Who do you query? (a blonde day for kite)

[KITEfrog]

The most recent buyers from script sales August and July.

Buyer: Scott Rudin Productions
Price: Seven figures

Buyer: Warner Bros. Pictures
Price: Low-seven figures

Buyer: Walt Disney Pictures
Price: n/a

Buyer: Lion’s Gate
Price: n/a

Buyer: Universal Pictures
Price: n/a

Buyer: Paramount Pictures
Price: n/a

Buyer: Sony Pictures Entertainment
Price: $3 million

Buyer: DreamWorks
Price: n/a

Buyer: Twentieth Century Fox
Price: n/a

Buyer: New Line
Price: n/a

Buyer: New Line Cinema
Price: Seven-figures

Buyer: Columbia Pictures
Price: n/a

Buyer: Focus Features
Price: n/a

Buyer: Film Four UK
Price: n/a

Buyer: 20th Century Fox
Price: n/a

Buyer: Fox Searchlight
Price: n/a

***

Then I looked in the Forum's list of Prod Co's and I didn't see some of these names?

When I go to movies, I remember names like, Miramax, Fall Line Films, Icon, United, etc......and all the other big names that I saved above.

What's the difference between a production company and a Studio?

If I were to query the 10 big ones, who are they?

Thanks,
Kite

[PoisonIvy]

Studios are not production companies. You can't query a studio. Something like Focus you can probably query but they will trash your letter. Why? There is a thing called "Collective Bargainin Agreement" under which no studio can work with a non-WGA writer. SOme major production companies (or mini-majors) are also singnatories. So stick to smaller companies. You would be better off.

[English Dave]

There is a thing called "Collective Bargainin Agreement" under which no studio can work with a non-WGA writer. SOme major production companies (or mini-majors) are also singnatories. So stick to smaller companies. You would be better off.

With the proviso that if you get a deal with a studio you join the WGA fortwith.

[Joaneasley]

A list of producers with studio deals can be found in the Hollywood Creative Directory of Producers. You could query production companies who have deals with studios, or query production companies who might either find financing to make your script low-budget, or they might take it to a bigger producer they know who could take it to the studio. It's always better to have your script taken to a studio by someone whose taste the studio trusts.

Look at which producers made the biggest hits lately. They're likely the ones with clout now.

[BROUGHCUT]

Studios are not production companies. You can't query a studio. Something like Focus you can probably query but they will trash your letter. Why? There is a thing called "Collective Bargainin Agreement" under which no studio can work with a non-WGA writer. SOme major production companies (or mini-majors) are also singnatories. So stick to smaller companies. You would be better off.

I could be missing something, but the collective bargaining agreement aka the Minimum Basic Agreement to which *all* WGA signatories, not just MPAA members, are, um, signatory? I appreciate this comment is possibly in jest but other people do read threads apart from the OP and the topic is confusing enough...

Kite, studios tend not to be buyers, either, at least not directly, which is the point here.

Spec scripts need producers attached before going into studios, (at least they do if you want a realistic shot at getting them set-up).

The majority of these projects that were specs would have been submitted to the studio via a production company with a studio deal.

See Variety's latest "Facts on Pacts" for the 226 prodcos and producers with deals at the top eight studios, as of May this year:

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=chart_pass&charttype=chart_factspacts2005spring&dept=Film

These are they.

[PoisonIvy]

No, it wasn't a jest at all. This is exactly the rationale Legal gives to their creative execs. BVMPG Legal even asks execs to forward all the query letters they may receive to them accompanied by a legal release form attached certifying they haven't read it. The way production companies are treated is entirely different than studios.


Kite, studios tend not to be buyers, either, at least not directly, which is the point here..

That is not true. They buy unpackaged scripts directly from writers all the time. They develop them, then attach producers. It gives a studio more control over the creative process - that's what development departments are for. So it's not that they're not buying period, it's just they don't buy from unrepped non-WGA members.

[BROUGHCUT]

No, it wasn't a jest at all. This is exactly the rationale Legal gives to their creative execs. BVMPG Legal even asks execs to forward all the query letters they may receive to them accompanied by a legal release form attached certifying they haven't read it. The way production companies are treated is entirely different than studios.

Has your account been hijacked?

To clarify.... The WGA, a labour union, can ban sigs from buying (speculative) material from non-members who were not employed to write?

Not only that, but the WGA has a special rule that prohibits MPAA members (anyone that distributes is a "studio", so otherwise the definition would be too diffuse) from entering into any business with non-WGA writers? I thought studios binned query letters because they haven't the time to read them and to minimise exposure to lawsuits, not because it would violate an agreement with a collective bargaining organisation.

WGA signatory producers and prodcos -- studios included, unless I am seriously mistaken -- can hire non-union writers as long as the terms of employment satisfy MBA requirements. I don't know what happens if a writer accrues enough points for membership but declines to join the Guild, I expect signatories would be banned from employing them again at this point?

That is not true. They buy unpackaged scripts directly from writers all the time. They develop them, then attach producers. It gives a studio more control over the creative process - that's what development departments are for. So it's not that they're not buying period, it's just they don't buy from unrepped non-WGA members.

I wasn't particularly clear. Just saying scripts rarely go into studios without a producer to shepherd them through the development process. A few weeks ago, I think you actually said that a script never goes into a studio without a producer already attached.

The studios ultimately bankroll the purchase, but specs can be paid for via discretionary funds and such like -- an ancillary point, really. Not saying the studios don't acquire specs, but that the producers and prodcos with whom they have deals are both the first point of contact and, if it is to be set-up at the studio, often the buyers of the material.

Even if this last comment is totally off and studios pay for 99% of specs directly, the majority of those scripts would have been brought into the studio by a producer.... So the answer to Kite's question is undoubtedly to approach these producers... just as a major agent hoping to sell a tentpole project would.

[PoisonIvy]

I'll contribute to this one last time because I believe I was not clear in my previous posts but I'm not going to argue about it anymore - I don't believe in board arguments.

Here's the deal. Specs come into studios in 3 forms. Packaged projects with producers attached - majority of specs. The prodcos usually assume the leading role in production/development and studio ponies up the cash. Some of those scripts (1%) are written by new unrepresented writers who are immediately invited into WGA and get a shot at a career. But those a packages scripts with backing.

Unpackaged projects - sometimes they go into turnaround and are reacquired by the writer, sometimes the agency feels the writer or the material are strong enough to be bought without the perks. These scripts never come from newbies and are always written by WGA members. After acquiring them the studio may develop it internally or attache a prodco to shepherd it.

The third form is pitch to script. But those are always a product of internal development and are not always considered specs. These always come from A list writers.

Technically, if you follow the WGA guidelines to the letter, the first case scenario will not work for non-members - a typical catch 22 (you can't sell unless you're a member, you can't become a member unless you sell). This shadiness is enough for a studio to say - I don't want to get into this unless this project is backed by a production company/a three letter agency, etc.

As a result, if an unrepped non-member sends something into a studio, it will be tossed or sent to Legal with a filled out form testifying that the material has not been read...

As you probably guessed from my posts, I work for a studio, so all these formalities are the realities of my every day life. These rules may seem ridiculous but I didn't invent them.

[English Dave]

Ayep, witness the crazy who is sueing because he wrote a script called Lost in 1978 about a plane crash. You can't blame the studios for putting up a hard front. At the same time, if you send them a kick ass script they'll listen. But think....what are the chances of you as a new writer having a kick ass script that hasn't already been picked up by a manager, agent or prodco?

[BROUGHCUT]

I am not arguing. When you state categorically that the WGA bars studios from buying scripts from non-members there is nothing to argue about.

It is also implicit in your first post that there are two MBAs -- one for majors and mini majors, another for other signatory producers and prodcos, which is not the case. Either that or you are suggesting people would be "better off" working for non-signatory companies.

Unpackaged projects - sometimes they go into turnaround and are reacquired by the writer, sometimes the agency feels the writer or the material are strong enough to be bought without the perks. These scripts never come from newbies and are always written by WGA members.

Why do you assert this -- because you think it's against the MBA?

I obviously don't think the WGA is relevant to this thread at all... it jumps the shark at the mention of WGA reacquisition (which apparently only applies to unpackaged projects, from the context of your post)... the fact that pitches aren't specs -- well, nobody is going to argue with you about that.

Technically, if you follow the WGA guidelines to the letter, the first case scenario will not work for non-members - a typical catch 22 (you can't sell unless you're a member, you can't become a member unless you sell).

Are you able to cite the WGA "guidelines" that suggest studios and other signatories can't buy from or employ non-members?

The WGA is, as you initially indicated, a "collective bargaining" organisation that governs terms of employment for its members. Sure, the MBA umbrella covers specs, to an extent, but signatories can purchase scripts from non-members and avoid paying minimums, granting steps, and such like. They are acquiring a property, not *hiring* a writer and can therefore wiggle out into the penumbra of the WGA's purview. If a signatory *employed* a non-member to script a pitch or do a rewrite, however, it's clear-cut -- then they would have to abide by the MBA irrespective of the writer's professional status or guild affiliations.

(I'd expect a signatory may be blacklisted if they continue to deal with a writer who abuses this flexibility and declines to join the WGA once they have earned enough points -- Dave's point -- there seems to be some shadiness here. Maybe someone will clarify, although it is a moot point, really.)

As a result, if an unrepped non-member sends something into a studio, it will be tossed or sent to Legal with a filled out form testifying that the material has not been read...

If it's unsolicited, it probably will be. But is this general policy the result of WGA agreements, or poor expectations and the consequence of lawsuits from -- more often than not -- unrepped non-members? Think it's the latter.

Of course, it is correct to say people shouldn't query studios, the reasons are obvious but have nothing to do with WGA shadiness, IMO. I'm UK based, I'm not a member, but there are several regulars here who obviously know a great deal about the minutia of the WGA, I'm sure they will correct me if I'm wrong.

[LIMAMA]

Writers are not "invited" to join the WGA either. It's not a private social club. It's a union.

[Joe Unidos]

Well, I am not a member of the WGA, but there is some misinformation floating around (to the extend that my rudimentary second-hand understanding is correct.) I just wanted to give a few comments and link to a guy who is VERY active in Guild politics and knows what he's talking about.

LIMAMA, I think the "invited" word choice isn't that far off. When eligibilty requirements are met, you get a letter. (You may have received it, I don't know anything about you.) Guess what it is? It's a forml etter INVITING you to join the union.

Broughtcut, the MBA is much more specific, involved and limiting to sig's than you seem to think. And the issue you raise of "working for" vs. "buying from" is, for lack of a more diplomatic term, completely and absolutely wrong. Read more about it here:

http://artfulwriter.com/archives/the_mba/index.html

[LIMAMA]

"LIMAMA, I think the "invited" word choice isn't that far off. When eligibilty requirements are met, you get a letter. (You may have received it, I don't know anything about you.) Guess what it is? It's a forml etter INVITING you to join the union."

You may get a formal letter "inviting" you into the WGA, but the reality is no studio or prodco who is a WGA sig would work with a writer who declined the invitation once offered. If you can offer an example of a writer who still managed to get such work after rejecting the WGA, I'd love to hear it.

[Joe Unidos]

I guess maybe I am not sure what your point was, then.

I thought you were nitpicking a word choice and I was simply offering an opinion that the word choice wasn't as inappropriate as you seemed to think it was. No big deal, really, and certainly unrelated to the original question.



[Also there is a "partial-membership" option that's sort of joining and not joining at the same time. Cost less and you can't vote (I think). A number of writer/directors choose this option.]

[LIMAMA]

Nah. I just think the term "invitation" implies that you really have a choice when you don't, not if you want to have a screenwriting career with the big players.

[Joe Unidos]

You know, I bet there's a good number of career direct-to-video guys that in theory have the points but don't join. Maybe not. I don't know. Just a thought.

[Hasil Adkins]

Nah. I just think the term "invitation" implies that you really have a choice when you don't, not if you want to have a screenwriting career with the big players.Yes, actually you do have a choice. You can choose 'financial core non-member' status, and you would still be allowed to work for signatory companies.

[Joe Unidos]

"'financial core non-member' status"

That's the term I was searching my brain for!! Thanks.

[PoisonIvy]

Hasil is absolutely right. And there are a number of writers who choose not to accept the "invitation" for various reasons. Because you can't force anyone to join the union.

Broughcut - I'm not sure what else to say to you... I'm explaining to you how it's done. And you're telling me it's not so. Well, maybe you know better then.

[LIMAMA]

Name one heavyweight writer who has "financial core non-member" status.

[Hasil Adkins]

I can't, because the status of members is confidential.

If your point is that 'heavyweight writers' join the union as current members, I won't disagree.

But your stated point: no studio or prodco who is a WGA sig would work with a writer who declined the invitation once offered. simply isn't accurate.

[PoisonIvy]

I know three who chose to do that. But I can't name them here. It's confidential info.

[LIMAMA]

I can't, because the status of members is confidential.

If your point is that 'heavyweight writers' join the union as current members, I won't disagree.

But your stated point: Quote:
no studio or prodco who is a WGA sig would work with a writer who declined the invitation once offered.
simply isn't accurate.

__________________

Now I'm more than confused. I've been screenwriting since 1994. It has been drummed into my head that a writer MUST make a sale/rewrite status with a WGA sig in order to accrue points to join the union, receive min, get benefts, the whole nine yards.

If a WGA sig can work with a writer who has declined to join the WGA, then does that not undercut the point of the union? Then why bother to join the WGA at all?

Can someone enlighten me? Or has my new meds clouded my thinking.

[PoisonIvy]

Now I'm more than confused. I've been screenwriting since 1994. It has been drummed into my head that a writer MUST make a sale/rewrite status with a WGA sig in order to accrue points to join the union, receive min, get benefts, the whole nine yards.

If a WGA sig can work with a writer who has declined to join the WGA, then does that not undercut the point of the union? Then why bother to join the WGA at all?

Can someone enlighten me? Or has my new meds clouded my thinking.

There are no simple answers to your questions. The debate's been going on for years and there's no end to it. If you go by the book, you're correct, except no one here goes by the book. Not really. If a no name writer refuses to join WGA, they'll crush him. If a huge writer quits, all they can do is cower and beg him to come back because that hurts the union. DGA is the same way - Rodriguez quit DGA twice now. Guess what, they'll be welcoming him back before long. Because it's bad for business.

[Hasil Adkins]

a writer MUST make a sale/rewrite status with a WGA sig in order to accrue points to join the unionDid someone post otherwise? Not in any of my posts.

There are various ways to join the guild, the most common of which is a sale or employment as a writer. You can join as an associate member if you don't have enought pionts to qualify. There are the indie and animation caucus initiatives. Winning a contest.

>declined to join the WGA

As a finanacial core non-member, you can work w/signatory co's, but you don't get benefits. You still have to fork over a percentage of your income and pay dues.

>Then why bother to join the WGA at all?

Because if you don't, you'll be paying into the guild and getting none of its benefits and protections.

[BROUGHCUT]

Ivy, yes, I am telling you that it is not so that the MBA bars sigs (including studios) from dealing with non-members. This is really all I'm responding to, it is unclear whether you still stand by this first post.

I can't name them here. It's confidential info.

Why the desire to be seen as an "insider" on an anonymous internet chat board? Are the WGA guidelines you refer to also confidential?

Broughtcut, the MBA is much more specific, involved and limiting to sig's than you seem to think. And the issue you raise of "working for" vs. "buying from" is, for lack of a more diplomatic term, completely and absolutely wrong.

Precisely what is absolutely wrong in my post, Joe? If it is impossible for sigs to enter into business with non-members outside of the MBA (because everything is always a "work for hire", presumably) why does the WGA find it necessary to make a distinction between non-member "professional" and amateur writers?

You have posted this article before. When Craig says "the WGA covers you by default" on a spec sale, his assumption appears to be that you are already a member of the Guild.

It is another matter entirely for a non-member to get the protection of a trade union because of legal maneuvering alone.

Also, read the comment from a reader directly below it, about "Acquisition of Rights":

http://artfulwriter.com/archives/2005/06/schroedingers_e.html#comments

I think you will find it's up to sigs whether they characterize a spec as a work for hire or not. It's a convention, not a rule. Specs are NOT works for hire, and a "legal maneuver", by definition, does not change this underlying fact, nor the reality that the WGA is there to protect its existing membership.

If you are not a member of the Guild, then you can not *depend* on being covered by the MBA when you sell a spec.

The "working for" vs. "buying from" question *should* be academic, because everyone on this board is aiming to get a Guild contract -- be that by negotiation or asserting their status as a "professional writer".

A Guild sig can hire a non-member as long as they abide by the MBA. It is logical to assume this only applies if the non-member is in "good standing", but this is something which has still not been clarified. An interesting , if academic, question and a bit premature if we can't even get the basics right.

Quite frankly, I am done caring, and I'm embarrsed to be the only one really wasting time on this silly thread. It could be down to its being on the Prod board instead of biz advice, where it now belongs, or the fact that there are more important things in the world than discussing make-believe MBAs with a brick wall.

[PoisonIvy]

Why the desire to be seen as an "insider" on an anonymous internet chat board? Are the WGA guidelines you refer to also confidential?[/size]
[/size]

Are we comparing egos now? 'Cause if we are you win.

[BROUGHCUT]

would you rather not compare WGA "guidelines" or the MBA. You are the one apparently "explaining to [me - and everyone else] how it's done", -- or rather dictating. I would readily admit that I'm wrong if you presented factual information backing up what you say.

If anyone new to the forum is interested, the actual MBA is not online but WGAE has an quick intro. It does not cover everything discussed here but is still useful, particularly the "Creative Rights" section.

http://www.wgaeast.org/mba/

The WGA categorically bans member writers from working for non-signatory companies. However, it does not require that signatories only work with WGA members. This could be a source of the confusion.

It's very easy to make me look as ignorant and egocentric as you imply, Ivy -- just quote some WGA literature that supports your fundamental claims about studios/sigs and first-time screenwriters. Legal at your studio will have a full MBA. I'm off to the Sahara desert for a month this Monday, so if you want to wait until then, you could probably just make it up.

[BROUGHCUT]

It would have been simple enough for some other DD'ers / mods to step in and help correct the misinformation in this thread. At times, DD can be quite cliquey and obsequious.