DAYS and other soaps- question about budget cuts

[MikeGoldy]

I have been wondering about this for awhile. If someone like Kristian Alfonso and Peter Reckell take 40% paycuts, does their guarantee of episodes go down, or does how much money they get paid for the episode go down. Potentially, could their guarantee still be something like 3 or 4 days a week, or does their guarantee go down to once a week, and that is how their salary is slashed. Thanks for any help you can offer insiders

[alphanguy74]

That is a good question. In the past, most of the time, when a "pay cut" is spoken about, then it refers to the actor's episode guarantee being cut, this is what happened when Heather Tom left Y&R. And isn't it what happened with Martha Byrne? This time around, who knows? Where did you get this 40% figure? That would be a heck of a cut if it was THAT deep. It just depends, I suppose, on what kind of financial trouble the show is in, and how much the actors are willing to bend. In the final season of Knots Landing, each of the main contract players (Devane, Sheridan, Shackelford, Phillips, and Dobson) had to sit out 5 episodes, because the show had gotten so expensive to produce, because they never had a major recast in their entire history. But Michele Lee decided to go ahead and shoot EVERY episode, and just do those 5 for union scale, because she CARED about the quality, and I suppose didn't want to break her streak of appearing in every episode of the series. So she volunteered a pay cut for herself to keep the quality of the show and her character up in the final season. Class act.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

Ken Corday confirmed this himself in SOD. However, it was in regards to the show's overall production budget, not only the contracts of actors.

[alphanguy74]

Oh, Ok..... I was wondering where that came from. Of course, you can look at it this way: Either the show's budget as a WHOLE is going to be cut 40%, and the actor's salaries may be cut 40%, or the cuts to the actors might be less, and cuts in other areas be higher. If nothing else, they can cut 3 or 4 of the writers!

[MikeGoldy]

When it comes to acting in daytime, I wonder if people like Peter and Kristian would rather work 3 or 4 days a week, than one day a week, even though they would have the same salary. Actors like to act, and seem to like their jobs more than normal folks out there. But if DAYS in particular is going to survive, it has to focus on its popular core.

[SteveFrame]

I agree with you Mike. I think they are going to have to have familiarity for the audience. Soaps have fed off familiarity for years. No matter how good a story is it has to be about characters the people care about to get invested.

Just like this mess with Melanie. It was hard for me to try and tune in and get invested in what was happening to her because I didn't care about her.

What blows my mind is that for years fans have berated ABC especially who have been dispensing out their vets over a long period of time. They claim that shows like GH and AMC just aren't the same without the faces of Brooke and Alan and Bobbie. And they say a big hole is in the show without them. And then I see on boards where some folks (often times the same folks who have berated ABC) saying that the firings of Drake and Dee are what the show had to do in order to survive. And they are saying whatever the show has to do to stay on is fine with them.

Also some of those are saying that the firings will not affect ratings. But yet they are the same ones who have been saying that the departures of the vets on ABC with the emphasis on new folks is what has drove the ratings down there.

It gets hard for me to follow.

I am one who thinks the firing of the vets will hurt the show's ratings. I think in a different climate they wouldn't hurt as much but right now it will. The writing on most soaps is not that good and with the new age of fan they hold on to actors and characters and couples and more loyal to them than the show today.

Also with the firings making the national media and local news the publicity is out there. Some laid all of the blame last year for Days drops on the fact of what Zucker said and not the writing. If that is the case then fans have to be looking at all the talks of budget cuts and the firings right now as a lack of stability in the show and if they tuned out before then they will tune out again. Because all the national blips are talking about the shows hurting and the genre dying.

So I for one will be anxious to see what this new publicity does to the ratings. I don't think Zucker's comment last year hurt the show as much as Corday and Sheffer did. The combination of Corday, Wyman, and Sheffer was a bad one for days. Sheffer is one who needs strong people around him in order to make it. Just look at him with Paul Rauch and Maria Bell. Look at him with Goutman and Culliton. When he doesn't have a strong producer and a strong co-writer he falters big time. He is only as good as the people working with him.

[DaytimeFan]

I would think that the actors would prefer to work 3-4 days a week at a lower salary rather than work 1 day a week on their current salary. Actors like to act, they also like to carry storyline, you can't have a storyline on one episode a week (although damn if Suzanne Rogers didn't try to make hanging out menus at Tuscany a number of years back look like an art form)...

To answer your question, in the case of DAYS, I believe it's a 40% salary cut, not guarantee cut.

[MikeGoldy]

OK, thanks DaytimeFan, that gives me hope. We could still ostensibly see the popular performers who end up remaining on the show. If guarantees were cut, i would be very concerned

[SalemPlace]

I must have missed this one. What was Zucker's comment last year?

[tylerbo20]

with John and Marlena leaving maybe Maggie can get a storyline and Doug and Julie..

[jcar03]

When they cancelled Passions he also said DAYS was unlikely to continue past 2009.

[SalemPlace]

I forgot about that. Thanks.