As for “these ridiculous levels of disparity”, there is also a ridiculous level of disparity in viewership numbers. This show is getting 20 million viewers an episode and doing really well in syndication. The top-ten shows last year were:
NBC Sunday Night Football
The Big Bang Theory
NCIS
NCIS: Los Angeles
Dancing With the Stars
The Blacklist
The Voice (Monday)
Person of Interest
The Voice (Tuesday)
Blue Bloods
So aside from this sitcom and some hour-long dramas, you have football and three hours of reality competition. You really can’t syndicate or rerun sports or reality shows, so while reality shows are cheap to produce, there’s no ongoing revenues. And I think sitcoms syndicate better than hour-long dramas.
IIRC you are a camera man. If you were employed and getting a steady pay check from this show would you feel any differently about pouring a bit more of the profits into the stars so you could keep your steady job going?
An article in the New York Times said that the syndicated reruns on TBS get an average of nine million viewers an episode. Any of the networks would be happy to get nine million viewers an episode for a first-run sitcom.
I am not a camera man. No I would not. I would appreciate the steady job because the show is successful, but the stars getting obscenely rich when I would know how little work and effort goes into their day would be irritating.
What does the amount of “work and effort” have to do with anything? The cast is not paid based on that, the pay is based on supply and demand. There is a huge demand for Jim Parsons, but the supply of Jim Parsons is limited.
And I’ve worked as a camera guy, the actual work done while filming is next to effortless. Easiest job I’ve ever had. Sure the training takes a while, but it ain’t logging or being a prison guard.
Funny, I think the same thing about the compensation certain sports figures earn. What makes a quarterback or a pitcher or any other grown man who plays a game worth millions of dollars? It all comes down to what the market will bear or what the power that be and customers are willing to pay. Bottom line: it’s all about the bottom line.
I have no doubt that camera operator, key grip, etc. are much more physically demanding jobs than principle acting. That said, I don’t seem to know any of their names for some reason.
That ain’t workin’ that’s the way you do it
Money for nothin’ and your chicks for free
I don’t know enough about the system to answer that. A standard rate that every actor gets in every show would be good, though.
Profit should be used to make more projects, add seasons to struggling shows, improve production quality, and essentially give more people steady jobs. It should not be hoarded by a small few who have been lucky enough to stumble into a popular product.
Ok, let’s say you’re Chuck Lorre, and that’s your conviction. So you tell Cuoco, Parsons and Galecki that they’re getting $50K an episode and they should be lucky they’re getting that, because that’s way more than “the standard rate”. Period. No negotiations.
They walk. You don’t have a show anymore. You lost the network hundreds of millions of dollars, and you caused dozens of people to lose their jobs. And you have to go into hiding because crazed fans of the show are hunting you in the streets. Congratulations.
Or they don’t, because everyone in TV gets the same money, and they see, like every other Production Company does, that profit is shared across all their shows to keep thousands of people employed, and they appreciate and respect that.
If they walk after that, then fuck their selfish asses.
And how exactly will you force “every other Production company” not to hire these three and produce the show, pay them their $1M an episode and earn those hundreds of millions that you gave up?