This post is part of our feature on Money Losers of 2008. See all 20.
Take-Two Interactive's (NASDAQ: TTWO) Grand Theft Auto IV has made a lot of money. It's been the recent driving force for the software publisher's fortunes. And the Grand Theft Auto franchise is the reason why Electronic Arts (NASDAQ: ERTS) made a bid for the company earlier in the year (that transaction was never ultimately consummated).
But there's something of a sad story behind the glitz and glamor of the game. According to The New York Times, an actor named Michael Hollick, who played a character named Niko Bellic in the fourth Grand Theft Auto, received a small pittance in compensation when compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue that Take-Two took home for itself. Did Hollick earn only $2 million? $1 million? Did he only make $500,000?
Try $100,000. That's all Hollick grossed for himself and his major role in the incredibly successful game title! The Times article says that Hollick supplied his voice and motion-capture assets to the software, and he worked for about 15 months on the project. Can you believe that? No residuals, royalties, or anything else that begins with an r. Take-Two simply paid him a set fee and did not allow him to participate in any of the gross dollars captured by the mature-rated juggernaut.
Well, believe it you must, because it's apparently true. Let's see, $100,000. How successful was Grand Theft Auto IV? According to the cited article, which was published back in May of this year, the game generated, at that time, $600 million over a few weeks. Plus, according to a recent press release from Take-Two, the title won Game of the Year and Best Action Adventure Game accolades at this year's Spike TV Video Game Awards program. So, Hollick's talents helped propel not only sales of the software, but they also aided in snaring a lot of prestige, as well. I can imagine this doesn't sit well with the poor man at all.
Yet, is he really such a poor man? By strict definition, I suppose he can be considered a money loser for not being able to negotiate a higher deal. But I have to doubt that it would even have been possible for him to devise a higher compensation package. What leverage did he have? As far as I can tell, he was one lucky struggling actor who got a great gig, one that made a valuable addition to his resume. Here's what he has to remember (and, I hate to be the one to say this): as far as Take-Two is concerned, he wasn't the fundamental engine of the game. He was merely a convenience to the company. The publisher probably could have signed up any number of eager actors to take the role. Hollick won the lottery, and he ended up complaining that the prize wasn't big enough (hey, if I won a $100,000 lottery, I wouldn't whine about it!).
Hollick got a great gig, and perhaps he can exploit it to secure jobs with better compensation. In that way, he might want to consider the experience a loss leader instead of a total loss.
Hey, I wouldn't mind being a part of a major game on the Sony (NYSE: SNE) PlayStation 3 or Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) Xbox 360 platforms. I'll never get the chance! But, yes, I admit, it probably hurts Hollick to see what Take-Two has taken to the bank and what he took home, after taxes, for well over a year's work. I wouldn't call this grand theft on any level, but I wouldn't call Michael Hollick's salary grand on any level, either. I have to wonder if complaining about this publicly will help his career on a long-term basis, or if it will hinder his chances at future employment. After all, if you were the head of a content company, would you hire a guy who complains about compensation?
At any rate, I salute Michael Hollick. Hopefully 2009 will be a winning year for this money loser.
Disclosure: I don't own any company mentioned; positions can change at any time.
Be sure to check out more Money Losers of 2008.
Warren Buffett, tells us more!
Oil has dropped $13, so gasoline should drop 30 cents, Americans hope
Wal-Mart's new Supermercado concept could be huge
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-25-2008 @ 11:38AM
puhsitch said...
I don't think there's any reason to feel sorry for the guy; he's nowhere close to being a reason behind the game's success. As you said, if he didn't do it, some other struggling actor would. Considering everything, I'd say he came out a definite winner.
12-25-2008 @ 1:54PM
lithdoc said...
Really silly article. Hollick did great, and believe me, GTA 4 would have raked in equally as much money if Hollick was not there. I'm yet to hear anyone say that "hey, you gotta get GTA 4, it's got Mike Hollick in it!"
The job he did in the game was okay, nothing of outstanding value. His "talent" was certainly not the driving force behind the game - there are story writers, managers, and more importantly, the programmers, many of which probably got paid same or less than less than stellar hollick.
12-26-2008 @ 2:23AM
Greg Huntoon said...
Ouch, for sure. It's sad when people itching to make a breakthrough will sacrifice the long-term profit for short-term gain. When you're a starving actor, $100k sure sounds like that'll be your start. But in reality, especially after a 15-month commitment, you're making a barely decent hourly with no return on your investment (in this case, your time).
Doesn't help that there will always be someone behind you willing to take the deal if you decide to hold out on your contract negotiations.
12-26-2008 @ 12:29PM
lithdoc said...
Some more information about hollick. Here is what NY times say about Hollick: "Hollick was paid about $1,050 a day for his work on the game, about 50% more than the standard Screen Actors Guild-negotiated rate for actors."
Does not seem at all bad for someone who is virtually unknown to the masses. Enough whining, I'm sure there are tons of people who would have done this job for even less.
12-26-2008 @ 2:44PM
Chris said...
I'd be willing to give my shot at it for a $100k w/ no complaints at all!! Now if they had stated a bonus might come later.. that would merit complaining on his part!?!
12-26-2008 @ 3:07PM
nindmspcure said...
I don't think anybody knew who he was before GTA-IV. I'm sure he'll do better than Chris Bellard, the guy who did the voice for CJ in Grand Theft Auto-San Andreas.
12-26-2008 @ 7:07PM
gerard said...
whoever wrote this piece.. it's all over the place.. first you say 'can you believe this guy spent 15 months working on a project for $100,00? Then you say he's whining over a 'lottery win'. I couldn't keep up with the mercurial nature of your story-telling. Ever hear of derailed thought, I think you have a touch of that, writer!