Comments by "buddermonger2000" (@buddermonger2000) on "Man Carrying Thing" channel.

I think the best way to actually put that line at the end of it is not "I'm evil" it's a bit more sad: "I'm broke" Streaming makes nowhere near the money per show TV did. So... no money. Most shows get few if any views. Again, no money. And then finally probably a plurality to even a majority of the audience just wants to watch re-runs of nostalgia shows so it's just like "What am i even paying you for?" Edit: Due to difficulties with allocation of budgets and amount of money brought in vs spent, more than a few of these writers are costing more than they give back.
2
@Pennis-Prager They also often can't actually spend it. It's "wealth" which means the only way to do anything with it is to sell it. Usually, the wealth is tied to their own company, and trying to sell either bleeds you of control at best or tanks your own value at worst.
2
@gefadsfrrewdgfbt5811 My brother in Christ, if you cost someone more than they bring in, why are they paying you?
1
@criticalthinker3262 Why do you think they actually are? "Tons of people are watching, and they're raking in billions!" Yeah, no. The ad rates are down, so ad revenue is low, Less and less people are watching and they're slowly bleeding subscribers. And even Netflix had been pushing it because they put quantity over quality as well as their overall model of the entire show dumped at once, it meant few shows are seen and thus actually making any money for them (which is where the meme of them greenlighting everything came from). If they wanted to strike, the Iron was hot in 2020 while riding the covid high. That's when they made in all of their profits. Now? Nah.
1
@criticalthinker3262 They do tend to be fired so yeah
1
@criticalthinker3262 It's not dodging the question. You don't get paid if you tank the value. You get fired. Which is effectively a negative salary. If negligence can be proven, you get sued for damages, which means you pay them and now you've actually reached negative in ways very few lower tier workers ever do. Now, as your comment about paying more workers if they weren't being paid millions, you've completely ignored my statement. The issue is that the workers aren't paying for themselves because they don't bring in the required attention and income from their projects. The solution isn't more workers, but instead better workers. So these workers are incurring a loss on the company due to their shit work. And that's why they're broke. Even if they paying for 300 extra workers by completely pulling his salary (and those people still wouldn't be paid near at all as that's below the poverty line by a significant margin, so it's actually going to be closer to 20 because those writers are paid 6 figures), it's not going to justify the income that they're demanding, because they don't bring in enough money to do so.
1
I need to look at their personal salaries but I once saw Bezos or Musk only making less than 6 figures in personal salary. Or maybe low 6 figures (under 200k), and while definitely quite a bit of money, usually not enough to make a significant dent into something like this.
1
Yeah, actually, you can. You can earn 27 million and be 30 million in the hole, and then it doesn't matter. You made 27 million, but you're still 3 million in the hole. You still lost money.
1
@Zionswasd Actually It means precisely that because the people who don't pay that quickly enough end up going under as their debt increases its interest and makes them pay even more long-term.
1