14 Actors Shared The Exact Minimal Sums Of What They Made From Residuals Of Popular Shows
While one might be willing to assume that actors from popular TV shows and movies are raking in millions, it is far from the truth, as revealed by actors, who shared the exact numbers as they opened up about not getting fair compensation for their work and were united by a call to strike by SAG-AFTRA, the world’s largest performers’ and broadcasters’ union, on July 14, joining the Writer’s Guild of America, which has been on strike since May.
SAG-AFTRA, the world’s largest performers’ and broadcasters’ union, joined the Writer’s Guild of America and is on strike as of July 14
Image credits: FilmUpdates
Actors opened up about unfair compensations as they shared their residuals online
SAG-AFTRA president Fran Drescher explained what led the world’s largest performers’ and broadcasters’ union to go on strike, as she noted in her statement that while “SAG-AFTRA negotiated in good faith and was eager to reach a deal that sufficiently addressed performers needs”, “AMPTP’s responses to the union’s most important proposals have been insulting and disrespectful”.
Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, SAG-AFTRA’s national executive director, similarly emphasized that “The studios and streamers have implemented massive unilateral changes in their industries’ business model, while at the same time insisting on keeping the contracts frozen in amber”.
Alyssa Miller for Nofilmschool noted that demands from the actors’ union are very similar to the WGA’s and included restrictions on artificial intelligence technology, which can use a performer’s likeness or writing style without their consent or compensation, and a new business model with residuals based on viewership.
Constance Marie Lopez showed that her residuals for Switched at Birth – the TV series she worked on for 5 years – varied between 3, 4, and 74 cents
Image credits: goconstance
Constance Marie Lopez shared a video online where she explained that her reason for going on strike is unwillingness of AMPTP to negotiate and adjust actors’ contracts to the changed situation in relation to streaming, the internet and AI. The actress showed her residuals for the Switched at Birth TV series, which she worked on for 5 years and which the studio is still showing, and it varied between 3 and 74 cents. Lopez stated it to not be enough for her to make a living in addition to it not being a sustainable business model.
Luke Cook similarly answered to the critics in his video, saying that the strike is “nothing like millionaires striking to be even bigger millionaire”, as 95% of actors from SAG-AFTRA can’t make a living from acting and have side jobs to survive, but they are asking for more adequate pay as people who are contributing to the production of films and TV shows.
Many working actors shared their residuals, a compensation a performer or writer receives for the replay of the TV shows or movies they are in, online, in response to critics of the strike and a comment by Disney CEO Bob Iger, who claimed that actors and writers are not being realistic with their demands for fair compensation.
Heather Matarazzo responded to strike critics by showing her residuals that netted in 6 to 9 cents
Image credits: heathermatarazz
Luke Cook noted that 95% of SAG members can’t even make a living from acting and are only asking for more adequate pay
Image credits: thelukecook
Image credits: bestofpauld
Image credits: sagaftra
Kimiko Glenn from Netflix’s Orange Is The New Black posted a video receiving $27.30 in overseas royalties in 2020 despite the show’s success
Image credits: itskimiko
Image credits: itskimiko
Image credits: sagaftra
Kellee Steward joined a trend of posting one’s pay and addressing Bob Iger with: “Hey Bob, this is disturbing to me!”
Image credits: Kellee_Stewart
Jack Bensinger joked he felt like he was “OVERpaid” after receiving 19 cents of residuals for 7 episodes in Stephen Colbert Presents Tonight Out The News
Image credits: JackBensinger
Derek Russo received $1K in residuals for the Loki TV series, despite it being among the most-viewed shows on streaming
Image credits: DRusso97
Armen Taylor received 31 cents worth of residuals in a year for 4 episodes in a TV show
Image credits: ArmenTaylor
Desmond Chiam made 3 times his pay in residuals for Bones, however only made fractions of his pay in residuals on any other streaming gig
Image credits: deschiam
Kamil McFadden only netted $2.77 from residuals for K.C. Undercover and brought attention to a negative amount in his payroll
Image credits: Kamil_McFadden
Stephen Glickman received no residuals for Nickelodeon’s Big Time Rush, which was played on Netflix for two years
Image credits: StephenGlickman
“This should help so much this month!” actor Kris Lofton commented on $31.86 of residuals for an entire month
Image credits: RealKrisDLofton
Ricky Horn Jr. commented: “If we broke, just say that”
Image credits: iVanguard
Kylie Sparks commented on having received no residuals for being in a TV series by Netflix
Image credits: kyliesparks
Spencer Rothbell tweeted: “POST YOUR PAY!! Hey Bob, this is disturbing to me!”
Image credits: srothbell
47Kviews
Share on Facebook
I feel like I'd need to know the initial pay for the role rather than just the royalties before I can form too much of an opinion, here... though those royalties seem like an absolute joke, so I can understand the anger.
It doesn't matter. Netflix continues to make bank on Gilmore Girls, the writers hardly anything. Do you not get that?
Load More Replies...
I think... I don't know enough about this to have a well-informed opinion. I think I have to read up on this and understand all sides first rather then gut- reaction to this post. Still, I'm glad it sparked my interest to learn more.
Please do! I've never even worked in the industry, but living and working in LA, I quickly realized a couple things. First, the film industry impacts absolutely every business in the LA area to some degree. And second, the VAST majority of people who do work in the industry have multiple jobs to get by, especially the "talent". Work is sporadic, and only the a-listers actually make big money. And nearly everyone you see on the screen is a SAG member -- you can only be an extra a couple times without joining the union.
Load More Replies...
I don't understand residuals. So, as an actor, you accept a role. You play character Y on one episode and get paid $1000. Then, you get paid tiny bits of money when it re-airs? And they're mad these bits of money are too small? When I work at a company and write a manual, I don't get additional pay each time the company uses the manual - I got paid to write it, and it becomes the company's property. So... I guess I just wonder why they want additional payment for each view, when they receive an up-front payment for selling their image and talent. I'm sure they must deserve it, I just don't understand.
That's because you compare apples with pears. A manual is not bringing revenue. It's more like a patent or a recipe or a license. Other artwork, like music for example also gets paid whenever it's played. That's why the initial pay is so low. The big actors and A list stars get millions. Those millions can sustain them. But for the lower ranks that residual is part of the pay and they rely on that. Be aware that 2000 per episode sounds much, but it's not much when you make yourself aware that it takes weeks to film an episode, and in those weeks the actor can't work on anything else. So if they get only that they earn less than minimum wage. The networks have paid fair residuals, so the actors didn't get rich, but they could live of the money. It was fair compensation. But streaming services want to pay the same small initial price but skimp on the residuals, so while they still earn millions, they don't want to pay accordingly.
Load More Replies...
People who are complaining about the actors striking, why? Bob Igor and the like don't need the amount they get paid, they earn that off the backs of everyone else, just like in every capitalist venture. Instead of complaining that the actors (and writers) are whining and are already loaded (they aren't), why aren't you mad at those at the top yet again exploiting everyone below them?
I appreciate the well known actors having the backs of their fellows. Stars who are making millions have agents who fight for them. This strike isn't about them.
THIS is deplorable. No matter what industry, the TOP seems to skive more than what's fair at the expense of the bottom. Companies posted (some of) the highest revenues during the Pandemic when all was streaming content, all the time. Whaddaya know - they found a way to cheat actors, writers and other workers out of a reasonable share of that money. SHAME.
The main issue is the contracts were written for broadcast television. If your show is on TV, the actors get reasonable residuals. Shows that stream on subscription services, even shows originally made for broadcast TV, get paid almost nothing. Actors and writers who took jobs working for streaming services were generally paid a lot less than if they had broadcast television jobs and then are receiving almost nothing in residuals. The people most impacted are not the headliner actors, it's the supporting cast. On a show like Netflix's Wednesday, the handful of big-name actors will be paid well but other essential roles will not be paid well at all and receive almost no residuals even though they had to be on set for months. What it works out to is non-headlining actors are no longer able to make a living being actors. The streaming services have been making so much content, in part, because they have been able to underpay talent.
I think...anyone who pays Union dues should have the right to strike for better pay and/or working conditions at any time. Of course in an ideal world the big cheese would not be permitted to earn more than 4x the lowest paid worker, and certainly not millions more.
4x as much in earnings would be fine. 200+x as much is closer to reality.
Load More Replies...
Calling all actors millionaires is obviously incorrect and frankly stupid. However, regardless of however much they make, berating people fighting for equal pay just because they make more than you is the dumbest f*****g s**t.
Similar to the average musician making a thousandth of a cent on Spotify royalties.
When I heard that actors are now striking too I thought " Wow, greedy bastards. You already have millions of $" but then I remembered not every actor is a Johnny depp or angelina jolie...
Not taking a side on the issue, but maybe the guys who keep bringing up the comparison with books should know their argument is better suited *against* SAG-AFRA requests, not in favour... An author get paid royalties only after a book exceeds a minimum sales quota. These days, only major authors get significant royalties, most authors will never exceed the quota covered by the advance payment. The threshold is easily in the 10.000 units, while average book sales are in the 2-3000 copies in the lifetime of a book. Big authors are like big actors, they get the advance, royalties and then some. "Poor" actors are like the average author, they get the initial cash and they are done.
I think the point is that *successful* shows (ones who've "met the quota" and then some, based on the book analogy) aren't paying proper royalties.
Load More Replies...
This was interesting. And sad. I would be interested in seeing the total residuals paid for ALL actors / writers for an airing / streaming of a popular show. Like is the studio getting $$$ for allowing the show to air but only paying out the total of a fast food combo meal in residuals to the actors/people involved in making it?
last time they had contracts, SAG didnt put in stipulations for how to calculate streaming revenue for residuals, only TV reruns, so the studios invented their own method. That was stupid and short sighted of the Union. Now they want a better method for calculating revenue for residuals. BTW most of those who lose out are the B-listers who do the secondary roles on shows, not the A-listers who get better residuals in their initial contracts bc their agents get it
The way I see it is the old method of residuals (larger payments) is just about dead. Prior to streaming residuals would have been larger since the network is getting paid by advertisers who are subsidizing everything. With streaming, there are minimal or sometimes no advertisers. With minimal or no advertisers the amount of possible residuals is a lot lower. The residuals the actors may have received prior to streaming are not coming back at all. It is not financially possible. I do not see these strikes ending anytime soon or favorably towards the actors and writers as a result. The amount the CEO (Iger) is paid is not relative either. They are in charge of the entire company, the actor played a part in a series/movie, completely different aspects to the job and the amount of time it takes to perform the job.
I would strike too! What s**t money do the actors really get?? ZERO. They do not get even enough to buy a sandwich or a cup of coffee.
What do residuals even mean? They get paid lump sums for shows and movies.
Yes but that lump sum is often less than minimum wage, and sometimes they don't even get their travel costs paid, so they end up not even earning enough to pay for the cost of travelling to set.
Load More Replies...
I'm not sure about this. Reminds me of those who in the music industry. If I turn up to work I expect to be paid x amount for the time I spend. My work is charged out and my company make a profit. That's it. Done. I appreciate if my work is then re-used I should be compensated (per the article) and apporationately. If this isn't fair, then that is wrong. But I can't see how someone who has a bit part in a show (with a cast of many and production of many more) can expect to be royally paid when the likelihood is the amount received overall is marginal? Life sucks I'm afraid. There can only be one Brad Pitt, Alan Sugar, Ronaldo, Oprah, Cher (whoever in their field) so to argue you want comparable wages is frankly disproportionate - because it's what THEY earn.
Please for the love of God can people who have never worked in the entertainment industry please just f*****g Google for the most basic info before spouting off. The ignorance and low IQs are killing me.
Load More Replies...
What is with the residuals though? If I work at a job for a few years, I get paid for my work and that's it. I don't expect checks for the rest of my life. The girl who played Soso, a minor role for that show, expects to keep making a living for a job she finished 5 years ago? Why? Just pay people for their work like with every single other profession and that's it. If actors negotiate for residuals, it should only be for the core performers and only if it meets a certain threshold. Giving people who had minor roles checks for 9 cents is just going to p**s them off.
Because the entire legal system with entertainment contracts is designed that way. Please, for once educate yourself the tiniest little bit before spouting ignorance.
Load More Replies...
I'm definitely in the "you got paid already, what's the problem" camp. Okay, maybe they should get something for repeats, but they don't get paid every time I play the DVD. How much do they want to get paid? $1000 per rerun? No-one would ever show their work. They need to be careful about pricing themselves out of a market. What other industry has this sort of arrangement?
It's been standard for years when cable was king. The networks make money every time the show airs; it makes sense that it should be divided. I don't understand how they wouldn't know ahead of time; I would think it would be in their contract.
Load More Replies...
Something like 85% of all union members don't even earn enough to be eligible for healthcare. You don't really believe ALL actors are super famous movie stars, do you? I promise you, the elderly woman on the painkiller medication, and the person with two lines on Law and Order, are not wealthy.
Load More Replies...
They do not get paid millions, that is the point. They don't get paid enough to live on. And it is 100% normal to be paid a small amount every time something that you have created is sold. That's how patents work (why do you think pharmacy is so profitable?), books, articles, songs etc.
Load More Replies... 
I feel like I'd need to know the initial pay for the role rather than just the royalties before I can form too much of an opinion, here... though those royalties seem like an absolute joke, so I can understand the anger.
It doesn't matter. Netflix continues to make bank on Gilmore Girls, the writers hardly anything. Do you not get that?
Load More Replies... I think... I don't know enough about this to have a well-informed opinion. I think I have to read up on this and understand all sides first rather then gut- reaction to this post. Still, I'm glad it sparked my interest to learn more.
Please do! I've never even worked in the industry, but living and working in LA, I quickly realized a couple things. First, the film industry impacts absolutely every business in the LA area to some degree. And second, the VAST majority of people who do work in the industry have multiple jobs to get by, especially the "talent". Work is sporadic, and only the a-listers actually make big money. And nearly everyone you see on the screen is a SAG member -- you can only be an extra a couple times without joining the union.
Load More Replies... I don't understand residuals. So, as an actor, you accept a role. You play character Y on one episode and get paid $1000. Then, you get paid tiny bits of money when it re-airs? And they're mad these bits of money are too small? When I work at a company and write a manual, I don't get additional pay each time the company uses the manual - I got paid to write it, and it becomes the company's property. So... I guess I just wonder why they want additional payment for each view, when they receive an up-front payment for selling their image and talent. I'm sure they must deserve it, I just don't understand.
That's because you compare apples with pears. A manual is not bringing revenue. It's more like a patent or a recipe or a license. Other artwork, like music for example also gets paid whenever it's played. That's why the initial pay is so low. The big actors and A list stars get millions. Those millions can sustain them. But for the lower ranks that residual is part of the pay and they rely on that. Be aware that 2000 per episode sounds much, but it's not much when you make yourself aware that it takes weeks to film an episode, and in those weeks the actor can't work on anything else. So if they get only that they earn less than minimum wage. The networks have paid fair residuals, so the actors didn't get rich, but they could live of the money. It was fair compensation. But streaming services want to pay the same small initial price but skimp on the residuals, so while they still earn millions, they don't want to pay accordingly.
Load More Replies... People who are complaining about the actors striking, why? Bob Igor and the like don't need the amount they get paid, they earn that off the backs of everyone else, just like in every capitalist venture. Instead of complaining that the actors (and writers) are whining and are already loaded (they aren't), why aren't you mad at those at the top yet again exploiting everyone below them?
I appreciate the well known actors having the backs of their fellows. Stars who are making millions have agents who fight for them. This strike isn't about them.
THIS is deplorable. No matter what industry, the TOP seems to skive more than what's fair at the expense of the bottom. Companies posted (some of) the highest revenues during the Pandemic when all was streaming content, all the time. Whaddaya know - they found a way to cheat actors, writers and other workers out of a reasonable share of that money. SHAME.
The main issue is the contracts were written for broadcast television. If your show is on TV, the actors get reasonable residuals. Shows that stream on subscription services, even shows originally made for broadcast TV, get paid almost nothing. Actors and writers who took jobs working for streaming services were generally paid a lot less than if they had broadcast television jobs and then are receiving almost nothing in residuals. The people most impacted are not the headliner actors, it's the supporting cast. On a show like Netflix's Wednesday, the handful of big-name actors will be paid well but other essential roles will not be paid well at all and receive almost no residuals even though they had to be on set for months. What it works out to is non-headlining actors are no longer able to make a living being actors. The streaming services have been making so much content, in part, because they have been able to underpay talent.
I think...anyone who pays Union dues should have the right to strike for better pay and/or working conditions at any time. Of course in an ideal world the big cheese would not be permitted to earn more than 4x the lowest paid worker, and certainly not millions more.
4x as much in earnings would be fine. 200+x as much is closer to reality.
Load More Replies... Calling all actors millionaires is obviously incorrect and frankly stupid. However, regardless of however much they make, berating people fighting for equal pay just because they make more than you is the dumbest f*****g s**t.
Similar to the average musician making a thousandth of a cent on Spotify royalties.
When I heard that actors are now striking too I thought " Wow, greedy bastards. You already have millions of $" but then I remembered not every actor is a Johnny depp or angelina jolie...
Not taking a side on the issue, but maybe the guys who keep bringing up the comparison with books should know their argument is better suited *against* SAG-AFRA requests, not in favour... An author get paid royalties only after a book exceeds a minimum sales quota. These days, only major authors get significant royalties, most authors will never exceed the quota covered by the advance payment. The threshold is easily in the 10.000 units, while average book sales are in the 2-3000 copies in the lifetime of a book. Big authors are like big actors, they get the advance, royalties and then some. "Poor" actors are like the average author, they get the initial cash and they are done.
I think the point is that *successful* shows (ones who've "met the quota" and then some, based on the book analogy) aren't paying proper royalties.
Load More Replies... This was interesting. And sad. I would be interested in seeing the total residuals paid for ALL actors / writers for an airing / streaming of a popular show. Like is the studio getting $$$ for allowing the show to air but only paying out the total of a fast food combo meal in residuals to the actors/people involved in making it?
last time they had contracts, SAG didnt put in stipulations for how to calculate streaming revenue for residuals, only TV reruns, so the studios invented their own method. That was stupid and short sighted of the Union. Now they want a better method for calculating revenue for residuals. BTW most of those who lose out are the B-listers who do the secondary roles on shows, not the A-listers who get better residuals in their initial contracts bc their agents get it
The way I see it is the old method of residuals (larger payments) is just about dead. Prior to streaming residuals would have been larger since the network is getting paid by advertisers who are subsidizing everything. With streaming, there are minimal or sometimes no advertisers. With minimal or no advertisers the amount of possible residuals is a lot lower. The residuals the actors may have received prior to streaming are not coming back at all. It is not financially possible. I do not see these strikes ending anytime soon or favorably towards the actors and writers as a result. The amount the CEO (Iger) is paid is not relative either. They are in charge of the entire company, the actor played a part in a series/movie, completely different aspects to the job and the amount of time it takes to perform the job.
I would strike too! What s**t money do the actors really get?? ZERO. They do not get even enough to buy a sandwich or a cup of coffee.
What do residuals even mean? They get paid lump sums for shows and movies.
Yes but that lump sum is often less than minimum wage, and sometimes they don't even get their travel costs paid, so they end up not even earning enough to pay for the cost of travelling to set.
Load More Replies... I'm not sure about this. Reminds me of those who in the music industry. If I turn up to work I expect to be paid x amount for the time I spend. My work is charged out and my company make a profit. That's it. Done. I appreciate if my work is then re-used I should be compensated (per the article) and apporationately. If this isn't fair, then that is wrong. But I can't see how someone who has a bit part in a show (with a cast of many and production of many more) can expect to be royally paid when the likelihood is the amount received overall is marginal? Life sucks I'm afraid. There can only be one Brad Pitt, Alan Sugar, Ronaldo, Oprah, Cher (whoever in their field) so to argue you want comparable wages is frankly disproportionate - because it's what THEY earn.
Please for the love of God can people who have never worked in the entertainment industry please just f*****g Google for the most basic info before spouting off. The ignorance and low IQs are killing me.
Load More Replies... What is with the residuals though? If I work at a job for a few years, I get paid for my work and that's it. I don't expect checks for the rest of my life. The girl who played Soso, a minor role for that show, expects to keep making a living for a job she finished 5 years ago? Why? Just pay people for their work like with every single other profession and that's it. If actors negotiate for residuals, it should only be for the core performers and only if it meets a certain threshold. Giving people who had minor roles checks for 9 cents is just going to p**s them off.
Because the entire legal system with entertainment contracts is designed that way. Please, for once educate yourself the tiniest little bit before spouting ignorance.
Load More Replies... I'm definitely in the "you got paid already, what's the problem" camp. Okay, maybe they should get something for repeats, but they don't get paid every time I play the DVD. How much do they want to get paid? $1000 per rerun? No-one would ever show their work. They need to be careful about pricing themselves out of a market. What other industry has this sort of arrangement?
It's been standard for years when cable was king. The networks make money every time the show airs; it makes sense that it should be divided. I don't understand how they wouldn't know ahead of time; I would think it would be in their contract.
Load More Replies... Something like 85% of all union members don't even earn enough to be eligible for healthcare. You don't really believe ALL actors are super famous movie stars, do you? I promise you, the elderly woman on the painkiller medication, and the person with two lines on Law and Order, are not wealthy.
Load More Replies... They do not get paid millions, that is the point. They don't get paid enough to live on. And it is 100% normal to be paid a small amount every time something that you have created is sold. That's how patents work (why do you think pharmacy is so profitable?), books, articles, songs etc.
Load More Replies... 
117
87