|
In response to
"as the WGA’s deal (likely) goes unrenewed by Monday’s deadline, the studios’ owners have never been more richly compensated -- (link)"
by
hollywood big shot
|
The irony is that as these CEOs are being richly compensated, their companies often lose tons of money.
Posted by
Mop🧹 (aka rburriel)
Apr 28 '23, 14:18
|
They argue they have to cut corners to bring the company back to profitability. One corner you could cut would be cut CEO compensation. What's that? You need to incentivize them in order to keep them around? How good can they be if they're losing you money?
Zas, in particular, needs to be brought down. I understand that he's shoulder-to-shoulder with Netflix in standing up to the WGA, although their incentives are different. Netflix is simple. Step 1: Destroy the Hollywood studios while supplementing your schedule with international content. Step 2: PROFIT! Zas, though? He just wants to use force majeure to get out of long standing contracts he doesn't want any more.
Why is Ari on this list, though? If we're going to include Ari, we need to include many other CEOs who aren't listed here.
|
Responses:
|