Return to Website

The Lee Majors Forum

Lets talk Lee

The Lee Majors Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: Re: Give Lee his money, by Paul


I find it very interesting that Lees real Brother or Sister are never mentioned in his BIO. Lee was the lucky one. Does anyone really care about the real story about a family torn apart by selfish relatives?



Oh and by the way...no big deal being a Kentucky Colonel. Lee maybe a good ambassador of good will, but you too can become a Kentucky Colonel!

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Since Paul's thread has been moved so far down the page, I thought I would reply in a new thread.



A friend recently sent me an article about LM, FF and royalties. It was quite clear in this article, by a guy who was involved with the agency that marketed FF's famous poster, that LM was apparently aware back then that he was not being paid royalties contractualy due to him.



I found it interesting that first he is ripped off by Universal over the royalties. Even before that he is jerked around in regards to a new series. Then FF gets such a great deal on rayalties and the poster's popularity zooms into the stratosphere, in part due to his efforts, even according to this article my friend sent. Suddenly he is Mr. FF. What a slap in the face.



I remember the famous People article, the one with him and FF on the cover. In it, the interviewer, as I recall, mentioned that her career was waxing and his waning. At the time, considering how big he was, I thought this was awfully rude. Hell, his show was still in the top ten! Lee reportedly joked that he didnít mind being referred to as Mr. FF. My guess is he did mind. Most men would, especially from LMís generation. How gracious of him to make light of it in spite of its likely irritation.



This certainly sheds light on why he would peruse Universal. I would guess that the reason for his tough contract negotiations years ago were the result of Universalís failure to pass on his share of the royalties? How unfortunate that he came out the bad guy in all that, at least in the eyes of Hollywood insiders, according to the A&E bio.



Perhaps the recent bio on A&E brought this back to the forefront for him? After all, in the editing of the bio, it made it look as though he was the hard-nosed negotiator for no particular reason other than ego. Apparently, that wasnít the case, at least not to him?



The bio failed to mention the breech of contract on the royalties. This was a troubling aspect of the bio, since I hate to hear anything bad about my heroes! It made him look selfish and demanding. I am glad to see that there was likely a reason for his behavior then and now.



Whew! Image restored!

Re: Re: Re: Give Lee his money, by Paul


Rhetorical questions or ones that have an answer?



Maybe I'll add a few myself.



Since when has negotiating contracts for work done been a subject open to the public for debate and speculation as to the motives or 'niceness' of the parties involved?

In recent times, for instance, James Gandolfini has refused to return to the Sopranos TV series whilst unresolved contractual issues remain. The 'company' on the other side of the negotiating table never identifies the individuals involved in negotiating, after all this is what they do best, right?

Why should the celebrity be targeted with adverse publicity because they negotiate for their rights, their skills, their name, and future use of their work?

Apart from salaries, rights and royalties are a BIG issue. Because there are often many parties involved things can also become very complicated.

It is seemingly a David & Goliath type encounter. As someone once told me - in business, noone cares if youre a nice person, they care if you get the job done as efficiently as possible, and if you bring a smile to the wielding of your expertise - even better.



Regarding the BIO. I think 'ME' missed the point.



The word 'bio'.... referring to the life of the subject, in this case the acting career of said subject - Lee Majors (aka HLY).



It is prudent to select only relevant material, especially when there are time constraints, and so much in the bio was a little rushed through there seemed to be more than enough material.



As to what you refer re family - that is for the parties involved, it is a private matter. Because a celebrity happens to be in the public eye because of the profession they are in, does not give people the right to know every little thing about them, and/or especially their family.



"but you too can become a Kentucky Colonel! " Ah, so are you? How far along the road towards this are you?!

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:


I find it very interesting that Lees real Brother or Sister are never mentioned in his BIO. Lee was the lucky one. Does anyone really care about the real story about a family torn apart by selfish relatives?



Oh and by the way...no big deal being a Kentucky Colonel. Lee maybe a good ambassador of good will, but you too can become a Kentucky Colonel!

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Since Paul's thread has been moved so far down the page, I thought I would reply in a new thread.



A friend recently sent me an article about LM, FF and royalties. It was quite clear in this article, by a guy who was involved with the agency that marketed FF's famous poster, that LM was apparently aware back then that he was not being paid royalties contractualy due to him.



I found it interesting that first he is ripped off by Universal over the royalties. Even before that he is jerked around in regards to a new series. Then FF gets such a great deal on rayalties and the poster's popularity zooms into the stratosphere, in part due to his efforts, even according to this article my friend sent. Suddenly he is Mr. FF. What a slap in the face.



I remember the famous People article, the one with him and FF on the cover. In it, the interviewer, as I recall, mentioned that her career was waxing and his waning. At the time, considering how big he was, I thought this was awfully rude. Hell, his show was still in the top ten! Lee reportedly joked that he didnít mind being referred to as Mr. FF. My guess is he did mind. Most men would, especially from LMís generation. How gracious of him to make light of it in spite of its likely irritation.



This certainly sheds light on why he would peruse Universal. I would guess that the reason for his tough contract negotiations years ago were the result of Universalís failure to pass on his share of the royalties? How unfortunate that he came out the bad guy in all that, at least in the eyes of Hollywood insiders, according to the A&E bio.



Perhaps the recent bio on A&E brought this back to the forefront for him? After all, in the editing of the bio, it made it look as though he was the hard-nosed negotiator for no particular reason other than ego. Apparently, that wasnít the case, at least not to him?



The bio failed to mention the breech of contract on the royalties. This was a troubling aspect of the bio, since I hate to hear anything bad about my heroes! It made him look selfish and demanding. I am glad to see that there was likely a reason for his behavior then and now.



Whew! Image restored!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Give Lee his money, by Paul


This post further down the page details further information re Kentucky Colonels:



(More Kentucky Colonel info By Mavisdavis 04/17/03 04:31:29 PM

Re: More Kentucky Colonel info By Little Red Haired Girl 04/20/03 09:02:33 PM)






--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:


Rhetorical questions or ones that have an answer?



Maybe I'll add a few myself.



Since when has negotiating contracts for work done been a subject open to the public for debate and speculation as to the motives or 'niceness' of the parties involved?

In recent times, for instance, James Gandolfini has refused to return to the Sopranos TV series whilst unresolved contractual issues remain. The 'company' on the other side of the negotiating table never identifies the individuals involved in negotiating, after all this is what they do best, right?

Why should the celebrity be targeted with adverse publicity because they negotiate for their rights, their skills, their name, and future use of their work?

Apart from salaries, rights and royalties are a BIG issue. Because there are often many parties involved things can also become very complicated.

It is seemingly a David & Goliath type encounter. As someone once told me - in business, noone cares if youre a nice person, they care if you get the job done as efficiently as possible, and if you bring a smile to the wielding of your expertise - even better.



Regarding the BIO. I think 'ME' missed the point.



The word 'bio'.... referring to the life of the subject, in this case the acting career of said subject - Lee Majors (aka HLY).



It is prudent to select only relevant material, especially when there are time constraints, and so much in the bio was a little rushed through there seemed to be more than enough material.



As to what you refer re family - that is for the parties involved, it is a private matter. Because a celebrity happens to be in the public eye because of the profession they are in, does not give people the right to know every little thing about them, and/or especially their family.



"but you too can become a Kentucky Colonel! " Ah, so are you? How far along the road towards this are you?!

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:


I find it very interesting that Lees real Brother or Sister are never mentioned in his BIO. Lee was the lucky one. Does anyone really care about the real story about a family torn apart by selfish relatives?



Oh and by the way...no big deal being a Kentucky Colonel. Lee maybe a good ambassador of good will, but you too can become a Kentucky Colonel!

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Since Paul's thread has been moved so far down the page, I thought I would reply in a new thread.



A friend recently sent me an article about LM, FF and royalties. It was quite clear in this article, by a guy who was involved with the agency that marketed FF's famous poster, that LM was apparently aware back then that he was not being paid royalties contractualy due to him.



I found it interesting that first he is ripped off by Universal over the royalties. Even before that he is jerked around in regards to a new series. Then FF gets such a great deal on rayalties and the poster's popularity zooms into the stratosphere, in part due to his efforts, even according to this article my friend sent. Suddenly he is Mr. FF. What a slap in the face.



I remember the famous People article, the one with him and FF on the cover. In it, the interviewer, as I recall, mentioned that her career was waxing and his waning. At the time, considering how big he was, I thought this was awfully rude. Hell, his show was still in the top ten! Lee reportedly joked that he didnít mind being referred to as Mr. FF. My guess is he did mind. Most men would, especially from LMís generation. How gracious of him to make light of it in spite of its likely irritation.



This certainly sheds light on why he would peruse Universal. I would guess that the reason for his tough contract negotiations years ago were the result of Universalís failure to pass on his share of the royalties? How unfortunate that he came out the bad guy in all that, at least in the eyes of Hollywood insiders, according to the A&E bio.



Perhaps the recent bio on A&E brought this back to the forefront for him? After all, in the editing of the bio, it made it look as though he was the hard-nosed negotiator for no particular reason other than ego. Apparently, that wasnít the case, at least not to him?



The bio failed to mention the breech of contract on the royalties. This was a troubling aspect of the bio, since I hate to hear anything bad about my heroes! It made him look selfish and demanding. I am glad to see that there was likely a reason for his behavior then and now.



Whew! Image restored!