Bloody Monday: Over 68,000 jobs lost

[Roberto Lequeux]

Just watched "Slumdog Millionaire". Gives a whole new perspective on poverty. Complaining about our economy is like complaining about room service at the Bellagio.

-shooter

lol... well, hate to say it but you are right on with that.. what most countries consider low class is closer to our image of what we call homeless

 

[Zack Birlew]

Well, the problem with the film industry today is that you can hardly get anyone to actually buy your product versus downloading it illegally or just waiting for television. Plus, there's always everyone's favorite channel of all: YOUTUBE! So, with all of that, the Depression comparison is moot. Heck, I'm reading Hollywood Reporter right now and there is an article talking about some film festivals having to close down. Granted, there's sort of an overabundance of film festivals, very much like how there is an overabundance of independent films, but it's pretty bad if even the festivals some indies depend on start to dwindle.

 

[Joel Kaye]

In my view, the market has never been better for content creators especially with the economic downturn. Every company in America should have a webisodic series... Why doesn't the Gap have a drama based reoccurring series that I can get hooked on?

Yeah. That's the truth. Video on the Internet is going to be way more huge than it is now. Every business will have a promo video in the future. It's a hell of a lot of content. Most will probably be infomercial or training.

The JCPenny doghouse spot is brilliant. I think companies will pay really good money for spots like that.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-787039950458736108

You want to make money? Write and shoot that stuff.

 

[Matthew Rogers]

In the last 8 years the 400 richest Americans gained hundreds of billions in wealth at the exact same time the economy was tanking. Every one of them is a billionaire.

What are you talking about? Most rich people's "wealth" is based in stock and therefore when the stock market went down, their wealth went way down. You don't think Bill Gates has $50+ billion in the bank do you?

It may be true that Americans live beyond their means... but it's also true that the game of business is rigged to benefit the owners. There is an awful lot of pressure in our society to go into debt... starting with college. Bush himself urged families to buy bigger homes than they could afford. When asked what people should do after 9-11 Bush responded "Shop".

Two things here... businesses are owned by people and MOST businesses are owned by people who are not rich (which I think would describe most business owners on here.) Even the huge companies like walmart, coca-cola, microsoft are publicly traded companies and are therefore owned by the stock holders. If the those companies make money then the owners (aka stock holders) make money also. I don't know why you would say business is rigged for the owners--they are the ones who are in business to make money and take risks every day.

Second, I don't know where you saw that Bush said to buy bigger homes. I did a couple of searches and couldn't find any news articles from 2001 to now that had Bush saying anything about buying homes. The market has crashed because of two reasons. First, gas went up. As soon as gas started going up you can see that the market started hurting. Gas is down again, and the economy is just slightly starting to get better in certain areas, but once gas goes up again the market will slump (it's a annoying catch-22 that alternative energy would solve). Second, it's not the issue of people buying too big houses, but too expensive houses. I read a report recently about a lady who had a monthly mortgage payment of $1400, but she worked at a job that paid $10 an hour. Why would anyone loan someone $200,000+ dollars when it's obvious that they would default on the loan? The interest only loans (which now have another name) are a stupid idea that should be banned--they are almost as bad as a loan shark!

Matthew

 

[abrosenfeld]

Has your work dropped off?

Have your clients cut back or trimmed budgets?

What does 2009 look like for you?

Are you worried about a potential SAG strike?

I think we can stop worrying about a SAG strike...

http://www.multichannel.com/article/162789-SAG_Chief_Negotiator_Allen_Is_Terminated.php

SAG Chief Negotiator Allen Is Terminated
Chances Of An Actors Strike Now Viewed To Be Very Unlikely
Linda Haugsted -- Multichannel News, 1/26/2009 9:35:31 PM MT
Doug Allen, the national executive director and chief negotiator for the Screen Actors Guild, was terminated Monday, a move that union watchers noted as a sign that a strike by actors is now very unlikely.

According to Johnathan Handel, an entertainment lawyer who has been blogging on the strike, Allen's demise was brought about by a "written assent" by 52.5% of the 71-member national board of the union. The document, asking for his termination, was vetted by attorneys for the union, and the news delivered to Allen Jan. 26.
Allen's place will be taken immediately by a formers guild attorney, David White, according to Handel.
The negotiating committee for the union, which has been working without a contract with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers since last June, will now shrink to a 10-member task force, according to the Associated Press.

 

[Joel Kaye]

What are you talking about? Most rich people's "wealth" is based in stock and therefore when the stock market went down, their wealth went way down. You don't think Bill Gates has $50+ billion in the bank do you?

No.

You seem to think he has it all long in the in stock market. He's HEDGED. There's no way a billionaire can lose most of their wealth unless they are pretty stupid and Gates isn't stupid. If the market tanks their options are worth a fortune. You can make money both directions in the market. They are diversified and hedged. That's apparently news to you.

There's another class of wealthy too - the Royal Family, The Vatican, The Rothschild's and probably 10 other families that control the money supply of the world. These are the trillionaires. They don't show up in the Forbes 400 and they are the truly wealthy I'm referring to. Gates is chump change to their likes.

As to Bush - well here you go:
http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2008...ference-on-increasing-minority-homeownership/

Read the whole speech. It's the complete plan that failed pretty much laid out as policy with a terrific quote near the end "If you put your mind to it, the first-time home buyer, the low-income home buyer can have just as nice a house as anybody else. "

I'm not saying this is a Republican thing. It's our culture of spending and the encouragement of it by all.

 

[Robert Kurhajetz]

Just to keep track of the daily events....this is a pretty grim scorecard....inch:

http://www.vault.com/companies/layoffs.jsp

 

[Joe G.]

"Why doesn't the Gap have a drama based reoccurring series that I can get hooked on?"

You know, there are varying opinions on this sort of thing.

 

[Matthew Rogers]

No.

You seem to think he has it all long in the in stock market. He's HEDGED. There's no way a billionaire can lose most of their wealth unless they are pretty stupid and Gates isn't stupid. If the market tanks their options are worth a fortune. You can make money both directions in the market. They are diversified and hedged. That's apparently news to you.

Uhhh, according to everything I was able to find, Bill still owns 8% of Microsoft. Looking at it a year ago, it was at $32 a share. Today it closed just above $17. If the 8% is accurate, then he lost $12 billion or half the stock value in the last year. I know he's probably got other money hedged, but even when you are worth $50 billion, a $12 billion loss in one year is fairly bad. If your net worth took a 24% hit, that'd be bad, right? Even hedged, that can only do so much. Everyone (except for people who only own walmart or mcdonalds stock) has taken a hit off the market because it's affected more than just the stock market.

There's another class of wealthy too - the Royal Family, The Vatican, The Rothschild's and probably 10 other families that control the money supply of the world. These are the trillionaires. They don't show up in the Forbes 400 and they are the truly wealthy I'm referring to. Gates is chump change to their likes.

First, the Queen is figured to be worth about $10 billion. Even if you add in the entire Royal Family, I would guess no more than $50 billion (which I think is more than double than they are actually worth.) The Vatican, that I could find online, was worth in the single to double digits billions (and mention them kinda sounds conspiracy like...) Rothschild's are very rich, something in the double digit billions. I have no clue what families you are talking about that are worth trillions. I found multiple lists and this list had the highest I could find (http://www.theindiastreet.com/2007/10/new-worlds-5-richest-families-by-vipin.html)--which happened to be the Walton's.

As to Bush - well here you go:
http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2008...ference-on-increasing-minority-homeownership/

Read the whole speech. It's the complete plan that failed pretty much laid out as policy with a terrific quote near the end "If you put your mind to it, the first-time home buyer, the low-income home buyer can have just as nice a house as anybody else. "

I'm not saying this is a Republican thing. It's our culture of spending and the encouragement of it by all.

Thanks for the link. That's a very interesting read. The idea behind it is solid, but the way it was put into play (which I don't believe is Bush's fault) was totally wrong. The lower interest rates was a good thing, and something I am currently enjoying on my mortgage. The problem, as I see it, was that sure, help people buy homes, but not $200,000-$300,000 houses! I know property is costly in certain parts of the country, but that's where the line needs to be drawn. Even with no interest loans, the people who were getting help couldn't afford $200,000 in the long run. $100,000, yes, but not $200k! The interest only loans did also not help. I still say we should outlaw those in the country. People who offer those are no better than loan sharks.

I do agree with you about the culture of spending. But we need to start with the government. Too many people look to the Federal Gov as their guiding light, and what do they see and hear? Spend money, we're doing it! After doing some research, there's probably about 10 people in Washington (in politics) that I actually trust to try and shrink government and get back to what the Federal Gov is supposed to do (protect us, that's it!) Heck, in TN, I'd say only 1 of the 4 people who rep me do I actually trust--and all 4 of them are "supposed" to be conservative republicans.

The question is, how long can we go on like this? At some point the country will collapse. When it does, what will happen? Will we turn into a whole socialistic country (instead of the half socialist country we currently are), or will it split into smaller countries? Heck, the states already have government in place, it would be easy to turn each state into it's own country...

Matthew

 

[Joel Kaye]

Uhhh, according to everything I was able to find, Bill still owns 8% of Microsoft.

I do agree with you about the culture of spending. But we need to start with the government. Too many people look to the Federal Gov as their guiding light, and what do they see and hear? Spend money, we're doing it!

You can own stock AND insure against losses by hedging with put options against the same stock. It's insurance against the market tanking and typically rich people have strategies in place so no downturn of any one market will kill them. Some do get burned like the billionaire who bought a bunch of Bear Stearns right before it tanked. Also, the whole Madoff thing burned people because he stole their money.

But the numbers are the numbers - if the Forbes 400 shows more wealth year over year every year despite the stock market tanking at the same time then that is what it is. There's nothing to argue. Very wealthy people have access to financial instruments the rest of society does not.

As to Gov't spending I totally agree with you - we the American people - have been ripped off by Gov't spending... and billions and billions of that spending went straight to billionaire friends of the people in power via no bid contracts - democrats and republicans alike. Hell, billions of Pentagon money is simply missing. Flat out robbery. People should be in jail.

Good Book:
http://www.amazon.com/Hostile-Takeover-Corruption-Conquered-Government/dp/0307237354/ref=pd_sim_b_17

Again - I reiterate, it's both parties.

 

[rod bradley]

Ideas are easy... realizing the ideas takes 1)critical thinking (as opposed to dogma) 2)work (not magical thinking... 3) time/human investment (not quarterly profit reports, ponzi schemes... 4)imagination (not to grandiose declarations)...

This is true of political social ideas, film ideas, ideas for inventions, etc...

The Bush administration was composed of men with limited imagination, locked into their dogma of revenge masquerading as patriotism, ie "protecting America" -- men completely disconnected from ordinary life (the flaw of many politicians to varying degrees) who lived in a world of simplistic ideas and privilege, who did not have to shine their own shoes, pay their own rent, cook their own meals, worry about their kids getting to school.

In short, they had little connection to the reality of the citizens they ruled over -- and appealed most to citizens who were either religiously innocent, or wealthy and delusional and/or corrupt -- who felt Bush would preserve their positions of unearned privilege (this his only success, in my book.)

Others have spoken to our wealth even in poverty, and having just returned from shooting a feature in Ethiopia, I am reminded about how lucky we are. And how resilient. We've just elected a man of intelligence, who (if he doesn't hang on thinking he'll win the day in Afghanistan) may just lead us a bit back toward a nation with a government of, by, for the people -- and I trust we are still a people with more to do than merely shopping... A man Ethopians were in general just as excited about as many of us.

And perhaps we need to rethink our economy and its meaning and remember that oft neglected phrase "the pursuit of happiness" -- and cease to equate it with shopping which alas, was our departed leader's advice in time of stress. Astonishing really. But yet there was hardly any outrage.

I see Obama as embracing learning, struggle, work, self-sacrifice as values that just might trump shopping. I feel these are truly American values. Not to push an analogy beyond the pale, but I sense the current administration seems to embody many of the values we have seen in Jim and Red Digital cinema.

Yes, it's hard for a genuine indie film to compete with Hollywood, but let's hope maybe there's even some modest readjustment that will be forced onto the all or nothing Hollywood system -- a least a bit of space where humanity can at least get into the same arena as money making.

Granted this may be naive. But I recall, when I spoke to friends three years ago saying Obama would be elected, they told me I was crazy, it was impossible. Maybe I was naive and just got lucky. I'll hope to get lucky again for all our sakes.

For those who think this is wayward political speech, please forgive. I see filmmaking as a privilege -- and innately political, whether making a commercial or a meditative feature about the internal life.

I found this an inspiring thread with lots of food for thought from brilliant kindred spirits -- inspiring my own late night mishmash goulash.