<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Here&#8217;s what Matt Weiner said about negotiations</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/</link>
	<description>The Mad Men blog and home of Jon Hamm Birthday Week (now in its 3rd annual appearance)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:28:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Karl</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/comment-page-1/#comment-18971</link>
		<dc:creator>Karl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 23:05:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=2363#comment-18971</guid>
		<description>Monique,

Paying O&#039;Reilly $10 million is not the same as paying MW $10 million.  O&#039;Reilly is on the air considerably more than 13 hours a year, for starters -- which sorta increases the number of ads that can be sold to recoup that cost.  And O&#039;Reilly is to his show what MW plus the entire cast is to MM; after O&#039;Reilly, FNC won&#039;t be required to pay megabucks to anyone else (for O&#039;Reilly&#039;s show, anyway).

I think MW deserves to get whatever the market will bear -- if I could wave a magic wand, I would write MW a $10 million check out of my bottomless money bin.  But I have yet to see any story in the press suggesting that Lionsgate is being greedy/crazy yet.  And that&#039;s probably because, as MW notes, negotiations are just starting.  I expect if Lionsgate becomes unreasonable, we&#039;ll see a lot about it in the press, because most everyone I&#039;ve read thinks it would be crazy for Lionsgate to screw MW (with which I agree).
---

Anne B,

I take your point about HBO &amp; SHO -- though I think the latter was always positioning itself a bit more towards the sex/violence oriented programming than HBO.  HBO&#039;s problem is that they passed on Mad Men, and when The Sopranos and The Wire concluded, they had nothing as good on the burner.  Let&#039;s face it -- throughout the decades, how many excellent TV shows have been airing at the same time?  We can say HBO shoulda grabbed Mad Men, but are there tons of shows of that quality that HBO (or anyone else) is passing up?

And the demographics matter more to basic cable b/c of the advertising.  And it&#039;s long been true of the broadcast nets; the earliest years of SNL did not generate huge ratings, but those who watched were desirable to advertisers.  That Gawker post in Mad News also discusses why MM may not be grabbing as big an 18-34 demo -- and AMC wouldn&#039;t mind having the youngsters, either!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Monique,</p>
<p>Paying O&#8217;Reilly $10 million is not the same as paying MW $10 million.  O&#8217;Reilly is on the air considerably more than 13 hours a year, for starters &#8212; which sorta increases the number of ads that can be sold to recoup that cost.  And O&#8217;Reilly is to his show what MW plus the entire cast is to MM; after O&#8217;Reilly, FNC won&#8217;t be required to pay megabucks to anyone else (for O&#8217;Reilly&#8217;s show, anyway).</p>
<p>I think MW deserves to get whatever the market will bear &#8212; if I could wave a magic wand, I would write MW a $10 million check out of my bottomless money bin.  But I have yet to see any story in the press suggesting that Lionsgate is being greedy/crazy yet.  And that&#8217;s probably because, as MW notes, negotiations are just starting.  I expect if Lionsgate becomes unreasonable, we&#8217;ll see a lot about it in the press, because most everyone I&#8217;ve read thinks it would be crazy for Lionsgate to screw MW (with which I agree).<br />
&#8212;</p>
<p>Anne B,</p>
<p>I take your point about HBO &amp; SHO &#8212; though I think the latter was always positioning itself a bit more towards the sex/violence oriented programming than HBO.  HBO&#8217;s problem is that they passed on Mad Men, and when The Sopranos and The Wire concluded, they had nothing as good on the burner.  Let&#8217;s face it &#8212; throughout the decades, how many excellent TV shows have been airing at the same time?  We can say HBO shoulda grabbed Mad Men, but are there tons of shows of that quality that HBO (or anyone else) is passing up?</p>
<p>And the demographics matter more to basic cable b/c of the advertising.  And it&#8217;s long been true of the broadcast nets; the earliest years of SNL did not generate huge ratings, but those who watched were desirable to advertisers.  That Gawker post in Mad News also discusses why MM may not be grabbing as big an 18-34 demo &#8212; and AMC wouldn&#8217;t mind having the youngsters, either!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anne B</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/comment-page-1/#comment-18966</link>
		<dc:creator>Anne B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 21:54:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=2363#comment-18966</guid>
		<description>Matt Weiner is not David Chase.  You&#039;re right.  No two writers are alike.

That said:  he may be better.  I felt the writing on &quot;The Wire&quot; was superior to what I heard on &quot;The Sopranos&quot;, but it never made the kind of bank the latter show did.  

&quot;Mad Men&quot; resembles &quot;The Wire&quot; more than it does &quot;The Sopranos&quot; -- in the intact world it creates for viewers, in the word-by-word precision of what is said, and especially in the weight of what is not said.  I have to listen more closely to an episode of MM than I ever did with Tony and the boys -- and there is much less comic relief.  Much less relief of any kind, actually.

Matt Weiner deserves every penny of that asking price.  He has singlehandedly elevated an obscure cable channel to the gold standard of scripted-series proving ground, with the single master stroke of launching &quot;Mad Men&quot; from there.  

Other networks have taken notice.  You can feel it in the strain of recent programming pushes at HBO and Showtime:  they&#039;re trying so hard to regain their premium-TV status that they really push the shock, in terms of both sex and violence.  They can&#039;t match the quality of what AMC has, so they fall back on the last taboos of a judgmental society.  It&#039;s a little sad.

But to Karl&#039;s point:  maybe I&#039;m just not in HBO&#039;s or Showtime&#039;s demographic anymore.  I look at that number in your post, Karl, and I see that it&#039;s not just about my age; it&#039;s about what I make and how I spend it.  

I think that &quot;Mad Men&quot; and AMC are a nice match, in terms of both branding and their place on the cultural radar.  But I loved HBO once, too.  I guess I just don&#039;t see myself among the one hundred colors in their box, any more.  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt Weiner is not David Chase.  You&#8217;re right.  No two writers are alike.</p>
<p>That said:  he may be better.  I felt the writing on &#8220;The Wire&#8221; was superior to what I heard on &#8220;The Sopranos&#8221;, but it never made the kind of bank the latter show did.  </p>
<p>&#8220;Mad Men&#8221; resembles &#8220;The Wire&#8221; more than it does &#8220;The Sopranos&#8221; &#8212; in the intact world it creates for viewers, in the word-by-word precision of what is said, and especially in the weight of what is not said.  I have to listen more closely to an episode of MM than I ever did with Tony and the boys &#8212; and there is much less comic relief.  Much less relief of any kind, actually.</p>
<p>Matt Weiner deserves every penny of that asking price.  He has singlehandedly elevated an obscure cable channel to the gold standard of scripted-series proving ground, with the single master stroke of launching &#8220;Mad Men&#8221; from there.  </p>
<p>Other networks have taken notice.  You can feel it in the strain of recent programming pushes at HBO and Showtime:  they&#8217;re trying so hard to regain their premium-TV status that they really push the shock, in terms of both sex and violence.  They can&#8217;t match the quality of what AMC has, so they fall back on the last taboos of a judgmental society.  It&#8217;s a little sad.</p>
<p>But to Karl&#8217;s point:  maybe I&#8217;m just not in HBO&#8217;s or Showtime&#8217;s demographic anymore.  I look at that number in your post, Karl, and I see that it&#8217;s not just about my age; it&#8217;s about what I make and how I spend it.  </p>
<p>I think that &#8220;Mad Men&#8221; and AMC are a nice match, in terms of both branding and their place on the cultural radar.  But I loved HBO once, too.  I guess I just don&#8217;t see myself among the one hundred colors in their box, any more.  <img src='http://www.lippsisters.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Monique R</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/comment-page-1/#comment-18965</link>
		<dc:creator>Monique R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 21:50:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=2363#comment-18965</guid>
		<description>Bill O&#039;Reilly just signed a deal for 10 million a year with Fox News.  Wanna know their ratings?  And don&#039;t think no one is making money on basic cable...  That&#039;s just naive.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bill O&#8217;Reilly just signed a deal for 10 million a year with Fox News.  Wanna know their ratings?  And don&#8217;t think no one is making money on basic cable&#8230;  That&#8217;s just naive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brenda</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/comment-page-1/#comment-18955</link>
		<dc:creator>Brenda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 19:59:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=2363#comment-18955</guid>
		<description>Matt Weiner is performing two key jobs: head writer, and executive producer (not to mention show creator.) He is the Mad Men equivalent of Seth Meyers plus Lorne Michaels at SNL. That&#039;s a lot of creative talent. Is it worth $10 million? Well, add up the value of the Emmys, the enormous amount of free publicity for which AMC did not have to pay, the advertising revenues, the syndication rights, the foreign rights, and I&#039;d say, pay the man.

As an equivalent, Ben Affleck gets $10 million per movie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt Weiner is performing two key jobs: head writer, and executive producer (not to mention show creator.) He is the Mad Men equivalent of Seth Meyers plus Lorne Michaels at SNL. That&#8217;s a lot of creative talent. Is it worth $10 million? Well, add up the value of the Emmys, the enormous amount of free publicity for which AMC did not have to pay, the advertising revenues, the syndication rights, the foreign rights, and I&#8217;d say, pay the man.</p>
<p>As an equivalent, Ben Affleck gets $10 million per movie.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donny Brook</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/comment-page-1/#comment-18948</link>
		<dc:creator>Donny Brook</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:54:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=2363#comment-18948</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;athletes don’t negotiate their own contracts, so it’s not about 20-somethings who don’t know anything about business. Their agents are the ones who both negotiate their contracts and (usually) tell them what to say to the press about it.&lt;/i&gt;

My point was that Matt Weiner has more personal agency, being older and most probably more intellectually proficient than the average ballplayer. The ballplayers don&#039;t know when to call off their dogs. Weiner does.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>athletes don’t negotiate their own contracts, so it’s not about 20-somethings who don’t know anything about business. Their agents are the ones who both negotiate their contracts and (usually) tell them what to say to the press about it.</i></p>
<p>My point was that Matt Weiner has more personal agency, being older and most probably more intellectually proficient than the average ballplayer. The ballplayers don&#8217;t know when to call off their dogs. Weiner does.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karl</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/comment-page-1/#comment-18902</link>
		<dc:creator>Karl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:37:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=2363#comment-18902</guid>
		<description>Actually, the story about the actors turned out to be mistaken, iirc.  But they will all ask for more, eventually.

And the key part is that AMC is not HBO, regardless of whether you&#039;re talking abbout MW or Chase.

The Gawker post linked in the latest &quot;Mad News&quot; notes that about half the people watching the MM finale make over 100K, mostly in the 25-54 demo.  That augurs well for landing the type of sponsors and rates that may help AMC &amp; Lionsgate afford the talent.  Even in this type of economy, the truly well-off tend to stay pretty well-off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, the story about the actors turned out to be mistaken, iirc.  But they will all ask for more, eventually.</p>
<p>And the key part is that AMC is not HBO, regardless of whether you&#8217;re talking abbout MW or Chase.</p>
<p>The Gawker post linked in the latest &#8220;Mad News&#8221; notes that about half the people watching the MM finale make over 100K, mostly in the 25-54 demo.  That augurs well for landing the type of sponsors and rates that may help AMC &amp; Lionsgate afford the talent.  Even in this type of economy, the truly well-off tend to stay pretty well-off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: latenac</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/comment-page-1/#comment-18898</link>
		<dc:creator>latenac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:20:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=2363#comment-18898</guid>
		<description>1.5 million for Mad Men is comparable to The Daily Show&#039;s average view audience although that has been higher lately. Emmy&#039;s are usually awarded to shows that are a critical success not necessarily a view success. The Sopranos got 11.9 million. CSI gets 19 million for comparison.

I&#039;m not saying MW doesn&#039;t deserve $10million maybe even more but fiscal realities have to be looked at as well. You can&#039;t give him $10 million and then have to shortchange actors who also don&#039;t have contracts right now from what I recall. AMC isn&#039;t HBO and MW isn&#039;t David Chase. No offense.

I do think however, that we don&#039;t have the whole picture. For all we know the article I linked to was meant to have fans call AMC and tell them to pay MW whatever he asked for. Or they did call people up to show AMC that no one else would want to do the show if things ended badly in negotiations. I think we&#039;re getting a peek into the sausage being made.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1.5 million for Mad Men is comparable to The Daily Show&#8217;s average view audience although that has been higher lately. Emmy&#8217;s are usually awarded to shows that are a critical success not necessarily a view success. The Sopranos got 11.9 million. CSI gets 19 million for comparison.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not saying MW doesn&#8217;t deserve $10million maybe even more but fiscal realities have to be looked at as well. You can&#8217;t give him $10 million and then have to shortchange actors who also don&#8217;t have contracts right now from what I recall. AMC isn&#8217;t HBO and MW isn&#8217;t David Chase. No offense.</p>
<p>I do think however, that we don&#8217;t have the whole picture. For all we know the article I linked to was meant to have fans call AMC and tell them to pay MW whatever he asked for. Or they did call people up to show AMC that no one else would want to do the show if things ended badly in negotiations. I think we&#8217;re getting a peek into the sausage being made.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karl</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/comment-page-1/#comment-18895</link>
		<dc:creator>Karl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:01:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=2363#comment-18895</guid>
		<description>Monique,

Latenac&#039;s perception of the &quot;going rate&quot; is drawn from the Nikki Finke posting linked upthread.  Finke essentially reported that MW was asking for HBO-type money, which AMC would be thought not to have w/o the extra subscription fees.  That&#039;s why I mentioned that we should consider that this negotiation is going on in a larger context where quality original shows are going to basic cable -- how that may affect ad rates, etc.  The &quot;going rate&quot; may well be increasing -- and MW may play a big role in that.  But I don&#039;t think latenac was necessarily wrong from the standpoint of what the &quot;going rate&quot; has been in the past.

Also, while the awards should not be discounted, the suits are going to care much more about the 63% increase in viewership this year.  The awards keep the buzz going and may draw more viewers to the DVDs and reruns ahead of S3, but it&#039;s ultimately all about the eyeballs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Monique,</p>
<p>Latenac&#8217;s perception of the &#8220;going rate&#8221; is drawn from the Nikki Finke posting linked upthread.  Finke essentially reported that MW was asking for HBO-type money, which AMC would be thought not to have w/o the extra subscription fees.  That&#8217;s why I mentioned that we should consider that this negotiation is going on in a larger context where quality original shows are going to basic cable &#8212; how that may affect ad rates, etc.  The &#8220;going rate&#8221; may well be increasing &#8212; and MW may play a big role in that.  But I don&#8217;t think latenac was necessarily wrong from the standpoint of what the &#8220;going rate&#8221; has been in the past.</p>
<p>Also, while the awards should not be discounted, the suits are going to care much more about the 63% increase in viewership this year.  The awards keep the buzz going and may draw more viewers to the DVDs and reruns ahead of S3, but it&#8217;s ultimately all about the eyeballs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Monique R</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/comment-page-1/#comment-18894</link>
		<dc:creator>Monique R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:34:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=2363#comment-18894</guid>
		<description>Latenac,
Fascinating how you know what the &quot;going rate&quot; is.  For what?  MW has created a competitor to HBO and taken all these people to the Emmy&#039;s and Golden Globes, someplace they never would go with Clint Eastwood re-runs or Lions Gate&#039;s torture movies.  Take a look at the other stars of basic cable Shawn Ryan, Ryan Murphy, James Duff-- what is the &quot;going rate&quot;?  Plus,  every other network will pay MW close to that money for his next show and would gladly switch places.  This is business for sure, bu he took them there from zero.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Latenac,<br />
Fascinating how you know what the &#8220;going rate&#8221; is.  For what?  MW has created a competitor to HBO and taken all these people to the Emmy&#8217;s and Golden Globes, someplace they never would go with Clint Eastwood re-runs or Lions Gate&#8217;s torture movies.  Take a look at the other stars of basic cable Shawn Ryan, Ryan Murphy, James Duff&#8211; what is the &#8220;going rate&#8221;?  Plus,  every other network will pay MW close to that money for his next show and would gladly switch places.  This is business for sure, bu he took them there from zero.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BroncoRoger</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/10/30/heres-what-matt-weiner-said-about-negotiations/comment-page-1/#comment-18893</link>
		<dc:creator>BroncoRoger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:11:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=2363#comment-18893</guid>
		<description>You guys are probably right that 4X the going rate is a little much, but if you don&#039;t ask, you don&#039;t get.  I think a part of that is wanting to recoup some of his lost wages from his initial contract.  The production company probably made much much more than they ever expected and MW didn&#039;t try to re-negotiate while they were raking it in.

Also, I hope this doesn&#039;t get played out in the public eye too much.  It&#039;s too much like seeing sausage being made- as I think someone has already mentioned.  It would be nice if they could get it done quickly and quietly, so we don&#039;t have to start trying to drum up grassroots support to save the show.

I am a little concerned that the production company has just started this.  It seems like an amateur move on their part.  They could have contacted MW&#039;s people months ago.  Now, everyone has to wonder about the next season until shooting begins?  I know-- it&#039;s a tough business.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You guys are probably right that 4X the going rate is a little much, but if you don&#8217;t ask, you don&#8217;t get.  I think a part of that is wanting to recoup some of his lost wages from his initial contract.  The production company probably made much much more than they ever expected and MW didn&#8217;t try to re-negotiate while they were raking it in.</p>
<p>Also, I hope this doesn&#8217;t get played out in the public eye too much.  It&#8217;s too much like seeing sausage being made- as I think someone has already mentioned.  It would be nice if they could get it done quickly and quietly, so we don&#8217;t have to start trying to drum up grassroots support to save the show.</p>
<p>I am a little concerned that the production company has just started this.  It seems like an amateur move on their part.  They could have contacted MW&#8217;s people months ago.  Now, everyone has to wonder about the next season until shooting begins?  I know&#8211; it&#8217;s a tough business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
