LA Times Acting Career Article

Another interesting article in the LA times that I wanted to pass along...

LA Times Article

It has an interesting definition of the "middle class" member of SAG - those who earn enough to get their insurance, but less than $100,000. What is interesting is that this "middle class" accounts for only 5% of actors, the vast majority not even qualifying for insurance... what a career we have chosen!

What I do keep coming back to, however, which none of the recent articles I have read and passed along have mentioned, is that it comes down to longevity. The longer you are able to actively pursue an acting career (or any other artistic endeavour), the greater chances of eventual success you will have... the trick is not being stuck in depressing, dead end jobs until that happens, but creating something parallel to you artistic venture that supports you over what could be a long time...

...this is what I am all about, of course, with Abundance Bound, but I like finding articles like this because I feel they get necessary conversations going. That in mind, I would love and welcome any comments - please feel free to write!

have a great weekend

Miata

To Audition or Not - Acting Blog post

Nice, quick, simple post from David August that I wanted to share.

To Audition or Not - Los Angeles Acting blog by David August

Los Angeles Times Acting Article

I came across this article in the LA times, and thought it worth passing on.

 

The main thing that jumped out at me - and will do to you now as well - is the phrase "You can be recognised on the street and still live in a  studio apartment", because it shows how precarious our income as actors can be. There are a few other things the article references which are interesting, so it is definitely worth a read, but I am also amused by the idea stated in there that working as a waiter can be good because it allows you to "network with customers" - that is certainly not something that I have ever heard of, let alone experienced, but maybe some of you have... I would love to hear about it if you have.

Anyway, here is the link LA Times Article.

As always, don't forget to check out the free stuff on our own website if you haven't already got it (click acting schools to go there), and I hope you find the article interesting.

To your prosperity.

SAG negotiations - alternate perspective

Something Adam came across from Michael Bay - in typical bombastic mode - but who none-the-less makes some relevant points. Read on...

SAG wants more than Directors and Writers? That's a smart tactic I guess. When are people going to understand, most importantly actors - we are at war - we are facing a major recession - our country is in dire need of being fixed - our country also has no money because we have given trillions to the Iraq war and we have NOT even started to pay for it - it is just paid right now by printing more money on presses - China owns our ass in every way. Why not strike on a business in a down fall. Just like the writer's they made pennies on the four extra months striking - when you do the real math and they are paying the price for it still - so many writer's out of work still!!! I want this business to thrive - I know the studio heads and they will punish those that defy them. Okay, be an idealist - but you will never get a better deal then the writer's or directors - only the same - the studio's will never allow it, don't kid yourself. The working actors don't want a strike - they have said so. Too many non working actors have a say which is crazy - maybe there are just too many actors?? Gosh I'm even a member of SAG, but I don't feel I've earned the right to vote in this guild.

One hunch, the leaders of these guilds seem to like the limelight they get in the press, it becomes more about the ego in the room rather than something smart. Striking is not smart. Through the history in America, strikes in businesses have only gained the union worker 6% at the max - so take the emotion out of it and go for the 6%. A path to strike is not smart for the the hundreds of thousands of people in this business. Sanity needs to prevail here - talk real and talk the same talk as your union brothers - not more!

What I think he misses is that there are simply more actors than writers or directors - where you have one director, and two writers, you have fifty actors, so that having the same deal puts significantly less residuals into their pockets...

... not that actors should get 50 times what Director's do, but it seems to me that the deal should be somewhat sweeter  than the other two unions.

I would welcome any thoughts on this!

For now

To your prosperity,

Actors Strike Re-Print

Something I came across from the LA times, and wanted to pass along for the actors out there reading this.

I am not sure I agree with everything that is said here - there are strong arguments for limiting those in SAG who can actually vote on Union issues that I won't get in to here - but it certainly makes some interesting points.

HERE we go again. The entertainment industry quivers near the brink, threatened with another devastating strike even as people are still picking up the pieces from the last one. Can it be much longer before we start seeing A-list celebrities wielding picket signs again? 

Last week's flameout of talks between the studios and the Screen Actors Guild means that TV and film performers could walk off the job as soon as June 30. If that happens, Hollywood would have enjoyed barely four months of labor harmony since the 14-week writers strike ended in February. Another TV season, much of which is set to be unveiled beginning today during the networks' annual "upfront" presentations to media buyers in New York City, would be imperiled. 

It's not freak-out time -- yet. SAG and the studios are likely to resume talks at the end of this month, which would still give them plenty of time to hammer out a deal over payment for shows that run on new media, product-placement fees and other issues. And while much attention has been paid to tensions between SAG and its sister guild, AFTRA -- which represents many broadcast performers and which last week started negotiating separately with the studios -- the sideline blowhards aren't blowing as Santa Ana-hot as they did during the run-up to the Writers Guild of America strike. 

Neither are most of the major players. Asked about the prospect of another walkout, Doug Allen, SAG's chief negotiator, told me last week: "That's not our objective. We've made more progress than management admits or has been reported." Studio sources who declined to speak for attribution also downplayed the likelihood of a work stoppage. 

Still, mere talk of another strike is enough to jolt Hollywood, where ordinary workers who took massive hits to their pocketbooks during the writers strike are still scrambling for scarce TV and film jobs, as my colleague Richard Verrier recently reported in this newspaper. 

But let's face it -- Hollywood doesn't have a technology problem. It has an income-disparity problem. Everyone knows it, and yet no one talks about it. 

Learned explanations abound of how the industry finds itself in this sorry mess, centering on emerging technologies -- often meaning the Internet -- and how new formats are changing the way consumers view and pay for movies and TV shows. Those theories are all true, as far as they go; no one disputes that viewers are migrating to the Web, and it's understandable that Hollywood guilds want to help protect their members' economic interests as part of the transition. That's what they're supposed to do. 

Yet In Hollywood, where enormous wealth is celebrated as the ultimate marker of talent, it's considered bad form to state the obvious. Income disparity? What are you, some sort of Marxism-spouting grad student? 

Yet grotesque levels of income inequality are at the root of the industry's current labor troubles. And that's what everyone should remember the next time one of those A-listers makes an arty "Speechless" video in support of striking writers, marches a picket line alongside middle-class Hollywood workers, or, for that matter, publicizes any other call-to-arms for social justice. 

Starting in the 1980s, the studios started making sweeping, multimillion-dollar deals with talent -- A-list actors, mainly, but also some name-brand writers and directors. The types of riches thrown about might have embarrassed imprisoned former Tyco chief L. Dennis Kozlowski, famed for his opulent party where an ice sculpture urinated premium vodka. 

Stars with precious few hits to their credit and their agents began sniffing that a $20-million fee for a motion picture wasn't meeting their "ask." In the final seasons of NBC's "Friends," each of the six principal cast members collected $1 million per episode (and they were by no means alone -- such stars as Kelsey Grammer and Ray Romano got packages that were even richer). Huge advances and "first-dollar gross" deals -- in which talent collected money directly off the top of the box-office revenue, crimping studio profit margins -- became commonplace. 

Studio chiefs naturally started complaining about the soaring costs of movies and TV shows. The sensible thing to do, of course, would have been to start saying "no" to the stars and their handlers. But for the most part, that's not what they did (well, Viacom boss Sumner Redstone eventually said "no" to Tom Cruise, but only after the star had made himself damaged goods). Refusing the stars might have risked the studio's competitive position, they reasoned. 

Instead, the bosses started trying to make up for their spendthrift ways by economizing elsewhere -- that is, taking money out of the hides of ordinary workers. Or, as Hollywood prefers to call them, people "below the line." Indeed. 

So studios have been trying to save nickels and dimes by using cheaper labor to make TV shows and films overseas or by snagging tax incentives and other goodies to produce entertainment in states other than California. 

This is why the producers of ABC's "Ugly Betty" announced last week that they're decamping the Los Angeles area for New York, so the show can take advantage of recently passed tax credits in the Empire State. Meanwhile, two-thirds of 150 production workers in Southern California are expected to be laid off. What timing! Can you say "collateral damage"? 

The studios, for their part, are still reeling from their largely self-inflicted wounds, which may explain why guild officials have found the bosses so difficult to deal with in recent negotiations. 

Back in the '70s and '80s, studios routinely recorded profit margins as high as 20%, according to financial analyst Tom Adams of Adams Media Research. Today, most are lucky to squeak by with single-digit margins, Adams said, adding that rich talent deals are a major reason for the shift. (Remember, though, that studios are now relatively small parts of sprawling, diversified corporations whose overall balance sheets generally look much better.) 

When I asked if there was any sign that studios are making progress rolling back these types of frothy talent deals, Adams replied simply, "No." 

Figures bear that out: The average movie in 2007 cost $70.8 million to make, or 48% more than in 2001, according to the trade group Motion Picture Assn. of America. That's more than double the overall rate of inflation. 

Last month, a group of actors -- including household names such as Ben Affleck and Kevin Bacon -- were pushing a proposal to limit SAG voting to performers who work at least one day a year. The idea was to not have the union's future decided by, say, a waiter whose greatest triumph was a bit part 30 years ago on "Quincy." (Those nutty stars -- first they take your money, then they tell you to shut up.) 

But the SAG board rejected that bid in favor of an approach designed to help middle-class members. "We don't want this to be a profession practiced only by actors who make millions," SAG's Allen told me. 

He added that the union can only negotiate the minimum rates on the pay scale, not what the studios pay the mega-stars. "Management has to be willing to take responsibility for what they're willing to pay at the top," Allen said. 

Until that day comes, though, the industry's ordinary workers can do little other than pray that unions deliver some incremental gains for them. 

Oh, and maybe find some creative places to stick a picket sign toted by a multimillionaire mega-star.

So there it is. As a little plug for myself, given what appears to be happening in the industry again, check out Monthly Money Management as a way to bridge the gap between acting schools and art programs and an actual career as an artist...

Have a great rest of week.

Acting, Careers & Money

Today I want to finish up the article from Bob Fraser regarding acting careers, and the responsibility that go along with it. If you missed the earlier installment, please see below, but enjoy...

The main reason I am passing along this letter and my answer is because I get a lot of mail with this sort of request for 'help.'

"Can you look at my headshots and pick out the best one?"

"Can you send me the names of some agents who will help me start my acting career?"

"Will you read my screenplay idea and give me your thoughts on how I can sell it to Warner Brothers?"

"Can you get my pictures to J. Lo? I want to work with her."

"Should I move to New York or Hollywood?"

"I have an idea for a show I can star in. If you can get it to the right people, we can split the profits."

"Do I need a manager? If so, could you tell me who the good ones are? I don't want to get cheated."

... and so on. Okay ...

One of the first (most important) things I talk about in my courses, my articles, my columns and my blogs is the absolute necessity of doing the legwork and homework yourself.

As long as you live in a world where someone else is going to do the work it takes to get you into the acting business - well, you are not going to move forward - and you will probably get hurt ... financially or otherwise.

In fact, it is precisely this mindset that scammers are looking for. When a scammer meets an actor who believes it is possible for someone else to make it happen FOR them - he knows he's landed a sucker.

This belief in a one-step process (or a short-cut, or a secret doorway, or an easy way 'in') is what gets most actors in trouble.

When you think all you have to do is 'convince' an agent to represent you and you'll be on your way - you're just asking for trouble. The kind of agent that can be 'convinced' is generally a scam artist.

Real agents make their own decisions based on their assessment of how much money you'll make as an actor. If you aren't making any money now, don't expect a legitimate agent to be very interested in you.

When you focus all your energy on getting into the union - you are going to be unpleasantly surprised at the result. 93.6% of members of the acting unions earn less than 243 dollars a year. (This is one of my fake statistics - but I'll bet it's close.) Can you live on $243 a year? NO. That will barely cover your dues. 

Will it be different for you when you get into the union? Not if you think getting into the union is a step you must take to be successful.

It isn't.

If you concentrate on making money as an actor, you will get into the unions and land an agent ... as a matter of course.

If you up and move to Hollywood or New York (London, Mumbai, Sydney, Vancouver, etc.) without a solid plan of action - in the hopes that you will meet someone who will help you achieve your dream ... you ARE going to end up an unhappy camper.

Again, scammers are looking for uninformed pigeons all the time. They will spot you, trap you and take your money. They're good at it. They've been doing it for years.

The absolute truth is that there are MANY steps (and a lot of them are difficult) that you MUST TAKE ON YOUR OWN - if you ever expect to make your goal of becoming a professional actor a reality.

Here are just a few:

You must learn how to get a good picture. This is not a matter of finding a good photographer - it's a matter of learning what you must do to make a great picture happen ... no matter who takes the pictures.

You must learn the 'culture' of show business and work within that reality. Most actors think this will "just come naturally" and find themselves, five years later, still working at a crummy job and trying to 'make it' in their spare time.

You must take care of yourself - yourself. 90% of actors don't have a sugar daddy or a family who will take care of them as they pursue their dreams. Somehow, successful actors make it a point to 'take care of business' by themselves. If you

need a 'keeper' to get the basics taken care of ... then your prospects are dim.

You must make a lot of decisions.

You will have to decide on a budget for your acting business. 

You will have to decide whether your new 'friends' are for real or out for your money.

You will have to learn the 'map of the territory.'

You must decide what niche will work best for you.... and I'm just skimming the surface.

This idea, that you have to find other people to help you, is a major mistake. MAJOR MISTAKE.

This mindset is the reason I put together my four acting career courses, You Must Act!, Nail It! Headshot Secrets Revealed, and Action!

Not to plug the courses too outrageously, but if you want to know what ALL THE REAL STEPS you must take to have a professional acting career, get my courses. 

(The nice thing about my stuff is that if they don't work for you, you can get your money back - be sure to read my One Year Guarantee for details.)

Also, read the biographies of successful actors.

Almost every biography has the elements (steps) that lead to a career in the business.

And you should read David Mamet's books - and K.Callen's books -- and Stanislavski - and Michael Shurtleff, Allan Miller, Lee Strasberg - well, it's a very long reading list. (Not to mention Michael Caine's video acting classes.)

In other words, there is lot of homework for you to do. 

A dream without work to make it happen, remains a dream. You can't spend a dime of the money you make in dreams.

Is it easy to do it all this work on your own?

NO.

Is there a shortcut?

NO.

Is there another way?

NO.

You have to do it. Agents, managers, connections, etc - are people who come along AFTER you have started to succeed ... on your own.

There are three elements you must have in order to be successful on your own:

You must be willing to learn ... INFORMATION

You must do what it takes ... HARD WORK

You must not give up ... TENACITY

You don't need an agent, a manager, a teacher, a photographer, a friend, a lover, a consultant, a coach, or sugar daddy to take the steps necessary to get you to your destination.

In fact, if you wait for somebody else to do things for you, you will be waiting a long time ...

... like forever.

If you want to be a professional actor, you must get the information, do the hard work and be willing to keep at it for a while.

In other words... YOU must act.

Great article, so I really appreciate Bob letting us re-post it from his newsletter. And I feel that, although it is obviously directed at actors, the message is applicable across the artistic spectrum.

I would welcome any comments on this, so please leave them here, and I promise I will respond.

Also, if you are interested in courses to take you from your acting schools or art programs to a career in acting or the arts, don't forget to check out our monthly audio program "Monthly Money Management".

Until next time, to your prosperity!

Michigan Film Tax Rebate

Michigan just announced that it is launching a 40% tax credit to films being made in the state. Not sure of the details yet, but it is the latest in a series of states (NY, New Mexico, etc) aggressively going after film production...

...and yet California has none, despite having Arnie as Governor. Annoying.

I also just heard that "Ugly Betty" is shifting to NY to take advantage of their recently announced tax credit. NY, I am happy for you (I love that show), but I am concerned to see work leaving LA.

There was also an item on the news today saying the the Producers have called off talks with SAG... I really hope we don't have a repeat of the WGA situation!

Fingers crossed...

Miata

You Must Act - Article

I have re-printed this article from our friend Bob Fraser of You Must Act fame (an excellent resource for actors - highly recommended), as it addresses a number of issues that people bring up to us all the time.

Bob's work can seem confrontational, but with 50 odd years of experience as actor, writer, producer and director in this business, few teachers out there offer such a wealth of knowledge and experience.

Anyway, here is the first half, courtesy of Bob Fraser:

All right. I'm going to get in the pulpit this time and 'preach.' 

For longtime readers there will be some old themes in this diatribe - so bear with me. For those of you who are newer subscribers - please pay close attention...

I get hundreds of letters a week and most of them are lovely. Many people write to say thanks and those letters are great to get.

However, I also get letters from actors who think that I'm the answer to their problems. They know I can help them. If only I would.

Here's a typical letter:

(I've changed the name and obscured the location.)

"Dear Bob,

"Unfortunately, I cannot buy your courses right now. Maybe later. I have lots of expenses. Can you tell me what I need to do to become an actor. Do I need to go to acting school? And if I do, where are the good ones? How much do they cost, etc?

"I live in 'xxxxx' and I don't think there are any good acting schools, or even any, in 'xxxxx.' If

you could just tell me how to become an actor and help me find a good school to learn acting - when I win the Oscar I'll be sure to thank you, ha ha."

"Signed, Jill" 

Two interesting things about this letter. First, although she can't buy my courses which contain

the information she is seeking - she expects me to take time out of my schedule to do her "legwork" for her. Secondly, she thinks this request will result in her winning an Oscar - somehow.)

Here's my answer:

Dear Jill,

There are many fine acting schools in 'xxxxx.'

Since you are sending me an email, I assume you have a working knowledge of the internet. A quick trip to Google and a search for theatre training, acting training, acting school, plus 'xxxxx' will get you a lot of results.

You have brought up two important things in your letter that I feel I must address. First that

later is an actual time - a real place. Second that I can help you to achieve your dream by

doing your homework for you.

Jill, it has been my observation (over a 50 year career)  that 'later' rarely happens when it comes to our dreams.  

Dreams come true, goals are accomplished, careers are built - by taking action now.

That's WHY the title of my first course is ...

You Must Act! 

If I added a word to the title, it would be ... 'NOW.'

Getting right to the crux of your "help" idea:

No one else is going to make your dream a reality FOR you. 

No one else is truly going to help you accomplish YOUR goals.

No other person on this earth can DO this for you.

The bottom line is (and always will be) this: Jill, if you don't do it - it won't get done.

So, no, I won't look up acting schools for you ... you do it. 

If you sincerely want to know what it  actually takes to accomplish your dream of acting professionally ... do what it takes to find out.

If you continue to believe that someone else is going to come along and take the steps needed to get you to the top - well, that used to be an E-ticket ride in Fantasyland. 

I know how hard it is to raise kids - my wife and I raised three. But if you believe you can't be a great mom AND an actor -- you've put aside the best tool you have (your brain), because you aren't THINKING it through. 

The reason I tell people to THINK things through is because of this truth: There is always a way.

You know that's the truth.

Since the beginning of human history the one thing we have always known is; there is always a way.

It's up to you to figure out what that 'way' is.

Whatever you do, don't wait for someone else to take the steps ... or 'later.'

Much Success

Bob Fraser 

More to follow

Money / Debt Management Seminar

This link was posted on our graduate chat group yesterday, and I wanted to share it in case anyone is in LA and interested in finding out more about our rights when it comes to creditors, debt management etc.

It is at the SAG Foundation, and click here to go to the page.

If anyone can get there, please let us know what you think, and relay any useful information.

We also cover debt management strategies in both out Monthly Money Management audio series, and free tele-seminar "The Power of Prosperity" - please check them out if that is of interest to you.

Until next time.

To Your Prosperity!

Celebrity's Money & Salaries

Just a quick something I saw. It really is fascinating how star's salaries have changed over the years, and how Hollywood's spending decisions are effecting them. In my opinion, this is all the more reason to learn about money now, so that we are all ready for the industry as it changes...

Here is the link to the article.

Star Salaries

Enjoy.

Abundance Bound in Backstage West

I will get a link up as soon as it is online, but our article regarding actor's financial paradigms went out yesterday in Backstage West.

It is very cool seeing one's name in print - I think I am going to enjoy writing for Backstage over the next few months...

Have a great weekend.

Miata