What if the entertainment industry had been willing to negotiate with its customers?

In fact, the answer would have been obvious to anyone who had followed the story of a few prominent American studios and TV networks. 

As recently as last month, executives from CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox were negotiating with the media companies over what to do about their pay TV carriage agreements with their cable and satellite operators.

CBS and NBC were trying to negotiate an unprecedented deal, which would require them to pay all their cable subscribers a monthly fee of $9.99 for a basic package of CBS, ABC and NBC shows and movies.

The industry would be required to pay the companies a monthly sum equal to the total number of subscribers in the cable and the satellite companies’ respective markets.

If they did not, the entertainment companies would be forced to make a “pay-for-play” offer to their cable customers. 

The proposed arrangement, which was approved by the broadcast media industry last year, was hailed by many in the industry as a model for the rest of the industry.

And while that deal was still in the early stages, a new report from the entertainment consulting firm Drexel Hamilton found that CBS and the other companies in the negotiations were willing to offer a similar deal to the cable companies.

That deal, the report said, would have raised $50 billion for the entertainment businesses.

In other words, a major American TV and film studio was willing to make what was known as a “bargain.” 

The entertainment industry, however, was not so lucky. 

Drexel concluded that “the content industry is not prepared to negotiate for the TV content market.

In the end, they have been forced to negotiate on behalf of cable, satellite, and pay TV operators.

They are now stuck with the burden of paying their share of the content market, and are in the position of being forced to accept a significant increase in their costs for the rights they have acquired.”

The deal proposed by the entertainment industries was essentially a form of extortion. 

While it was a form that was acceptable to many people in the entertainment business, it was not one that was being supported by the people who actually made those agreements. 

That was the conclusion of David B. Stolper, the author of the new book, “The Biggest Entertainment Deals of All Time.” 

Stolper said the industry was being “stuck in a minefield” because it did not have a “good-faith” relationship with its content partners.

The media companies did not negotiate the deal on behalf the content owners, he said. 

“They were being paid off for the first two years, and they were getting screwed over,” Stolpers said.

“And so I think it was pretty clear to me that there was a pattern here.” 

It was clear that the entertainment and media industries did not trust the content companies to negotiate their deals with their content partners on their behalf.

They had been taught to do so from an early age, but that was not how the industry operates. 

According to Brent Bozell, who was an attorney for the industry for several years, it is the content company’s business model that is broken. 

Bozell said the content industry, with its vast resources, is very good at negotiating with its media partners.

It does so by providing a “free” service, and the content partners, who typically pay a significant fee, are not in a position to demand that the content be made available to them. 

In the case of CBS and other media companies, the content distributors were simply taking advantage of the cable industry’s financial problems. 

For example, CBS was facing a significant $50 million loss in the second quarter of 2016. 

And CBS was not going to be able to compete on the same level as the cable networks because it was losing money in the same way. 

At the same time, CBS’s content partners were being “forced” to pay more money to carry CBS’s shows. 

This was because the content distribution companies, like cable companies, were required to cover the costs of carriage.

The content companies could not afford to pay this upfront, and so they had to get their content carried. 

Stollers said he thinks that the industry’s unwillingness to negotiate was one of the reasons why the industry would not accept a similar arrangement. 

What does this all mean for the future? 

Stolipers thinks that it is not the content-distribution companies who are going to “pay” the entertainment-industry companies for their content, but rather the content providers themselves. 

He thinks that this is the end of the “free market” for the content producers. 

It is the only way that they can make a living. 

But Stolpers fears that this will be the end for the

Tags: Categories: About