>How does it actually work out that that is the case? If WB-at-large
>posts no profit, the shareholders will sue. Do all shows produced by
>WB (or any company like it) produce profit statements for show-runners
>which depict a loss?

No, studios as a whole always show a profit from a corporate perspective. But
it's what the people who make the shows get, which is never factored into the
corporate statement, that is flexible.

It's all an issue of what's called "cross collatoralization of revenue
streams." What that means is what elements are allowed in to define what makes
net profit. If net profit means the studio can hold back only the costs of
production, PR and film distribution costs, all of which can be
tallied...there's a net.

But all too often there's a category called "miscellaneous overhead" which can
be, well, ANYthing, any expense can be counted against the revenue from a show
or movie. If a set burns down on movie Bbeing shot in Latvia, they can put the
costs of that against show A's profits.

At the end, by putting those costs against the show's profits, by golly the
studio shows a profit...it's the individual component of that, the show, that
doesn't.

jms

(jmsatb5@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2004 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)