Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ThatGuy" data-source="post: 1156881" data-attributes="member: 3440">This whole situation is very interesting for me. Some of you know I used to make a living as an actor - which means I have some insight into the world of actual NIL compensation. Many years ago when the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) was formed, the actors who formed the union wanted 2 things: 1) to no longer be employees of the studios (instead, independent contractors, thus having control of their career choices), and 2) to be compensated for the use of their name, image, and likeness over time (read: getting residual revenue payments for work they'd done in the past that was still generating revenue for the studio). They hammered out a standard contract that was eventually accepted by the studios (not without a lot of consternation, as you would expect). That contract has changed over time, but most of the basic tenets regarding NIL compensation still live on.An interesting wrinkle comes with the SAG (now SAG-AFTRA) standard contract for commercials. Booking a national commercial as an actor is a big deal. Not only can it be very lucrative (you can easily make >$100K off of 1 national spot), but it also has some distinct contract and compensation considerations. Basically, if you sign a standard SAG-AFTRA commercial contract with an advertiser, they pay you in 3 distinct ways: first they pay you for the session fee (the days' wages to shoot the commercial). Then they pay you usage fees (the aforementioned residuals). There are different pay scales for Class A network TV, cable, and streaming. The really interesting part to me here: lastly, after 13 weeks (and every 13 weeks thereafter), they have to pay you a holding fee. This fee allows the advertiser to retain the right to re-air your work, but it also compensates you for holding a conflict. Meaning: as long as they're paying you, you can't go and do a commercial for a direct or indirect competitor. Your name, image and likeness are bound to their product.As an actor, you can't just say "hey, I want to buy out Southwest so I can go do a commercial for Delta." I mean, you can say that - but the agreement is very clear that you agreed to X compensation in order to not go to a competitor. Consideration has been exchanged. You're free to take other jobs, just not commercials with brands that directly compete.This is why you don't see the same people in Coca-Cola ads and Pepsi ads. It's also why you see situations like the former Verizon spokesperson suddenly appearing in a Sprint commercial. After years of paying his holding fees, Verizon decided they would stop. Which freed him to go on and do a commercial for their largest competitor.BACK TO CFB:To me, the most mindblowing thing about this Mensah situation with Duke is that their grounds for keeping him could more than anything be tied to actual Name, Image and Likeness. As in, "Your image is tied to us. We gave you consideration (a holding fee of some sort), and you agreed to not use your name, image, or likeness to support a competitor."There is obviously a precedent for this arrangement, going as far back as the first SAG commercial contract.After a few years of "NIL" being an out-in-the-open way to simply pay players to play, Duke could hold him to the actual terms of an NIL agreement, since athlete NIL (on the playing field regularly) is a lot different than actor NIL (on recorded footage). By going somewhere else, he by default can't execute the terms of using his NIL to promote Duke.Anyway, it's going to be very interesting to see how this works out. Especially with rumors that the Big 10 has given its members a solid contract to protect them from this sort of thing. I do ultimately think collective bargaining is needed, if nothing else to have both sides agree on what is a "fair" NIL contract, so that both sides feel protected. We'll get there - but until we do, my popcorn bowl is ready.</blockquote>

Verification: Which team did Georgia Tech defeat in Aer Lingus College Football Classic 2024?