaned through the investment.

2. Hard to say how much money is out there in general. To be sure, the credit markets are tightening but investors with cash are looking for new places to invest now that real estate is out of fashion. It all really depends on the risk vs. reward to the investor.

3. This too varies. With dumb money, the condition on the investment can be limited to the right to recoup the investment plus a "vig" or return on the investment. Smart money usually requires additional controls such as approvals of personnel, business plan, business partners, etc.

Puts your deal it at the front of the line, baby!

I agree with you - far too many people get producing credits these days; even people who are not rendering meaningful services. The result is a dilution of the producer credit - at least as far as the industry is concerned - for "working" producers. The trades recently reported that the TV Academy is being more stringent with credits and the MP Academy wants to relax its standards. I think this is part of a normal process to regulate credits in a reasonable fashion that ultimately does not restrict credit to the point of denying credit where credit is due.

Thanks for the comment. However, I disagree that this issue is not compelling (at least if you don't compare it to global warming or poverty). Corporate greed is driving the extension of copyright and abrogating one of the basic tenants of the law which is to encourage creators - not necessarily owners - of copyright to share their creations with the rest of society without concern that somebody else will make a buck off their backs.