Entry tags:

a few million is nothing!, fandom related yay!, not a good show, who cares

Ay caramba! After 23 years, "The Simpsons" is in danger

Short version: Fox is losing loads of money each year from producing new episodes. Their revenue from the show/brand comes from merchandising and reruns. The lead voice actors, who reportedly make around $8 million per season, are being asked to take a 45% pay cut in order to keep the show on the air. They themselves have offered to take a 30% pay cut, but also want a higher percentage of revenue from merchandise and reruns (which... kinda negates the idea of taking a pay cut in the first place).

In its 23rd year on TV, The Simpsons could be on the endangered species list.

The show's producer said Tuesday the show can't continue under its current financial model, following a report that big pay cuts are being sought for the actors who provide voices for Homer, Marge and Bart Simpson and other characters.

"We believe this brilliant series can and should continue, but we cannot produce future seasons under its current financial model," said Chris Alexander, spokesman for 20th Century Fox Television. He said producers hope a deal can be reached.

The animated series is a fixture on Fox's Sunday night schedule, and critics consider it one of the best shows in the medium. But like many programs that have been on the air for a long time, the cost of making it has become prohibitive.

The Fox network reportedly loses money each year on new episodes, even as all the old episodes run in perpetuity in reruns and are a cash cow for producers and creators.

The Daily Beast reported Tuesday that producers are demanding a 45 percent pay cut from the six voice actors, who reportedly make nearly $8 million each for a season. The website said the voice actors have offered to take a 30 percent pay in return for a portion of the show's syndication and merchandise revenue.

Allan Mayer, a spokesman for one of the show's voice actors, Harry Shearer, said he had no comment on the talks. The manager for Dan Castellaneta, the voice of Homer Simpson, told The Associated Press she didn't know about the negotiations, and creator Matt Groening didn't immediately return a phone call.

"The Simpsons" is averaging 7.1 million viewers for its new episodes this fall, down 14 percent from last year. Back in the 1991-92 season, an average of 21.7 million people watched it every week, Nielsen said.

The median age of the show's viewers back two decades ago was 23, and this season it is still very young for a TV show, 32, Nielsen said. That's an indication of how the show has regenerated its audiences as the years go by.

"It's still a very young and male audience, which is difficult to reach on broadcast TV," said Brad Adgate, a researcher for Horizon Media. "Its longevity is due to that. They can charge a premium to reach that audience, and they do."

(Post a new comment)

	ladylance 2011-10-05 03:15 am UTC (link)
	Given how much money the show makes on residuals, I really can't blame the actors for not being thrilled by Fox's demands. (Reply to this)

	sandglass 2011-10-05 03:24 am UTC (link)
	Won't they eventually make the money back rerunning it throughout the years? A 45% pay cut is pretty massive. Not that I feel very bad for people who would still be making $5mill. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	whimsy_chan 2011-10-05 06:51 am UTC (link)
	Stating it as a percentage makes it sound so much worse than it is. At my salary, a 45% pay cut would have me living in a cardboard box. The difference between $8 million and $5 million is so much less significant--I can't feel bad for these people. Also, The Simpsons has been dead to me for years, so I can't really muster up any concern for the issue. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	sandglass 2011-10-05 03:41 pm UTC (link)
	Yeah, but I feel like if we're just talking about their salaries, we're leaving out the Fox execs who are probably making even more. I hate how this sort of thing pits the visible actors against the faceless corporations and always has the actors look greedy... (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	phosfate 2011-10-05 07:15 pm UTC (link)
	Word. The argument always seems to be "They make more money than me so they must be greedy and in the wrong!" Weirdly, I saw the exact opposite argument when David Duchovney wanted off X-Files: "He makes so much money! He's an idiot to walk away from that!" (Reply to this)(Parent)

	ekaterinv 2011-10-05 10:53 pm UTC (link)
	Seriously. And it's not like the actors are replaceable. They put the last twenty-three years of their lives into this, and without them, the series would be nothing. But we never ever hear about the possibility of some asshole exec taking a paycut (and they make way more than the actors do), or reducing their own bonuses -- that's unpossible! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	eleutheria 2011-10-06 08:48 am UTC (link)
	I personally don't see why they can't both be greedy. Yes, obviously Fox execs are drastically overpaid, but I still can't get all up in arms about someone making $5 mil instead of $8 mil. It's still an outrageous amount of money. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

uldihaa
2011-10-06 01:04 pm UTC (link)

This.

It's pot calling kettle when you get down to it. Now if those actors were barely making a living, I'd be all for them. But "only" 5 million a year? Let me play the world's smallest violin.

The "effort to pay" ratio is frankly ridiculous for both sides.

But here's a question: What do the animators make per season? Are they making millions per season too? My guess is no.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	cmdr_zoom 2011-10-05 03:39 am UTC (link)
	I admit, my first impulse is "just let it die already." (Reply to this)(Thread)

	ekaterinv 2011-10-05 04:02 am UTC (link)
	Yeah, mine too. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	platedlizard 2011-10-05 04:19 am UTC (link)
	Yep. I definitely prefer my series to end on a high note. I haven't watch Simpson's in about 7 years, or more. don't know if that's typical though. I don't watch tv in general. /drunk //rum ///where's the beer :( (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	mmanurere 2011-10-06 05:08 am UTC (link)
	I noticed that we never hear about the writers' seven-figure incomes, and figured that they're probably boosting the bottom line by cutting corners there. I might be wrong, but the quality of the scripts tends to support my hypothesis. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	coffeebun 2011-10-05 06:02 am UTC (link)
	Preeeeeetty much. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	whimsy_chan 2011-10-05 06:41 am UTC (link)
	Yeah. Or "it's about damn time." I stopped watching around season seven--I'm continually surprised to hear it's still on the air. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	bemysty 2011-10-05 10:04 am UTC (link)
	Well, Simpsons is one of those renew-till-it's-run-into-the-ground cases... not that I would know in regards to the Simpsons' quality, I haven't watched it in like a decade, if not longer. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	caffeine_fairy 2011-10-05 11:32 am UTC (link)
	So much this, the new episodes are poor, to say the least. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	frenzy 2011-10-05 05:44 pm UTC (link)
	It would be the merciful thing to do. Watching the newer episodes is a heartbreaking experience. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	platedlizard 2011-10-05 03:52 am UTC (link)
	Simpson's is still on the air? /joking, a bit (Reply to this)(Thread)

	silrana 2011-10-05 12:58 pm UTC (link)
	Actually, that was my first thought. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	eleutheria 2011-10-06 08:50 am UTC (link)
	My first thought too, and not even a little bit joking. (But then, I think that every time I hear that Smallville is still on the air.) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	tofuknight 2011-10-06 06:52 pm UTC (link)
	Smallville is still on the air?? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	skypirate 2011-10-06 07:25 pm UTC (link)
	It's not. ;) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	tofuknight 2011-10-06 08:18 pm UTC (link)
	Your icon both amuses and horrifies me. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	j_crew_guy 2011-10-05 01:10 pm UTC (link)
	The most appropriate quote on this come from, well, The Simpsons: "Who knows what adventures they'll have between now and the time the show becomes unprofitable?" Troy McClure in 1995(!) (Reply to this)

	dark_puck 2011-10-05 04:33 pm UTC (link)
	Simpsons is in trouble? Do not give a fuck. (Reply to this)

	brennalarose 2011-10-05 04:42 pm UTC (link)
	They've had 23 years, a movie, and enough merchandising to resurrect a dozen shows. Let it end on a high note. Anybody with the Simpsons on their Resume shouldn't have trouble finding new work, right? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	anidraugluin 2011-10-06 12:51 am UTC (link)
	The high note would have been about 1998. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	brennalarose 2011-10-07 02:05 am UTC (link)
	Then they can take it off life support. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	anarchicq 2011-10-05 04:53 pm UTC (link)
	So. Did anyone vote Nedna? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	kaen 2011-10-05 06:35 pm UTC (link)
	Nope, my inner child still carries too much of a torch for Principle Skinner/Edna. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	anarchicq 2011-10-05 06:40 pm UTC (link)
	This. I totally voted no. Also it looked like Edna would have to change too much from who she is to make Ned happy. So there's that. (Reply to this)(Parent)

veneotaqueen
2011-10-05 05:46 pm UTC (link)

Given the wank about three years ago when they replaced the whole cast in the Mexican dub (who have been in the roles since the premiere, and to us Latinamericans were as idiosyncratic as the original actors) for the very same reasons (and south of Rio Grande, voice actors earn way, way less than the original actors), my automatic answer to this this is "¡Que se jodan también! And kill the damn series already!"

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	luxshine 2011-10-05 09:15 pm UTC (link)
	This, so hard. The paycut the Mexican dub actors was much worse than 45%, and no one from Fox said anything about the fact that they were the only voices the Simpsons had ever had... And the series continued, and all my love for it was lost due to the change so... yeah. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	expeliarbum 2011-10-06 05:21 am UTC (link)
	After that I only watched then in the original english. The other things seemed so wrong. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	luxshine 2011-10-06 02:07 pm UTC (link)
	yeah, especially when they hired imitators (And the original Bart voice, who had been fired over copyright disputes)... Did they really thought we wouldn't notice? (Reply to this)(Parent)

tangentialone
2011-10-08 05:25 am UTC (link)

"It's still a very young and male audience, which is difficult to reach on broadcast TV," said Brad Adgate, a researcher for Horizon Media. "Its longevity is due to that. They can charge a premium to reach that audience, and they do."

Well, that about sums it up, doesn't it. ಠ_ಠ

(Reply to this)