PDA

View Full Version : Digital Domain CEO John Textor: "Free Labor Is Much Better Than Cheap Labor"



Mr Rid
04-05-2012, 08:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HRHBiM4gp9s

DigitalSorcery8
04-05-2012, 08:17 PM
Yeah... despicable and disgusting.

What do you expect from a person who came from the banking industry?

Typical salary of an out-of-touch individual - $16m+. :bangwall:

He wants to do to the VFX industry what Wallstreet has done to Main Street America! Screw over the real workers!

Mr Rid
04-05-2012, 08:18 PM
"The top box office grossing films of the last 30 years were driven by an abundant amount of visual effects and so were the top 100 films of all time which made a combined amount of $56 Billion dollars. If you were new to this industry, you would suspect that the companies that administer visual effects for the Hollywood conglomerates would be fortune 500 companies with stock prices that rival Apple or Google.

Isnít it ironic that the visual effects industry is one of the worst businesses to be in? Each facility operates on a flawed business model by losing or making no money at all on the blockbuster films they conduct work on. On a good year they will make a profit margin as small as 3-5%. How can this be possible? The reason why is Hollywood studio conglomerates effectively leverage their position by pitting vfx facilities so strongly against each other that eventually one company ends up taking the project for a loss. In fact, one producer was so bold as to state in an article that:

If I donít put a visual effects shop out of business (on my movie), Iím not doing my job."

DigitalSorcery8
04-05-2012, 08:34 PM
In fact, one producer was so bold as to state in an article that:

If I donít put a visual effects shop out of business (on my movie), Iím not doing my job."

And this "Textor" is cut from the very same cloth.

Another low-life from the world of business.

I have NO PROBLEM with people making lots of money. Heck.. "I'm greedy as hell" - but as I've told my clients time and again, "but I won't screw you to get it!"

It's a shame that so many have apparently tossed their morality out the window to make the almighty dollar.

Titus
04-05-2012, 08:44 PM
"The top box office grossing films of the last 30 years were driven by an abundant amount of visual effects and so were the top 100 films of all time which made a combined amount of $56 Billion dollars.

..

On a good year they will make a profit margin as small as 3-5%. "

I've been attending several production seminars (in Europe and here in Mexico) in the past couple of years, and what we know is that all the production chain is rotten. The average profit for the Hollywood investors and producers is also 5%, and they receive their money last, so we're all in the same boat.

cresshead
04-05-2012, 10:35 PM
so if your a 'student' you'll be thrilled at the prospect of working on a AAA feature film and terrified at your future prospects of employment in the VFX industry once you have your degree and are no longer a student...

he's figured out a way to lower his overheads to compete with china, S. korea but long term he'll kill the idea of working in USA for vfx.

longer term VFX is a dead industry in USA and europe if they continue to squeeze the dollar chasing to death.

same will go for console game production too maybe.

a profit share scheme might be a better solution for ALL involved in feature film production.

geo_n
04-05-2012, 10:38 PM
Posted it a before but didn't want to name DD.
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=127073

Anyway it sucks!

Dexter2999
04-05-2012, 10:59 PM
Maybe make up T-shirts for NAB and SIGGRAPH
Front
"Thank You Digital Domain for undermining the VFX industry!"
Back
"F*ck John Textor!"


too much?

DigitalSorcery8
04-05-2012, 11:21 PM
Maybe make up T-shirts for NAB and SIGGRAPH
Front
"Thank You Digital Domain for undermining the VFX industry!"
Back
"F*ck John Textor!"


too much?
Nah. Hits the nail on the head.

Just right! :thumbsup:

BigHache
04-05-2012, 11:40 PM
I think this school model is flawed as well. It's obvious the students aren't going to get good job placement after graduating, so how many years do they really think this will carry on before social media chains let everyone know not to sink money into it for a degree that won't pay for itself?

jeric_synergy
04-05-2012, 11:55 PM
People can be pretty stupid for a chance to "work in the movies!"

I'm pretty sure corporate video has a much better profit margin. Even when I was a PA, I'd >>MUCH<< rather work on a commercial or a corporate video, because you could actually get paid. The only advantage of a movie was you weren't always hustling for the next job.

Isn't it illegal to use gov't subsidies to compete with commercial enterprises?

jeric_synergy
04-05-2012, 11:56 PM
Isn’t it ironic that the visual effects industry is one of the worst businesses to be in?
Why "ironic"? Sucky, sure, but "irony" really isn't there.

Surrealist.
04-06-2012, 12:35 AM
The options are:

1) Current trend - cheap labor. farm work out to Asia. In America, nobody wins, save maybe the companies that try to save money by doing so. But for American artists looking for work. Not a good thing.

2) Use actual production studios as a work experience type of vocational school. Here at least the student comes out with not only an education but a resume. People are going to pay money for school anyway. Why not make it a win win situation instead of feeding an educational institution. The money after all has to go someplace. And it will, as it does every year.

The students from this program would have the advantage over students that graduate from more conventional schools. At least this give them an edge.

The current failing system does not even do that.

There is also the inferred belief that students in the states are more valuable as a work force, saying it is a better quality worker.

Not sure where the evil bad thing is here. The FX industry is hurting. If someone has a better idea. Implement it.

At least this guy is doing something that he thinks will benefit both parties. Perhaps thats up for debate.

But this kind of system of work training is not new at all. It has been around as long as I can remember. Its how I got all my teeth worked on when I was a kid, it is how my friend learned how to cook, it is how my sister became a hair stylist and went on to a successful career at it. All the students who worked on my teeth paid to work there.

Same is true of my sister's vocational school. She paid for the "privilege" to cut hair.

People get an arrangement like this mixed up with Apprenticeship. That is an entirely different set up and there is no guarantee of hands on experience in the actual craft. You could be getting coffee for artists and execs and work for free. Or in a vocational arrangement you can pay and sit down at the workstation.

If you are real smart you'll head down to the library and use the internet or get some books, grab a hold of some free 3D educational software, learn on your own and not spend any money. Work up a reel and get some work.

But for those who are going to pay for an education, there are choices and this is one of them. In a field where the competition has got to be razor sharp, this is a viable option for the right person.

Titus
04-06-2012, 10:24 AM
Surrealist, maybe you don't see the problem with this business model. VFX shops aren't restaurants, dentists or even stylists. You make a clear benefit to the society working for free to becoming proeficient in those crafts. I hardly see any benefit doing roto at DD, only exploitation.

I run my own studio, it's very small and receive many unsolicited job applications monthly, some from students of these new animation/VFX careers. But ethicaly can't use free labor.

DigitalSorcery8
04-06-2012, 11:40 AM
But for those who are going to pay for an education, there are choices and this is one of them. In a field where the competition has got to be razor sharp, this is a viable option for the right person.

And will only end up hurting the industry in the long run.

How many less people do you think they will be hiring when they know they can get not only FREE workers but workers who are PAYING to work there? This will only end up decreasing the professional work force. Looks to me that people like Textor need to get out of the picture and stop taking such huge salaries so that the actual WORKERS can get paid decently. It's greed at the top again. Perhaps the VFX industry needs smaller, boutique studios that have far less overhead and FAR less over-paid managers?

rcallicotte
04-06-2012, 12:57 PM
I think it's great to have some sort of apprenticeship. But, there should be regulations (legal guidelines), such as not being able to take away jobs from other technicians in order to take on apprenticeships. Also, apprentices should be paid, even if it's like interns (like about minimum wage). And apprenticeships should have time limits, like about two years or thereabouts. After that, they can have help getting a job in that company or get help to find a job.

The whole "one-world" economy thing will only help some people who are already rich get even richer, but for the middle class in the United States it means we are the ones who "sacrifice for the greater good". But, the wealthy are the real "winners" or should I say wieners?

Let's not pretend this is about anything else.

fazi69
04-06-2012, 05:18 PM
Yes, it is fun to work hard to hear that another suit received multi million paycheck or to watch brave Cameron in his little submarine going where no man goes before. And if studio build on free labor become big enough and "too big to fail" maybe even your tax money will be used to save few suits from life of common man. More and more I see that I`m in wrong profession.
After 12 years of hard work I`m in the starting point and watching this POS telling me how exciting is to work for fame is just disgusting. Hey, CEO, as a student I worked for free and guess what ? It not work. Fame as a motivation is good only for unstable people. Look at Hollywood ;-)

mikala
04-06-2012, 05:24 PM
All I can add is "What a pencil dick this guy is."
He's the kind that will instantly spout "Got to pay top dollar for top people" if his salary were to be questioned. Yet the grunts get screwed in the southern orifice that make the money for his salary. No grunts....no salary. Man I wish people would wake up.

tischbein3
04-06-2012, 06:41 PM
well at least its honest.

Dexter2999
04-06-2012, 06:51 PM
This topic is making me actually ill. Can't read anymore and prefer not to think about it anymore.

jasonwestmas
04-06-2012, 07:21 PM
Money has nothing to do with this. . .a Jag-off is a Jag-off.

Surrealist.
04-06-2012, 07:32 PM
Surrealist, maybe you don't see the problem with this business model. VFX shops aren't restaurants, dentists or even stylists. You make a clear benefit to the society working for free to becoming proeficient in those crafts. I hardly see any benefit doing roto at DD, only exploitation.

I run my own studio, it's very small and receive many unsolicited job applications monthly, some from students of these new animation/VFX careers. But ethicaly can't use free labor.

Just sharing some thoughts. I understand where you are coming from. I don't have a problem with your views. I just shot a few things from the hip as I see it. Take what you want from it. And of course you don't have to agree. :)

Surrealist.
04-06-2012, 07:42 PM
And will only end up hurting the industry in the long run.

How many less people do you think they will be hiring when they know they can get not only FREE workers but workers who are PAYING to work there? This will only end up decreasing the professional work force. Looks to me that people like Textor need to get out of the picture and stop taking such huge salaries so that the actual WORKERS can get paid decently. It's greed at the top again. Perhaps the VFX industry needs smaller, boutique studios that have far less overhead and FAR less over-paid managers?

It is certainly a complex situation. But I have a feeling that the roots of it go deep beyond what is being discussed here. There has been a slump in the industry and I won't pretend to know the answer.

I appreciate your thoughts on it. You could well be right. I honestly don't know.

DigitalSorcery8
04-06-2012, 07:50 PM
Money has nothing to do with this. . .a Jag-off is a Jag-off.

Nope. Money has EVERYTHING to do with it. His and no one elses. :devil:

mikala
04-06-2012, 07:52 PM
Nope. Money has EVERYTHING to do with it. His and no one elses. :devil:
And that he's a JO. :devil:

DigitalSorcery8
04-06-2012, 08:12 PM
And that he's a JO. :devil:

Well, yes, he's that too. :thumbsup:

jeric_synergy
04-07-2012, 01:38 AM
Now you guys know why unions get started: to resist abuses like this.

tischbein3
04-07-2012, 04:42 AM
Not sure where the evil bad thing is here. The FX industry is hurting. If someone has a better idea. Implement it.

At least this guy is doing something that he thinks will benefit both parties. Perhaps thats up for debate.
Question is, wouldn't it be more benefical for a student to work in a less prestigious project, in a small company, and getting,no matter how little it is, a compensation for it ?

And also in the other direction this can be a shoot in the foot:

Wouldn't it be more benefical for DD to actuallly get people with the biggest talent instead of the biggest wallet ? How is such a worktime actually judged in future jobs by other companies ? AND more importantly, how will the others gazillions of studios actually react on this ? If I would have a little shop over there, I certainly would exploit this for my own profit, by pointing out that "here, we don't follow and never will follow this practise"....

silviotoledo
04-07-2012, 06:08 AM
Don't worry. It could be worst!

Actually women pays to be at Playboy Magazine. In the past, Playboy payed millions dollars to have the girls posing.

Students are not paying actually. Are they? :)

DigitalSorcery8
04-07-2012, 12:36 PM
Question is, wouldn't it be more benefical for a student to work in a less prestigious project, in a small company, and getting,no matter how little it is, a compensation for it ?
I would say yes, but then I'm planning on starting a small studio. :D


And also in the other direction this can be a shoot in the foot:

Wouldn't it be more benefical for DD to actuallly get people with the biggest talent instead of the biggest wallet ? How is such a worktime actually judged in future jobs by other companies ? AND more importantly, how will the others gazillions of studios actually react on this ? If I would have a little shop over there, I certainly would exploit this for my own profit, by pointing out that "here, we don't follow and never will follow this practise"....
:agree: But what I can't understand is why some people are AGREEING with this situation. On CGTalk there are those defending this practice. It really boggles my mind that some people think that this is GOOD for the industry. Of course some students may end up getting helped by it, but then that's primarily the rich. It will ultimately hurt those self-taught with good reels and looking for a junior position. Very, VERY sad. :cry:

jeric_synergy
04-07-2012, 12:47 PM
A small group benefits, to the detriment of the larger industry.

Where have we heard this before?

DigitalSorcery8
04-07-2012, 12:53 PM
A small group benefits, to the detriment of the larger industry.

Where have we heard this before?

99% vs. 1% ? :cursin:

And 93% of this economic recovery has gone to the top 1% in the US. WTF!

They can never have enough.

mikala
04-07-2012, 01:41 PM
I would say yes, but then I'm planning on starting a small studio. :D


:agree: But what I can't understand is why some people are AGREEING with this situation. On CGTalk there are those defending this practice. It really boggles my mind that some people think that this is GOOD for the industry. Of course some students may end up getting helped by it, but then that's primarily the rich. It will ultimately hurt those self-taught with good reels and looking for a junior position. Very, VERY sad. :cry:
Yup it will only be people that have names like Bif or Chip that have lifetime memberships at the golf course already going into these positions. Why because mommy and daddy are paying. The only great thing about this is that these same people with entitlement issues are just going to cause their bosses wonderful problems. Why you ask? It is because they will think they don't have to work to get anything just like they have their entire lives too date. I think there will be an insane turn over of staff with next to nothing getting done should this come to pass.
Except for the real 3D lovers that are naive enough to pay their way through this system. They will most likely be the ones carrying the load while Bif and Chip are having a round at the local course.

jeric_synergy
04-07-2012, 01:54 PM
The only great thing about this is that these same people with entitlement issues are just going to cause their bosses wonderful problems.
Won't THAT be a consolation when your child is sick and you can't get medical care because those same groups made it their mission to make sure that your life sucks if you can't afford a Mercedes?

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/04/us-healthcare-vs-rest-of-the-world/

Because, you can't know you're a winner unless you make sure there's a vast number of losers.

mikala
04-07-2012, 01:57 PM
Pretty damn sad ya. Oh to be one of the 1 percent.....nah would suck being such a butthead.
These guys sound like they are a bunch of "Mean Girls"

shrox
04-07-2012, 02:23 PM
I'll trade you a trickle down render for your trickle down wealth scheme...

roboman
04-07-2012, 04:38 PM
For me this is a hobby and side job (making stuff that mostly only ever gets seen at trade shows). Cable was going to open the world up to any one who wanted to make a show or movie. The Indi film movement was going to get small films seen. Digital projectors would mean anyone could offer movies to movie houses with out having to fork out a ton of money for prints. The internet and video on demand was the answer going to finely let the small, Indy and niche into the market on an equal footing. Really good digital movie cameras are getting cheaper every day, render nodes are getting cheaper, Digital editing has gotten shockingly cheap.

What happened? Seems like I have to work hard to find Indi stuff. If any thing, it seems like the big guys own things more then they ever did. At this point the tools are cheap enough that it seems like the big guys should be less relevant every year. What's the main road block to just cutting the big, extremely highly paid, guys out of the picture? What is it that they can do or provide that you can't? I've seen some Fan Films that were done for a silly low cost, that looked better then some of the stuff with a real budget. What is it that keeps people from being able to, on their own, produce a movie or series, get it out there and make money on it?

BigHache
04-07-2012, 05:41 PM
What is it that keeps people from being able to, on their own, produce a movie or series, get it out there and make money on it?

It's called money. They has it, so the ones with things like distribution channels listen to them. Just look at something like the Tucker Sedan.

The masses also still consume Hollywood products, so why offer what's not proven that the masses want?

Surrealist.
04-07-2012, 08:28 PM
"Surviving In Tough Times"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WApcUBcVMos

shrox
04-07-2012, 08:50 PM
Their trail of slime is slippery.

rcallicotte
04-07-2012, 09:26 PM
Another thing to consider - a skill like programming can be shipped overseas for less (a lot less), so why not ship all of these expensive jobs overseas so we can remain competitive?

This question would not have been considered only thirty years ago, because it would have been considered anti-American. I can't speak for other countries, but I do remember how people felt here in the 80s about such things.

Global economic initiatives by politicians controlled by the wealthy have led to this. Skilled labor - do these businesses really want it?

Imatk
04-07-2012, 10:56 PM
What is it that keeps people from being able to, on their own, produce a movie or series, get it out there and make money on it?

Actually you have a VERY good point. A friend of mine is about to start his own film (he also owns a VFX studio) by using this :

http://www.kickstarter.com/

I have the feeling that what you're talking about is not too far away especially if things like this DD stuff keeps happening.

And hopefully VFX will be unionized soon and things like this will not happen anymore.

Titus
04-08-2012, 08:35 AM
Another thing to consider - a skill like programming can be shipped overseas for less (a lot less), so why not ship all of these expensive jobs overseas so we can remain competitive?


That's fine for me, please send more projects here. Local studios are now working on VFX for Hollywood blockbusters. That's a lot of dough!

Right now I'm bidding for a tv series for children. Usually studios like Nelvana should be doing this project, but hey, they want to cut costs.

rcallicotte
04-08-2012, 10:11 AM
I don't mind our work going elsewhere if there is an overflow of work. But, when Americans can't get jobs or must take excruciating cuts so people here are unable to make house payments, can't buy gas and maybe even can't get regular groceries, then it's time for us in the U.S. to pull back.

I don't believe in "sharing the wealth" when it means I can't make my house payment or I can't fill my car with gasoline. I would, but it's really not anything but a political way for the wealthy to take away my ability to make a fair living. You deserve the same.



That's fine for me, please send more projects here. Local studios are now working on VFX for Hollywood blockbusters. That's a lot of dough!

Right now I'm bidding for a tv series for children. Usually studios like Nelvana should be doing this project, but hey, they want to cut costs.

robertoortiz
04-08-2012, 11:07 AM
The irony is that there is a huge HUNGER for new content and the tools for developing that content are readily available.

The question is how to develop that content at a profitable price?


Another BIG part of the problem that studios have is that talent is not a comodity that can be purchased.

That is why this myopic approach will fail.

Imagine this:

You got a kid living in skid row playing with blender on a 6 year old battered laptop, drawing every day. He think that his art is his way out..

On the other hand you got a kid from upper middle class who did not have to work a day in his life, and all of the sudden tells his parent he want to do CG because he read in a blog that it that it is better than getting a "real" job. Never mind that he has the talent of a hamster.

Guess who get the golden ticket under this approach?


It blows my mind how people with no talent think that talent is something that comes easy...

"According to Malcom Gladwell's essay, Outliers, mastery of anything - whether it's the Beatles in music or Bill Gates in the computer world - takes 10,000 hours of practice. " (link)

Think about that number...
There is no way you can grow talent/ drive/ passion like that.

Titus
04-08-2012, 11:57 AM
Guess who get the golden ticket under this approa

It blows my mind how people with no talent think that talent is something that comes easy...


I don't have any problems with rich kids, I'm clearly not one and only had the opportunity to pay an animation school a few years ago. This trade is hard enough to weed out all the people without talent and self motivation. I had to visit a cardiologist last year, a wealthy man. We were talking while he was doing his stuff and said her daughter studied animation in Canada but never got a job here, or while in Canada. She's doing something else right now.

I think this problem will fall for itself, it's not a sustainable business model IMO.

DigitalSorcery8
04-08-2012, 12:52 PM
The irony is that there is a huge HUNGER for new content and the tools for developing that content are readily available.

The question is how to develop that content at a profitable price?
That's the trick. I'm trying with my own IP. If it works, we'll be a small studio with great (paid) talent and will move forward and upward. But it's certainly NOT easy and it's taken ALLOT of work - persistence and determination. And it still may not pay off. And I'm certainly NOT rich. But then "rich" is relative.


Another BIG part of the problem that studios have is that talent is not a comodity that can be purchased.
But that's just it - the rich DO see talent as a commodity to buy and sell. Textor pretty much says exactly that. This is the attitude that pervades the super-wealthy in this country (the US - but I suspect most of the world.) Everything has a price and/or breaking point. If you break the backs of the poor and middle class, you can own them. This is what they've been trying to do for years - and so far, they've come nearer their goal EVERY year. It has to stop.

stiff paper
04-08-2012, 02:01 PM
Another BIG part of the problem that studios have is that talent is not a comodity that can be purchased.
The standard business approach to that is to continually break down the whole process into ever smaller "pieces". The idea behind this is standard corporate theory - that you can break up and reduce one highly skilled worker's job down to five or ten unskilled jobs, pay the unskilled workers a whole lot less, and then every person in the process is an easily replaceable cog - just another unskilled nobody - and there are millions of those.

This is also done because, again, in corporate thinking, you must never allow anybody that's low on the food chain to have any degree of leverage.


Never mind that he has the talent of a hamster.
Well... umm... sadly, it's been my experience that the VFX biz is chock full of hamsters already. They're hamsters that got a college education for doing CG in one way or another, and because they've got that qualification, they simply know that they're brilliant.


It blows my mind how people with no talent think that talent is something that comes easy...
I quibble with this, somewhat. There's a very small number of people for whom it all does come easy. It is a very small percentage, but those people do exist.


...mastery of anything - whether it's the Beatles in music or Bill Gates in the computer world - takes 10,000 hours of practice. "
Yes, but the reasoning behind that idea is... well... gibberish. He pointed at The Beatles and how brilliant they were, then he pointed at how long they'd spent playing the same rock 'n' roll tunes for low pay in dingy nightclubs, and he said, in effect, "It's undeniable that playing the same 20 cover versions of songs 4000 times turns people into songwriting geniuses."

Really? I mean, really? Because I think I could walk out of my front door and find 200,000 people in my town, and I reckon that if I got them all to play 20 different cover versions 4000 times each, that none of them would turn into Beatles quality songwriters.

It's easy for him to point at The Beatles and say that, because the only way to prove it wrong would be to travel back in time and see if they could write songs before they'd spent 10,000 hours playing covers. And then do it again to see if they'd got it after, say, 5000 hours. Or 1500 hours. Or, just maybe, if they'd got it after a few days.

Lightwolf
04-08-2012, 04:28 PM
Another BIG part of the problem that studios have is that talent is not a comodity that can be purchased.
But of course it is. Otherwise there would be no market for freelancers. Or, indeed, no labour market in the vfx business.
The appropriate talent can always be bought. The question is if one is willing to pay the price. And what is considered appropriate (which is probably closer to the core of the problem).

Edit:
Sorry, I seem to have been reading that part of the post out of context... from the buyers side of things.
And yes, talent is nothing that can be purchased by the students. However, the question is how much of a requirement talent is if you look at the available jobs in the vfx industry.

And as much as I despise the original notion of paying while being educated and working - I do wonder if this is a wakeup call for the vfx industry to see itself as what it has turned into: An industry.
Which also goes for people picking careers in the business.

Cheers,
Mike

robertoortiz
04-08-2012, 05:28 PM
And as much as I despise the original notion of paying while being educated and working - I do wonder if this is a wakeup call for the vfx industry to see itself as what it has turned into: An industry.




Agreed.
The thing is that the higher ups in the big studios have shown their hand.
With this we can actually see how the see the future of the talent they have to hire for their projects.
And frankly what they would prefer not to deal with it AT ALL.

I do wonder what this will do to the quality of the work.




Which also goes for people picking careers in the business.

Cheers,
Mike
I dealth with students and frankly they refuse to hear the warnings about how bad things can be. They think that Pixar, ILM and Dreamworks will be knocking at the door when they graduate.

Lightwolf
04-08-2012, 06:53 PM
I do wonder what this will do to the quality of the work.

That's the thing though, isn't it? Quality is only one variable to a successful business.

Cheers,
Mike

Celshader
04-08-2012, 11:19 PM
I deal with students and frankly they refuse to hear the warnings about how bad things can be. They think that Pixar, ILM and Dreamworks will be knocking at the door when they graduate.

Lambs to the slaughter. :(

jeric_synergy
04-08-2012, 11:30 PM
At a certain level, I don't care if a private organization does this.

However, I DO object if they are accepting any kind of government educational subsidy, because then you are specifically pitting gov't resources against other, private, businesses. Schools are not supposed to compete against existing businesses.

I'm pretty sure I've seen this scam before, and that's what took it apart.

greg.reyna
04-09-2012, 12:04 AM
::clip::
Isn't it illegal to use gov't subsidies to compete with commercial enterprises?

No, it's precisely the opposite. Commercial interests get government subsidies which are often designed to put us out of work. We're not a part of the equation. The national Chamber of Commerce is not a friend to labor. Labor is irrelevant. --I exaggerate, but not by much.

Organize! The taxpayers are the only investors who get next to nothing for their investment. In D.C., there are something like ten lobbyists for every member of Congress. Since the activist Supreme Court decided the 'Citizens United' case in 2010, the money pouring into super-PACS is endless. You think this is not related to the state of labor in the U.S.? Ain't it ironic that those staggering sums of money are used to buy TV time to convince us to fight each other instead of our actual common enemy.

Economics is not a science. The system is designed so big money calls the tune, and Congress dances in exchange for a high-paying job when their 'government service' is over. Welcome to The Reagan Revolution. The best con games are the ones where the mark never knows he's been conned.

100 years ago lots of good people got their heads bashed in to win us the privileges we have today. We're allowing it all to be taken away by our passivity. No American politician ever gave anyone anything until they were forced to do so. You want to see how far the madness of money extends, check out General Smedley Butler's booklet, 'War Is A Racket'.

Good luck to all of us,
Greg

Anyone who doesn't recognize the extent of the problem can check out Public Citizen's web site. If people organize we have a fighting chance. If we do nothing but be cynical and complain to each other, we get what we deserve: we get screwed. When Americans spend one-tenth the energy on learning some basic economics that we spend on memorizing sports data, that'll be the day we begin to wake up.

DigitalSorcery8
04-09-2012, 12:54 AM
No, it's precisely the opposite. Commercial interests get government subsidies which are often designed to put us out of work. We're not a part of the equation. The national Chamber of Commerce is not a friend to labor. Labor is irrelevant. --I exaggerate, but not by much.
:agree:

Organize! The taxpayers are the only investors who get next to nothing for their investment. In D.C., there are something like ten lobbyists for every member of Congress. Since the activist Supreme Court decided the 'Citizens United' case in 2010, the money pouring into super-PACS is endless. You think this is not related to the state of labor in the U.S.? Ain't it ironic that those staggering sums of money are used to buy TV time to convince us to fight each other instead of our actual common enemy.
:agree:

Economics is not a science. The system is designed so big money calls the tune, and Congress dances in exchange for a high-paying job when their 'government service' is over. Welcome to The Reagan Revolution. The best con games are the ones where the mark never knows he's been conned.
:agree:

100 years ago lots of good people got their heads bashed in to win us the privileges we have today. We're allowing it all to be taken away by our passivity. No American politician ever gave anyone anything until they were forced to do so. You want to see how far the madness of money extends, check out General Smedley Butler's booklet, 'War Is A Racket'.
:agree:

Anyone who doesn't recognize the extent of the problem can check out Public Citizen's web site. If people organize we have a fighting chance. If we do nothing but be cynical and complain to each other, we get what we deserve: we get screwed. When Americans spend one-tenth the energy on learning some basic economics that we spend on memorizing sports data, that'll be the day we begin to wake up.
:agree:

That's why we have OWS. People are fed up with BIG MONEY taking control of business and government. This thing with Textor and DD is just more of the same - ultimately taking advantage of the "little people" and screwing us over in order for them to keep raking in the cash while the people who "work" for them (those who get paid OR pay them) are pushed down lower and lower in the food chain. :cursin:

This isn't fiction. It IS happening.

Bill Carey
04-09-2012, 03:36 AM
Organize! The taxpayers are the only investors who get next to nothing for their investment. In D.C., there are something like ten lobbyists for every member of Congress. Since the activist Supreme Court decided the 'Citizens United' case in 2010, the money pouring into super-PACS is endless. You think this is not related to the state of labor in the U.S.? Ain't it ironic that those staggering sums of money are used to buy TV time to convince us to fight each other instead of our actual common enemy.


Oh yeah, organize. Join the many industries whose jobs have been pushed overseas by hire me or I'll put you out of business unions. (The biggest super-pacs of all are the private and municipal unions. Love you guys who hate it when people who think differently have the means to fight back)

I'm a hobbyist, so this doesn't affect me, but you need to organize differently than a militant union. Those days are gone. Organize as a educational group that stresses what local labor gives employers that out sourcing can't. Many managers in my industry are very tired of getting up to make phone calls at 3:00am to catch someone in the office in India. Tired of them switching people in the middle of a project that have to be trained all over again. Tired of explaining things 400 times because they have no cultural references in common. Tired of needing an answer now, but having to wait until the next day only to find out they didn't understand the question. Tired of getting the end result 2 weeks later only to find out they got it wrong. Do a little work and research on what people hate about out-sourcing. Sell yourselves on those points.

They can kill you on labor costs, you can fight back with access, communication and interactivity. Seems like those would be important in the fx industry.

tischbein3
04-09-2012, 04:32 AM
But what I can't understand is why some people are AGREEING with this situation. On CGTalk there are those defending this practice.
Doesn't actually surprises me... I could have bet on this. Its cgtalk, so my own recomendation is: Take opinions like these with the appropriate grain of salt, and listen to eurythmics "Sweet Dreams".

But again, renember, this is also just an opinion. :D

jeric_synergy
04-09-2012, 08:39 AM
Since there's an entire demographic in the USA that routinely votes against its own interests, I'm not surprised either. Americans always seem to think that THEY'LL be the lone black swan that magically outsmarts the money men.

"Militant" unions are gone due to a half-century of propaganda from the Reich, errr, Right. Real blood was spilled to move labor protection forward, but few seem to realize or remember that every inch was fought for. It's more fun to make fun of the unions than to remember that they were the people GETTING safety laws, child protection laws, and labor legislation that we take for granted passed in the first place.

robertoortiz
04-09-2012, 09:07 AM
The standard business approach to that is to continually break down the whole process into ever smaller "pieces". The idea behind this is standard corporate theory - that you can break up and reduce one highly skilled worker's job down to five or ten unskilled jobs, pay the unskilled workers a whole lot less, and then every person in the process is an easily replaceable cog - just another unskilled nobody - and there are millions of those.



The thing is that the tools we use allow for small teams to develop a huge amount of content.

But there seems to be a growing divide between the workflows of the studios (you do a single task) and smaller studios (generalists).
I do wonder if the difference will become more reflected in the future development of the tools we use.

kopperdrake
04-09-2012, 09:19 AM
so if your a 'student' you'll be thrilled at the prospect of working on a AAA feature film and terrified at your future prospects of employment in the VFX industry once you have your degree and are no longer a student...

he's figured out a way to lower his overheads to compete with china, S. korea but long term he'll kill the idea of working in USA for vfx.

longer term VFX is a dead industry in USA and europe if they continue to squeeze the dollar chasing to death.

same will go for console game production too maybe.

a profit share scheme might be a better solution for ALL involved in feature film production.

For these exact reasons I try and buy British where I can, food, clothes, you name it I try, even if it costs more. It's not patriotism, it's self-preservation. The more we kowtow to the money-makers the less we have as cultures. All we will ever be left as is telesales operatives selling things to other telesales operatives, which are made and/or created elsewhere for us to consume. Forgive me if I sound slightly socialist - but the end result of chasing the dollar/pound is exactly that - we lose our identity and all that makes us as countries and people individual. Ironically, the cultures (Western) that idealise the idea of individualism are exactly the ones turning us all into clones. Bah and bloody humbug. Here's to more outfits like the Iron Sky dudes who create great FX whilst sticking a finger up to the accountants and bankers running our industries and countries at the expense of long-term survival :thumbsup:

jeric_synergy
04-09-2012, 09:56 AM
Forgive me if I sound slightly socialist -

Why would that require an apology?

I'm tired of people using "socialism=Sovietism". The socialist hellholes of Sweden and France don't seem so bad to me. Especially compared to the laissez faire/industrial serfdom paradise the US is threatening to become.

Cryonic
04-09-2012, 11:20 AM
I don't mind our work going elsewhere if there is an overflow of work. But, when Americans can't get jobs or must take excruciating cuts so people here are unable to make house payments, can't buy gas and maybe even can't get regular groceries, then it's time for us in the U.S. to pull back.

I don't believe in "sharing the wealth" when it means I can't make my house payment or I can't fill my car with gasoline. I would, but it's really not anything but a political way for the wealthy to take away my ability to make a fair living. You deserve the same.

If enough people can't make their house payments, then the cost of the housing will start to come back down. The only reason for a house to cost as much as it does is Supply & Demand. Demand drops and supply rises (because of fewer homeowners) then price plummets. In the long run this is a good thing as it will eventually stabilize again as the price drops far enough that more people can afford it again.

robertoortiz
04-09-2012, 11:22 AM
For these exact reasons I try and buy British where I can, food, clothes, you name it I try, even if it costs more. It's not patriotism, it's self-preservation.

I wonder if we could apply the same principles in helping our brothers in the CG field?
How can we all work and help each other out as a as a group?

DigitalSorcery8
04-09-2012, 11:28 AM
Why would that require an apology?

I'm tired of people using "socialism=Sovietism". The socialist hellholes of Sweden and France don't seem so bad to me. Especially compared to the laissez faire/industrial serfdom paradise the US is threatening to become.

Agreed! Standard "Right" talking points. Use old-fashioned terms that bring negative connotations to evoke "patriotism" so that these people vote against what is best for them - and then vote to bring more cash to the coffers of the already super-wealthy. It's amazing that this brainwashing is so very effective. How many times have we heard the mantra "don't raise taxes on the job creators"? These so-called "job creators" are sitting on trillions of dollars and there are few jobs being created. Heck, during Eisenhower's time (and he's a Republican) the top tax rate was 90% for these super-wealthy. The country was moving along fine. Now it's down to about 36% and they want to drive it to half of that! Huh? (Of course they all pay less than that already - and sometimes nothing - but their tax rate needs to increase, not decrease.) When you see the "Right" keep talking about lowering the taxes on the wealthy AND AT THE SAME TIME keep the oil subsidies in place.... you can easily see where their priorities lay.

This Textor is just another one of these elite money-grabbers who want to see how far they can go with the system to line their pockets with more cash. Seriously... why is this guy making $16m+? and the VFX industry is not healthy?

And yeah, some unions ARE still something of a bully - but they are now the exception and not the rule. It was the unions who gave us so much that today we take for granted. I would say that unions are not all good or all bad. For example, teachers unions are helpful at getting proper pay - but go too far with tenure. WHY... should anyone have a job forever just because they made it to a certain number of employed years? Like most other jobs, it should ALWAYS be based on performance. I understand the love of tenure, but really... it's not fair and should be removed. But unions are about more than these simple ideas.

IMO of course. :)

DigitalSorcery8
04-09-2012, 11:35 AM
If enough people can't make their house payments, then the cost of the housing will start to come back down. The only reason for a house to cost as much as it does is Supply & Demand. Demand drops and supply rises (because of fewer homeowners) then price plummets. In the long run this is a good thing as it will eventually stabilize again as the price drops far enough that more people can afford it again.

I don't think so. That's only part of the problem. When people don't have jobs they consume the bare minimum - which affects EVERYONE down the line. People won't be able to buy even low-cost houses because of the trickle down effect of being unable to purchase goods and supplies. The entire country will begin to decline unless there is a middle class that supports the economy. And since the middle class in the US has been declining over the years, there is something MAJOR wrong with the system - essentially trickle-down economics does not work. We've been testing it for over 30 years and it has failed. When wages for the poor and middle class have remained steady and have risen very little over these past 30 years, the wealth of the rich has risen dramatically during the same time period.The system is broken and needs repair - otherwise the best days in this country are truly behind us.

SBowie
04-09-2012, 11:52 AM
This thread is showing a determined trend away from the original topic (a specific trend in the graphics industry that might well be of interest or concern for many here) into more traditional partisan politics. The connection is obvious enough, but this is not the place for the latter conversation - so let's not 'go there'.

shrox
04-09-2012, 12:30 PM
This thread is showing a determined trend away from the original topic (a specific trend in the graphics industry that might well be of interest or concern for many here) into more traditional partisan politics. The connection is obvious enough, but this is not the place for the latter conversation - so let's not 'go there'.

Which is basically this:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_CSO8wlo39mI/TMm4SVzi0zI/AAAAAAAAAVo/SpvKJNe7ccs/s1600/production+triangle.png

or

http://www.marcelijasinski.com/images/ProductionTriangle.jpg

rcallicotte
04-09-2012, 01:20 PM
Lol



which is basically this:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_cso8wlo39mi/tmm4svzi0zi/aaaaaaaaavo/spvkjne7ccs/s1600/production+triangle.png

or

http://www.marcelijasinski.com/images/productiontriangle.jpg

jeric_synergy
04-09-2012, 01:21 PM
So, are the movie producers just better at playing hardball than the VFX producers, who after all SHOULD be protecting their bottom line,

OR,

Are there systemic issues that prevent the VFX producers from making a profit?

DigitalSorcery8
04-09-2012, 03:13 PM
So, are the movie producers just better at playing hardball than the VFX producers, who after all SHOULD be protecting their bottom line,

OR,

Are there systemic issues that prevent the VFX producers from making a profit?

I think that there are less people who actually produce these high-end movies that require the VFX houses as opposed to LOTS of VFX houses available all over the world.

These producers can and do pit VFX houses against each other. These VFX houses need to change how they do business - like getting rid of the WAY overpaid executives (i.e. $16m+ salaries) and streamline their processes.

But IMO you simply do not exploit workers/students like Textor (and probably other VFX executives) is aiming to do.

Lightwolf
04-09-2012, 04:53 PM
So, are the movie producers just better at playing hardball than the VFX producers, who after all SHOULD be protecting their bottom line,

OR,

Are there systemic issues that prevent the VFX producers from making a profit?
I actually think it is a bit of both really (as well as other issues). There is no single cause for the situation.
For one, there aren't that many major studios/producers and that many major vfx studios either. But the vfx studios have the short end of the stick and would need to expand into other areas to be able to afford the vfx bidding wars (or just to be able to say: "No!").
That part of the DD strategy seems to be solid.

On the other hand, apparently the situation can't be that bad. After all, how could a relatively unknown newcomer manage to walk of with the Oscar for VFX this year? A company that not only didn't exist 15 years ago or so... but has also grown without being the playground of a major director and has its roots abroad as well.
(How much longer they will prevail is a different topic though).

Another question is how well studios in other areas of work are doing.
I still think it is possible to run a profitable studio nowadays. But it's not as easy as it was 20 years ago and requires plenty of skills that go beyond the creating of decent visuals.

Cheers,
Mike

BigHache
04-10-2012, 11:38 AM
I actually think it is a bit of both really (as well as other issues). There is no single cause for the situation.

Definitely think this is on point. I think the majority of the issue comes from the top of Hollywood (above the producers). They want more and more, so everyone below (including producers) gets less and less. Producers don't want less and have negotiating power, the power to award or at least get bids on vfx contracts, so they use that to increase any piece of theirs that may be threatened.

As an offshoot, I don't think Starz wanting more money from Netflix was only Starz wanting more money. I would say the content owners wanted more and it just went down the pipe.

jeric_synergy
04-10-2012, 01:37 PM
(or just to be able to say: "No!").
<<SNIP>>
.......... requires plenty of skills that go beyond the creating of decent visuals.
Not accepting terms that will bankrupt your VFX house is a skill I guess, but I'd expect that one to be fundamental.

shrox
04-10-2012, 01:52 PM
Where is the money going? What is Textor doing to avoid this?

I just saw Thor last night. It was funner than I expected, look good, but there was one scene, where the fire-shooting metal Destroyer backhands Thor, the motion and render of the Destroyer looked awful.

Is Textor too busy doing blow to check out a few dailies?

Lightwolf
04-10-2012, 04:16 PM
Not accepting terms that will bankrupt your VFX house is a skill I guess, but I'd expect that one to be fundamental.
I suppose you've never been in a situation where the choice was either too little income or no income.
I do however suspect that most freelancers as well as studios have. And it's a tough lesson to learn indeed (been there, done that).

Cheers
Mike

DigitalSorcery8
04-10-2012, 05:40 PM
I suppose you've never been in a situation where the choice was either too little income or no income.
I do however suspect that most freelancers as well as studios have. And it's a tough lesson to learn indeed (been there, done that).

Cheers
Mike

I have. it may be necessary for the short term, but it is completely unsustainable. At some point you end up having to lay off people and if it progresses there is no choice but to close up shop. Underbidding CAN be done, but you can't KEEP doing it. It isn't a sound business plan. Plain and simple.

jeric_synergy
04-10-2012, 09:29 PM
Underbidding CAN be done, but you can't KEEP doing it. It isn't a sound business plan. Plain and simple.
This.

DigitalSorcery8
04-10-2012, 09:41 PM
This.

Yup!

Lightwolf
04-11-2012, 01:49 AM
I have. it may be necessary for the short term, but it is completely unsustainable. At some point you end up having to lay off people and if it progresses there is no choice but to close up shop. Underbidding CAN be done, but you can't KEEP doing it. It isn't a sound business plan. Plain and simple.
And then we're back at square one: Learn to say "No" and educate customers (something that apparently only works in rare cases) or fold.
Unless the studio finds a way to cross-finance the vfx part of course.

Cheers,
Mike

kopperdrake
04-11-2012, 03:00 AM
If a job comes in that's too cheap for us then I say 'no', plain and simple. Simply put, there's a cut-off point where you are actually losing money, despite there being a budget. You get to keep the customers who are willing to pay your rate, and for that they get - apart from the standard degree of 3D experience and talent - localised knowledge, knowledge and understanding of the relevant home market, understanding of the nuances in language and culture. Anyone can offer a 3D service, but not everyone can offer the 3D service if it needs relevant local issues. This is the same for most professions - the clever bit is finding that niche and getting your fingers in tight :)

DigitalSorcery8
04-11-2012, 12:14 PM
And then we're back at square one: Learn to say "No" and educate customers (something that apparently only works in rare cases) or fold.
Unless the studio finds a way to cross-finance the vfx part of course.

Cheers,
Mike

Precisely!


If a job comes in that's too cheap for us then I say 'no', plain and simple. Simply put, there's a cut-off point where you are actually losing money, despite there being a budget. You get to keep the customers who are willing to pay your rate, and for that they get - apart from the standard degree of 3D experience and talent - localised knowledge, knowledge and understanding of the relevant home market, understanding of the nuances in language and culture. Anyone can offer a 3D service, but not everyone can offer the 3D service if it needs relevant local issues. This is the same for most professions - the clever bit is finding that niche and getting your fingers in tight :)

In a perfect world you are exactly right. But sometimes things don't go as you'd planned. If you have no work coming in - and you've got people to pay - and a job comes in that is under what you would require, you may take the job because it will pay for some of your expenses. And unfortunately some producers couldn't care less about "nuance" - they are interested ONLY in saving the almighty dollar and lining their pockets as much as they can.

And the VFX industry has apparently LOTS of competition now. Look how many professional studios have closed down. It's sad, but hopefully things will begin to even out. Now that labor payscale in China is moving up, some US manufacturers are coming back to the US. The more things even out over the world, the better chances we all have. If everyone (ultimately) has a decent standard of living, no one will be willing to take these VFX jobs for under X amount. But... it's going to take time.

lwanmtr
04-11-2012, 04:04 PM
Just found this thread.....Wow.....Im not sure how to respond to that video... In the long run it's taking jobs away from those who have already paid their dues and need to get paying jobs.... Internships should only be short term temporary things...but it sounds like he's going for long term unpaid labor.

I did hear recently, though, that congress was talkign about making the 'unpaid intership' a thing of the past, since its become more and more prevalent that companies are abusing the internship programs.

I hope they follow through with this, personally.

Cageman
04-11-2012, 06:00 PM
Become extremely good at what you are doing and studios will not afford to say no to you.

Simple.

lwanmtr
04-11-2012, 06:13 PM
its not that simple, unfortunately...not anymore. with unpaid interns and outsourcing, its much easier for companies to get what they want done at much less cost than hiring from the US.

There is a local company in seattle (not going to name them)....they have 3 employees, and despite doing alot of work for major studios, they only hire unpaid interns...with an option to keep them...but guess what...they have not hired anyone who has taken their internship.

DigitalSorcery8
04-11-2012, 06:35 PM
its not that simple, unfortunately...not anymore. with unpaid interns and outsourcing, its much easier for companies to get what they want done at much less cost than hiring from the US.

There is a local company in seattle (not going to name them)....they have 3 employees, and despite doing alot of work for major studios, they only hire unpaid interns...with an option to keep them...but guess what...they have not hired anyone who has taken their internship.

Yup. A prime example of a company abusing the system and exploiting workers.

Perhaps having good ethics AND running a VFX business are mutually exclusive? :bangwall:

Cageman
04-11-2012, 06:43 PM
its not that simple, unfortunately...not anymore. with unpaid interns and outsourcing, its much easier for companies to get what they want done at much less cost than hiring from the US.

Unpaied interns will never have the same experience as a senior artist. He said that 30% of the workforce will be students... OK... so, you have 70% of the staff that you need to be competitive with.

I never said that it will be easy to be competitive with those, but the solution to the problem is simple; become a great artist and you will belong among those 70% of the workforce.

lwanmtr
04-11-2012, 06:57 PM
That is sadly a semi-naive look at it. I know from personal experience that if they can get work cheaper, they will. Doesnt matter how good your work is, or how long you've worked with them...its all about the money.

Skill and Quality *should* be a major factor, I agree.

DigitalSorcery8
04-11-2012, 07:13 PM
No matter how good you are, there will ALWAYS be someone better OR someone NEARLY as good who will do what YOU do for less. This happens in business all of the time. No one is irreplaceable - NO ONE. Gone are the days of job security. This is the age of the bottom line - if they can make more money without you they will fire you. It really is that simple. I'm sure that there are some places where those in charge actually DO care about those who work for them and want a great working environment and pay fair wages - but I think you will find that there are more people who care MORE about how much cash they can make as opposed to being fair.

And... this is sad. :cry:

robertoortiz
04-12-2012, 05:08 AM
Some updates:
fxpodcast: John Textor, One on One interview April 11, 2012
http://www.fxguide.com/fxpodcasts/fxpodcast-john-textor-one-on-one-interview/


http://effectscorner.blogspot.com/2012/04/digital-domain-plans-to-have-paying.html



No matter how good you are, there will ALWAYS be someone better OR someone NEARLY as good who will do what YOU do for less. :

Or maybe that the lie that the MBA mayors are selling to justify their jobs and we as asociety have been eating it up. We have been told repeatedly in the past 2 decades that everyone is replaceable.

But for some reason no one seems to ask the logical question.
If I am just a cog, Mr MBA, what makes you so special? Why are you earning more than 50X the average salary of a salary in your company?
Why there sems to be no accountability to your actions that are costing the company millions?

COBRASoft
04-12-2012, 06:37 AM
This is a very bad signal, but it's not only in the VFX world. Developers go through the same misery and I'm sure other jobs suffer too. The only way to 'beat' this is by being better, faster and more flexible. That's how I try to do it as a developer with my own company.

prometheus
04-12-2012, 07:05 AM
I can create a toroid object for free for every vfx house that is in need of it:devil:

Other than that, reasonable pay for quality and no one should open the mouth to state comments like the thread say. (discusting)

BigHache
04-12-2012, 07:08 AM
But for some reason no one seems to ask the logical question.
If I am just a cog, Mr MBA, what makes you so special? Why are you earning more than 50X the average salary of a salary in your company?
Why there sems to be no accountability to your actions that are costing the company millions?

It's mindset, production vs. management. Management is always viewed as solving bigger problems, therefore more pay. And if you start in a company as production they will never see you as management.

rcallicotte
04-12-2012, 07:41 AM
Interns will never replace skilled labor, unless someone creates a program that writes code or makes amazing animations by themselves. Microsoft tried this marketing scheme with Visual Studio decades ago with the advertised idea that "reusable code" and "widgets" would replace the need for highly skilled programmers. It still isn't so to this day - it takes a certain amount of experience and understanding that doesn't come easily to most people to program.

And most of your 2D and 3D skills might be belittled by the same mentality, but it is simply a lie that your hard earned skills are worth the same as somebody who is arrogantly puffed up by these economically greedy monsters and yet has no experience and a modicum of talent.

jeric_synergy
04-12-2012, 09:22 AM
No matter how good you are, there will ALWAYS be someone better OR someone NEARLY as good who will do what YOU do for less.
As long as there is 'friction', this doesn't matter. It's like high and low pressure areas in the atmosphere: local conditions will dictate whether you can get work or not.

However, the internet has lowered friction for data-based industries to a remarkable degree.

kopperdrake
04-12-2012, 09:58 AM
I'm sorry - but if *anyone* thinks they can hire 30% of their staff from the student pool, and not watch their company go down the pan in the long term, then they really are fools. From my perspective, watching that video, it screams 'don't touch this employer with a bargepole'.

30% inexperienced means a percentage of the experienced people will have their arms and ears tugged by the inexperienced constantly. Some of the experienced will oblige happily, but it takes them off their task in hand. They might have an understanding project manager, they might not - either way they will do less productive work and may or may not be black listed as a team member by their own direct management. Some will make up their lost hours, some will do so happily (the rare bunch), most will do so begrudgingly. A begrudged employee is not a happy or productive employee. Their immediate family won't be happy either - they will get grief, they will lose friends. I have seen it.

Others will not want to make up their lost hours having helped out the inexperienced employees. They don't begrudge helping them, but they sure don't want to be an unpaid trainer, so they will leave on time, and not be as productive. They may also be blacklisted by their direct management.

Then we get the people who will really not want to help the inexperienced - why should they train the guys, off their own backs, who will eventually replace them, at a lower man-hour cost to the company? There *will* be backstabbing, nay-saying, bitching and generally a foul mood. I have seen it happen - where it has happened I have seen the company slide - a large company.

Then we have the 'as yet to be employed by the employer'. What would *you* think looking in at this set up? Would they be first on your list to go to for a proper job, that pays enough to support you and possibly your family? Would you want to lower yourself into that quagmire of murky relationships between the various tiers of employees?

No - to me it sounds like a desperate move to lower overheads, to survive. Again, I have seen similar happen, and the long term is not good for anyone involved, at any level. The only person who will gain is the chap at the head who will make a short term gain, but in doing so will destroy the fundamental structure of the company. If the company is not independent, then they will move on having made their large salary - they are not in it for the long haul. Again - I have seen it happen - some experienced ex-employees who can't take it any more move on to other companies in the same industry. Some move into companies who can use their skillsets but in a non-related industry. Some just change life direction totally. Either way, skilled workers are lost, and you end up being able to employ only the inexperienced - talented or not - and that is not a good place to be.

DigitalSorcery8
04-12-2012, 10:09 AM
Or maybe that the lie that the MBA mayors are selling to justify their jobs and we as asociety have been eating it up. We have been told repeatedly in the past 2 decades that everyone is replaceable.
Yes, but it IS true. Someone MAY not be able to do the job as well as you, but they CAN do the job - and often will do so for less. And there will always be someone who can do it better. And obviously the more people you have moving into the industry, the more these producers will have to choose from. As long as they can keep more of that money, that will be how they play it.


But for some reason no one seems to ask the logical question.
If I am just a cog, Mr MBA, what makes you so special? Why are you earning more than 50X the average salary of a salary in your company?
Why there sems to be no accountability to your actions that are costing the company millions?

Exactly! The answer of course is... they are NOT worth it. IN the 1970's, no CEO made more than 30x the salary of their lowest paid workers. Now look at what we've got - Textor making WELL OVER 100x what I'm sure his lowest paid workers get. These people are NOT worth it no matter how you slice it. And you know what? I don't blame THEM as much as I blame those who allowed them to get into that position. If these VFX companies are THAT stupid, then they deserve to go out of business. Let the smaller, more productive shops end up growing and taking the business.

Ethics seem to have been tossed out years ago - replaced by blind greed. I still agree with "greed is good," but you still have to temper it with morality and good ethics. You can still get rich by NOT breaking the backs of your workers - but instead of making $1billion... you might only make $500million. Oh yes... pity the millionaire/billionaire. :devil:

rcallicotte
04-12-2012, 11:53 AM
What I include below from what you said so well is the crux of the problem.


The only person who will gain is the chap at the head who will make a short term gain, but in doing so will destroy the fundamental structure of the company. If the company is not independent, then they will move on having made their large salary - they are not in it for the long haul.

jeric_synergy
04-12-2012, 12:14 PM
And you know what? I don't blame THEM as much as I blame those who allowed them to get into that position.
Who exactly are "those who allowed them"? The board of directors? Are most VFX companies structured that way?

Dexter2999
04-12-2012, 12:42 PM
More on the subject here:
http://www.fxguide.com/fxpodcasts/fxpodcast-john-textor-one-on-one-interview/

There are additional links on that page for a couple of posts and a link to more links apparently.

DigitalSorcery8
04-12-2012, 01:01 PM
Who exactly are "those who allowed them"? The board of directors? Are most VFX companies structured that way?

Good question. I honestly don't know, but it's certain to say that Textor just didn't walk in and start collecting that salary. And considering Textors background, he shouldn't be making THAT salary. He will end up ruining DD - and it will be the fault of those in charge of DD who are ultimately responsible. They ALLOWED him to do it.

DigitalSorcery8
04-12-2012, 02:50 PM
From OccupyVFX

http://www.occupyvfx.org/?p=23

"When Wyndcrest Holdings bought Digital Domain several years ago, the first thing that they did was take the pirate flag down off the roof. That may have been the beginning of the end. The executive management of this company, specifically, John Textor and Cliff Plumer, have consistently paid themselves well over $700,000 a year, while the company has nearly continuously lost money. In 2010, DD lost nearly $45 million. In the process, they have all but destroyed the heart and soul of this once great company in Venice. I know that margins in Visual Effects are thin, and that owning your own content is key to success. However, just how greedy do you need to be? When is enough, enough? Is it not enough to own your own content? Do you need to now have slave labor to complete your projects?"

kopperdrake
04-12-2012, 04:27 PM
Pretty much sums it up. Whilst executives can get away with these salaries, then they will do it. We are going through a great 'levelling' where outsourcing jobs easy to outsource to cheaper countries will happen. People initiating this will make money doing so. DD are competing in this market, trying to survive. At some stage in the future things will level out, but it really means cheap labour countries becoming more expensive than us, and us becoming the cheaper option. I don't know about you, but I see many cheaper countries out there at the moment. One option as an artist is to follow the work and go abroad, earn less, but pay less to live. Or we can carve out a localisation niche at home where our knowledge of the local culture and language counts for something in the projects we do. Or we can compete for the fewer jobs at home that pay decent. Or we can do something entirely different.

Personally I'm not a fan of unfettered globalisation - because unfettered globalisation favours the cheapest labour at the expense of other qualities; appropriateness of product, working conditions, dilution of local difference and richness, homogenisation, bias towards safe-sale products, loss of local skill bases, etc. There is something seriously messed up with the global economy's methodology, but as long as the bottom line is the only thing that counts to those pulling the strings then it will not change.

bobakabob
04-12-2012, 06:29 PM
I still agree with "greed is good," but you still have to temper it with morality and good ethics.

"The Morality of Good Ethical Greed" is a great title for a thesis. It would make fascinating reading :D

Dexter2999
04-12-2012, 07:03 PM
"The Morality of Good Ethical Greed" is a great title for a thesis. It would make fascinating reading :D

I think that is the principal put forth by John Nash in A BEAUTIFUL MIND. Each acting on personal interest may prosper one or be self defeating. But if all act with the group in mind then there is opportunity for everyone to prosper.

However, research has recently shown that people with money have an exageratted sense of entitlement. They will take for themselves to the detriment of others.

So...forget it.

DD wasn't purchased because they wanted to make special effects. It was purchased because they want to make money.

DigitalSorcery8
04-12-2012, 07:21 PM
"The Morality of Good Ethical Greed" is a great title for a thesis. It would make fascinating reading :D
It sounds like a book that may have already been written. :)

I think that is the principal put forth by John Nash in A BEAUTIFUL MIND. Each acting on personal interest may prosper one or be self defeating. But if all act with the group in mind then there is opportunity for everyone to prosper.
That's the way it SHOULD work.


However, research has recently shown that people with money have an exageratted sense of entitlement. They will take for themselves to the detriment of others.

So...forget it.
I guess the key word there is exaggerated. I would think that every successful person would think that they should get a decent amount of remuneration, but it speaks volumes about these sorts of people who think that THEY should get something and someone else should not. It comes down to morality. If I'm a CEO and want to make $16m.... and we have to lay off 50 employees in order for the company to make my salary... then it's up to ME to re-evaluate my pay and see what I can do for those who work for me. If I'm a decent human being I will take a pay reduction and make sure all of our employees are paid fairly. If I'm a a-hole... I'd take my money and say FU to those laid-off employees.

The question is: What kind of person would you WANT to be?


DD wasn't purchased because they wanted to make special effects. It was purchased because they want to make money.
Yup. And this is Capitalism at its extreme. When money is held higher than morality then there is something wrong with not only the system, but those running it. Capitalism is great - as long as people who have a conscience are running it.

jeric_synergy
04-12-2012, 08:58 PM
Capitalism has to be embedded in a larger system to serve the population well. AND it shouldn't be the scoreboard of a society, but just a tool.

DigitalSorcery8
04-12-2012, 09:39 PM
Capitalism has to be embedded in a larger system to serve the population well. AND it shouldn't be the scoreboard of a society, but just a tool.

I'm not entirely sure I completely understand, but my first inclination IS to agree. :beerchug:

jeric_synergy
04-12-2012, 10:30 PM
Capitalism is a monetary system, not even a political system, something Americans don't seem to grasp clearly. And it's definitely not a culture. If there were a hierarchy, I'd say culture's on top, then political system, then monetary system.

But the hierarchy is a pyramid, not a line, and there are other things just as important as the monetary system but at the same 'level'. For instance, that the USA has subordinated the health of its citizenry to its monetary system is an outrage.

DigitalSorcery8
04-13-2012, 12:23 AM
Sounds logical to me. I'm on your side! :thumbsup:

lwanmtr
04-13-2012, 01:56 AM
Capitalism in its current form actually penalizes those with ethics or social conciousness....if you want to succeed, you have to be able to do things like screw anyone, even your 'friends'..after all, they are only standing between you and your money.

kopperdrake
04-13-2012, 08:15 AM
Capitalism is a monetary system, not even a political system, something Americans don't seem to grasp clearly. And it's definitely not a culture. If there were a hierarchy, I'd say culture's on top, then political system, then monetary system.

And therein lies the problem. At the moment the political system is run by the monetary system, and the culture sees this and makes money its centre as that's where the power is perceived to be.

The result? Those in power move to where the money is, those being governed aspire to more money (that's what makes you happy and empowered isn't it, after all - that's what the TV, politicians, celebrities and businessmen show us) and make that their end goal.

End result - culture becomes the aquisition of money.

robertoortiz
04-13-2012, 08:50 AM
Yes, but it IS true. Someone MAY not be able to do the job as well as you, but they CAN do the job - and often will do so for less. And there will always be someone who can do it better. And obviously the more people you have moving into the industry, the more these producers will have to choose from. As long as they can keep more of that money, that will be how they play it.



I used to belive that people were expendable, until experience showed me how false this mentality is.

When institutional knowlege walks out the door, it is VERY hard to replace it.
This is why companies are being driven to the ground ONE AND AFTER another becuase these fools with MBAs refuse to admit that employees DO MATTER.
CEO like this guy are going the be the ruin of computer graphics.
Having survived the collape of the IT industry as a developer (the 00 were hell) and I can tell you how fools like this one DRIVE companies to the ground with glee.

This reminds me of something...
There was a great revolution in mangement invented in the US and implemented succesfully in Japan called "Total Quality Control"
From wikipedia:
"TQM functions on the premise that the quality of products and processes is the responsibility of everyone who is involved with the creation or consumption of the products or services offered by an organization. In other words, TQM capitalizes on the involvement of management, workforce, suppliers, and even customers, in order to meet or exceed customer expectations."

The problem is that rockstar CEOs hate this.
It flies against the mentality that everyone is replacable.
Company history, knowledge, relationships and internal networks DO count.

jeric_synergy
04-13-2012, 09:09 AM
End result - culture becomes the aquisition of money.
Bingo.

And the kicker is: that turns out to be an unsustainable bad practice.

robertoortiz
04-13-2012, 10:47 AM
To bring this thread back to lightwave..

I do wonder if we will see a stronger shift toward specialist tools in the high end market. Since they seem to be moving towards making jobs more specialized.

jeric_synergy
04-13-2012, 11:26 AM
Good question. I think it could go either way.

If VFX companies keep biting it, the model may become more like "Iron Sky"-- generalists would gain. Good news for LW, eh?

Lightwolf
04-13-2012, 11:28 AM
To bring this thread back to lightwave..

I do wonder if we will see a stronger shift toward specialist tools in the high end market. Since they seem to be moving towards making jobs more specialized.
Isn't that what in-house tools are all about?

Cheers,
Mike

DigitalSorcery8
04-13-2012, 11:42 AM
Capitalism in its current form actually penalizes those with ethics or social conciousness....if you want to succeed, you have to be able to do things like screw anyone, even your 'friends'..after all, they are only standing between you and your money.

I have to disagree with this. There is a difference between making a profit and making an OBSCENE profit. I've told my clients time and again that I'm greedy as heII - but I'm not going to screw them in order to make my wealth. Before this recession, my wife and I were making GREAT money and having lower prices than most and working long hours. It would have taken us quite a few years to reach a million, but we would have done that AND our clients would have been happy with our prices.

The bottom line is... you don't HAVE to screw over people to get wealthy. Only when you end up with the mentality that you NEED to screw over people you find that you've gone over to the dark side. Textor has obviously gone over to the dark side. He screws over "the little people" so that he and his cronies can make the big bucks - without conscience. In the end, something will give - either revolution or regulation or bankruptcy - but it is unsustainable in the long run.

DigitalSorcery8
04-13-2012, 11:51 AM
I used to belive that people were expendable, until experience showed me how false this mentality is.

When institutional knowlege walks out the door, it is VERY hard to replace it.
This is why companies are being driven to the ground ONE AND AFTER another becuase these fools with MBAs refuse to admit that employees DO MATTER.
CEO like this guy are going the be the ruin of computer graphics.
Having survived the collape of the IT industry as a developer (the 00 were hell) and I can tell you how fools like this one DRIVE companies to the ground with glee.

You're right - but the people like Textor don't care. They don't care ultimately if the company is run into the ground by replacing knowledgeable people with less capable ones. In his model, the ONLY thing that matters is making as much money as quickly as he can. Then he and his cronies will move on to the next business to rape and pillage. In his world - EVERYONE is expendable in order to make the money he craves. In the REAL world we know that knowledge is paramount in most businesses - but it's not essential to making a fast buck. He is currently siphoning off lots of cash from a company that can - at this time - ill afford to do so. Does her care? No. Instead of taking far less pay, he screws over his workers AND students. What sort of decent person does that? Answer: none.

I would bet that most on this forum would prefer to take the longer and slower road to wealth - in this industry - as opposed to being someone like Textor who considers people as disposable. We can see and appreciate the work that veterans of the business can achieve AND how people can slowly work their way up in the company. But if you want to get wealthy quickly - "our way" is not the best way. You try the methods that Textor is trying to employ.

Earning wealth with a conscience or earning it without is the decision.

zarti
04-13-2012, 04:08 PM
cdnt read every post and im not able to judge socio-econo-politically the current state of things .

but for one thing im absolutely sure actually ;

if all those real talents , which are jobless now , cd join with each other , starting up relatively small studios .. they wd live and feel better than when they were at Big Studios . every studio which is big Now , Once was a small group of very talented and passionate artists and technicians . im sure most of them will do so and they should succeed . doesnt look easy , buts the only way , imho .

Passion drives this kind of job and deserves its best .



.cheers

robertoortiz
04-14-2012, 07:24 AM
cdnt read every post and im not able to judge socio-econo-politically the current state of things .

but for one thing im absolutely sure actually ;

if all those real talents , which are jobless now , cd join with each other , starting up relatively small studios .. they wd live and feel better than when they were at Big Studios . every studio which is big Now , Once was a small group of very talented and passionate artists and technicians . im sure most of them will do so and they should succeed . doesnt look easy , buts the only way , imho .

Passion drives this kind of job and deserves its best .



.cheers
Agreed 100 %.I think that the CEO of DD overplayed his hand and gave us a peek at the direction the CG industry is headed.

It is obvious to me that they would prefer people with more specialized skills instead of generalist and centralize the creative control of the project at the top.

This ongoing rift between the needs of GENERALIST and SPECIALISTS will be a golden opportunity for smaller companies.

Smaller companies, like Pixologic, Newtek, Luxology have a GOLDEN opportunity since companies like Autodesk are joined at the hip with the interests that WANT a more specialized workforce.

That open the doors for people and TOOLS (ahem Lightwave /Blender/Modo) that give more power to individual users.

They thing is that now those tools for the generalist market have to TALK to each other, and provide ENHANCED REMOTE COLLABORATION TOOLSETS.

jeric_synergy
04-14-2012, 08:59 AM
They thing is that now those tools for the generalist market have to TALK to each other, and provide ENHANCED REMOTE COLLABORATION TOOLSETS.
That would make an interesting thread in itself: what are the current options now and how does each stack up?

There's the obvious stuff, like Skype, but, for instance, there's Messiah's, urrrmmmm (can't remember official name) "sketch on" capability which would make getting the point across easier, and IIRC Adobe has some really kick-*** collaboration and markup tools (maybe for editing?).

On the latter, I remember I thought during the demo "There's everything you want right there."

Dexter2999
04-14-2012, 09:02 AM
Or if there were a union that ran as a post house?

Freelancers and people who were looking for permanent employment but were between jobs would work on projects people would bring to the union as a "shop". The union would charge a minimal fee because the purpose of the union isn't to make a profit or pay salaries to executives or even the cost of maintaining workstations, none of that.

Personally, I find the idea even more attractive (but less feasible) for the union to use the talent of it's members to actually create IP that benefits the health insurance and retirement plans of its members.

zarti
04-14-2012, 10:59 AM
always the Thing starts sliding over the Sh!T when a group goes beyond 50 members . Always !

heres my formula :

- artists build clusters ranging from 5 to 15 members max .
( thats the Magic size . keeps Humans very connected with each other . Unbreakable . )

- they altogether build a strong and fair network . worldwide .
( share projects when full , join forces when needed , etc .. a Brotherhood )

- start over from 0 . yes Zero .
( very quickly everyone will get what he Deserves ; in revenue and reputation )

- dont be Greedy .
( thats why we are here today discussing . there is Enough for Everyone )


--

technology( in tems of power , connectivity , compatibility )permit many things today .

yes , thats mi sujestion .

!best wishes to All

DigitalSorcery8
04-14-2012, 11:38 AM
Or if there were a union that ran as a post house?

Freelancers and people who were looking for permanent employment but were between jobs would work on projects people would bring to the union as a "shop". The union would charge a minimal fee because the purpose of the union isn't to make a profit or pay salaries to executives or even the cost of maintaining workstations, none of that.

Personally, I find the idea even more attractive (but less feasible) for the union to use the talent of it's members to actually create IP that benefits the health insurance and retirement plans of its members.

THAT... is an interesting idea.

I wonder what the pluses and minuses would be? It may be difficult to implement dividends on each IP. Something tells me that it would end up being a contentious area. Still... a VERY interesting idea.

jeric_synergy
04-14-2012, 12:01 PM
Sounds more like a co-op than a 'union'. Nothing wrong with that: perhaps it could be BOTH. A union with co-op features, or a co-op that acts as a workers' representative organization.

DigitalSorcery8
04-14-2012, 12:12 PM
Thinking about it though...

You would need quite a bit of cash up-front to survive since any IP would take quite some time to see any ROI.

Dexter2999
04-14-2012, 01:48 PM
Thinking about it though...

You would need quite a bit of cash up-front to survive since any IP would take quite some time to see any ROI.

In answer to this point and the one made before about the downside... they are one in the same. The union has funds in the form of the investment accounts for the retirement fund. Members would have to vote to allot a percentage that would act as the production fund.

This would have to be a somewhat small amount though as any original IP is in effect a high risk investment and retirement funds should be predominantly "blue chip". Perhaps if the investment were in a sequel that had a proven track record it would be deemed a safer investment and possibly be afforded a larger allocation.

But the union that covers CG artists is currently the union for traditional animators. There is broad spectrum of talent represented. Projects could be anything with animation and/or compositing.

But I think to Jeric's point, it is more like a co-op. Unions are more for protection than benefit.

Roberto-
Have you ever seen this? http://www.alienbrain.com/videos/

robertoortiz
04-14-2012, 05:36 PM
One common mistake I see in the areas of development of IP is that we got people who may be asking themselves to do too much outside their areas of expertise.

One idea that would be revolutionary is to have top of the line professionals for other fields willing to work and collaborate developing IP with CG artists.

That means finding away to entice professional writers, sound designers actors to join the fray. (of course there would be union issues with organizations like SAG, but that is another ball of wax)

DigitalSorcery8
04-14-2012, 08:32 PM
One common mistake I see in the areas of development of IP is that we got people who may be asking themselves to do too much outside their areas of expertise.

One idea that would be revolutionary is to have top of the line professionals for other fields willing to work and collaborate developing IP with CG artists.

That means finding away to entice professional writers, sound designers actors to join the fray. (of course there would be union issues with organizations like SAG, but that is another ball of wax)

There's really no way to do this unless pay is involved. Otherwise you would just be asking for "free work" and/or "you'll get paid if/when we make money." IMO the best way is to create a very short short that is incredible enough to attract people to WANT to work on it. But here still it would probably be asking for "free work." How else could you do what you suggest?

The only other way I can see is educating yourself on what is required to develop your IP and just do it. Obviously it's not easy, but then nothing worthwhile ever is.

robertoortiz
04-14-2012, 09:18 PM
There's really no way to do this unless pay is involved. Otherwise you would just be asking for "free work" and/or "you'll get paid if/when we make money." IMO the best way is to create a very short short that is incredible enough to attract people to WANT to work on it. But here still it would probably be asking for "free work." How else could you do what you suggest?

The only other way I can see is educating yourself on what is required to develop your IP and just do it. Obviously it's not easy, but then nothing worthwhile ever is.
I agree pay would have to be involved.
I am just thinking that a kickstarter like service could be the solution.

DigitalSorcery8
04-14-2012, 09:37 PM
I am just thinking that a kickstarter like service could be the solution.

Great idea!

Again, perhaps a really short short with incredible visuals would help to get people interested enough to "kick" in to the program.

warmiak
04-14-2012, 11:02 PM
I would bet that most on this forum would prefer to take the longer and slower road to wealth - in this industry - as opposed to being someone like Textor who considers people as disposable. We can see and appreciate the work that veterans of the business can achieve AND how people can slowly work their way up in the company. But if you want to get wealthy quickly - "our way" is not the best way. You try the methods that Textor is trying to employ.

Earning wealth with a conscience or earning it without is the decision.


If he is screwing with people he will have hard time finding valuable employees , on the other hand if he keeps hiring/getting free labor he will end up with substandard products.
Now if even with substandard output , he still manages to do well then obviously there is a market for that sort of product and there is no need for so many highly skilled artists in the first place.

shrox
04-15-2012, 01:35 PM
I seem to find freelance jobs with companies that are either very disorganized, or the contact person leaves right after I sign on. There was a medical company that I was going to do work for, then they just fell off the map.

lwanmtr
04-15-2012, 01:46 PM
Haha...I know that story too well.

Mr Rid
04-19-2012, 10:46 PM
Visual effects artists aim to create better work environments
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-visual-effects-workers-20120420,0,563491.story?page=1
"We're more responsible for the bottom line than any other part of the talent. Yet we're treated like talent was back in the 1930s and 1940s."

Taken from the United States Department of Labor and California’s Division of Labor Standards Enforcement list of six criteria that must be met for an unpaid intern.
4. The employer that provides the training must not derive any immediate advantage from the activities of the intern, and on occasion its operations may actually be impeded.

http://vfxsoldier.wordpress.com/2012/04/18/fxguide-interviews-digital-domain-ceo/

geo_n
04-29-2012, 10:12 PM
B.S.
http://talkmgt.com/blog/2012/04/04/vfx-students-paying-to-work-may-help-the-industry-overall-2/

DigitalSorcery8
04-29-2012, 10:32 PM
B.S.
http://talkmgt.com/blog/2012/04/04/vfx-students-paying-to-work-may-help-the-industry-overall-2/

:agree:

Well this pretty much sums up their POV: "Here at Talk Management, we don’t think that unions solve the problem..."

Of COURSE they don't think this - it's Talk MANAGEMENT. I wonder why they don't like unions? :bangwall:

Sheesh!

And then: "All of these companies closing up shop have had a significant impact on Montreal’s employment situation."

What do they think is going to happen when they keep pumping out VFX students year after year? Where will they ALL go? Most to painting houses?

--------

Hah... I just read the responses below the article. Apparently NO ONE is falling for this BS piece of propganda. :)

rcallicotte
04-30-2012, 07:47 AM
Nice.

From one of the students - "Out of a class of 30 only 3 or 4 people have gotten jobs and half of the class has even changed career choices because of what they discovered about the industry. We all went to study with the prospect of one day working on films but with all the controversy in the industry it harder then we thought."

BigHache
05-01-2012, 07:27 PM
Yeah I saw that comment on the article.

I really think this DD school is a short term solution. I give it 12 years max before it collapses on itself. I've read nothing that suggests there's a shortage of VFX workers, so after 4 years this school will flood the industry every year with workers it's not looking for? I would think with the houses that have closed there's already an available labor pool and this will only add to it.

DrStrik9
05-02-2012, 09:48 AM
It's a sad situation.

Culture, political system, and monetary system are all subservient to the nature of people. Basic human nature controls or greatly affects every aspect of fields of innovation, labor, management, life. One of human nature's greatest inherent enemies (contained within the human) is greed: greed for self-importance, greed for power, greed for wealth. Solve this, and the problems with culture, political system, monetary system would vanish.

However, solving these flaws in human nature is not something that's going to happen any time soon. The "good" thing about this is that each person/business/entity who abuses others for their own greed will ultimately be brought down, not by others, but by their own unsustainable actions. And the cycle continues.

lwanmtr
05-02-2012, 02:02 PM
The bad thing is that while we wait for them to be brought down by themselves, we suffer

DrStrik9
05-02-2012, 04:56 PM
The bad thing is that while we wait for them to be brought down by themselves, we suffer

Yup. But the ones who figure it out and decide to survive long-term will still be hiring talent. The idiots like John Textor who can't see farther than the ends of their own noses are the ones who get hurt.

DigitalSorcery8
05-02-2012, 05:28 PM
Yup. But the ones who figure it out and decide to survive long-term will still be hiring talent. The idiots like John Textor who can't see farther than the ends of their own noses are the ones who get hurt.

I agreed with what you said before, but strongly disagree with this statement. The people like Textor are the ones who WON'T get hurt. They are the ones who have the money and can survive anything save a complete collapse of civilization. It is the people who work FOR him that end up being the ones who are hurt. Not the wealthy - certainly NOT the wealthy.

roboman
05-02-2012, 11:09 PM
Yup. But the ones who figure it out and decide to survive long-term will still be hiring talent. The idiots like John Textor who can't see farther than the ends of their own noses are the ones who get hurt.
From what I've seen in other fields, people who do the sorts of things he is doing, most often see the house of cards getting ready to fall, since they are the ones who get to see all the details from the top down. Basically you often get the CEO job because you over promised the investors more then the other guy did. You take a crap shoot that will look good short term and might, if you are extremely lucky, work out long term. If it does work out you are a business god, if not you make the numbers look good, bail out, go to a new company and blame the crash on your replacement.

The main reason I've never worked for a publicly traded company. If you don't ever see the owners, the owners are probably in it just for the short term money and will hire the CEO who says he can get them that.... If the boss in the owner, the boss probably loves the company, field and people who work for him, the job is likely a better job, even if it doesn't always pay as much.

rcallicotte
05-03-2012, 06:45 AM
Watched any biographies on some of these wealthy? Might as well have poop for your main course every day from here to the end of your life than have what they "have".



I agreed with what you said before, but strongly disagree with this statement. The people like Textor are the ones who WON'T get hurt. They are the ones who have the money and can survive anything save a complete collapse of civilization. It is the people who work FOR him that end up being the ones who are hurt. Not the wealthy - certainly NOT the wealthy.

DigitalSorcery8
05-03-2012, 02:03 PM
Watched any biographies on some of these wealthy? Might as well have poop for your main course every day from here to the end of your life than have what they "have".

Which ones are you talking about?

shrox
05-03-2012, 02:23 PM
Heads on pikes, heads on pikes...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Heads_on_spikes.png