Julie, between watching 'Home coming Queen" and this video, you made me spit on my computer 3 times laughing, thanks, oh, bye the way, you are still smok'in hot!
Memo to Membership First: Julie received her SAG card in 1980 while still residing in San Francisco (she moved back to Los Angeles a few years later). If Lily did not give Julie her SAG card, she would not be in favor of U4S.
First of all, I had moved to LA when I got my SAG card for Incredible Shrinking Woman and Lily Tomlin helped me get it. But having a SAG card is not why I'm in favor of U4S. I think it's crazy that there are 2 unions and I believe if the unions got together our one contract would be the strongest contract it could be.
Regarding merging SAG's P&H and Aftra's H&R, two words: Mercer Report. Look it up. Regarding doubling Management's tip money of $23... ? Do you honestly think, Boh, that that's what Doug Allen was fighting for? The original Negotiating Committee didn't want a fixed amount... they wanted a fair formula that would protect the SAG actor in the future of New Media. A FAIR percentage from dollar one. The actors only made money if the Studio's did. Who the hell have you been talking to?
I suggested that doubling the rate we got for online streaming wouldnt have satisfied critics of the TV/Theatrical deal (and it wouldnt have). Your response being its not about a fixed payment, its about getting a first-dollar share of the distributors gross receipts (DGR). Two things:
1) Getting a first-dollar DGR formula for streaming in this round of negotiations was the longest of longshots. It became a pipe dream after DGA & WGA made their deals and a complete fantasy after AFTRA's.
2) A pure DGR formula would still have left critics VERY unhappy since so little money is changing hands for streaming rights. There will be plenty of examples where actors make more even from this contract's modest fixed payments. Whats critical (that you seem incapable of understanding) is that we signed a deal which provides BOTH models of compensation for streaming: fixed payment & DGR. Fixed pays only apply for the 1st year then move to a DGR formula allowing us to see which works best.
If streaming becomes a working business model & producers are raking it in, well move the DGR part of the formula closer to dollar one (progressively shortening the 1-yr fixed pay window) over successive negotiations. But its unsure if streaming will be profitable. The only reliably profitable online platform is electronic sell-through (iTunes, etc.) where people pay to download and own programming. And we have first-dollar DGR there. Even those profits are tiny compared to network
We understand, Julie. You've forgotten about the residuals that paid your rent and that you qualified for SAG Health Insurance before you started making a name for yourself. Now you have a pension which I'm sure you're thanking God for now that... you know... you're not working as much. Did you know that if UforS was in power 30 years ago your career would have been working at Starbucks to afford the gas to get to an open mic? Management is supporting UforS. Doesn't that tell you something?
Rubbish. Bruce Dow who runs our P&H plans says the differences between the SAG and AFTRA plans are NO REASON not to merge. Unions with different benefits plans merge all the time. Example: airline personnel are usually represented by separate unions (pilots, attendants, mechanics) in different companies. Each has its own differently structured benefits plan. Yet when the airlines merge so do the unions and so do their plans. It's not always quick & easy, but they ultimately get it done.
It's pretty simple. Unite For Strength is willing to sell the middle class actor down the river to avoid any confrontation with the AMPTP. They proved it with their firing of Doug Allen. SAG will cease being a Union and become a clearing house for whatever is left of our residuals. When those dry up, and we're all working as hobbyists, SAG will be a distant memory ... along with the brave SAG founders who'll be rolling over in their graves for eternity.
Is this the same Doug Allen who failed in overseeing a single contract successfully negotiated? Who was SAG's highest-paid official, earning $593,363 up 30% from the previous fiscal year despite MF controlled SAG's $6 million deficit? Who wrote an open letter attacking AFTRA just months before we were to start joint negotiations with them causing pissed-off AFTRA leadership to break ranks & (much to the studios' delight) negotiate a wonderfully lame contract of their own? Yeah, he'll be missed.
We're assuming you're serious, Julie, about voting in U4S so here goes; If you want a Management compliant Union, vote U4S. If you think it's okay to merge with AFTRA at the risk of your P&H being eroded along with no added leverage, vote U4S. If you actually think that the New Media deal voted up in the last Theatrical Contract ($23 six month residual) is a "solid deal", vote U4S. If you never want SAG to own its own building but continue to flush millions in rent down the toilet, vote U4S...
AFTRA had already set the package for actors. (Solution? Merger.) We could have yelled and screamed until we were blue in the face and all that would have happened is that SAG would have lost 100% of new television, versus the 90% we ultimately lost. We would have ended up with the same deal eventually, but we would have lost our ability to negotiate in sync with AFTRA in 2011. It just boggles the mind that some think we were in a position to demand more.
You harp that a day player will receive $23 for 6 mos of streaming vs $759 for a network rerun. So lets say we went to the wall and DOUBLED the formula. Would you have been happy with $46? Hell no! Youd still be screaming wed sold out our children & grandchildren. MF engage in some bizarre magical thinking allowing them to believe we can get equal to or more for streaming plays as we do for network repeats. The economics of internet and broadcast television simply aren't in the same universe.
At last, a decent Party Political Broadcast - completely saw the sense in it - and I'm old!
Julie I love you
don't listen to me
I ruined my life
now I just drink tea
I'm really old
my opinions aren't bold
I'm just keeping hold
of whatever I can - come back here old man I'm not finished yet...........................
yumyummoany 3 weeks ago
Julie is so beautiful, hot and sexy, and what a great rack she has!
maximuscaligula 3 months ago
I love you, Julie.
Thorpe741 5 months ago
Comment removed
hithr3000 7 months ago
Julie, between watching 'Home coming Queen" and this video, you made me spit on my computer 3 times laughing, thanks, oh, bye the way, you are still smok'in hot!
poppawheelie59 7 months ago
I agree with Julie... She's always seemed like a sensible person anyway, behind the sheenapoo
hithr3000 8 months ago
julie is looking hot these days!
bluestate69 11 months ago
@bluestate69 What do you mean "These days"? she has ALWAYS looked hot.. and most likely always will.. WHOO HOO.. :)
but yeah, she still has it... just wish I know what "IT" is.. I heard she keeps "it" in a jar in her closet shelf..
Kazahmish 8 months ago
I want to give that woman a tongue bath.
pdchr 1 year ago
You are so beautiful, Julie!!
Bannion77 1 year ago
The Homecoming Queens Got A Gun iz still a classic!
docthemetalfreak 1 year ago
she still got such a nice boobs, really cute woman
FuryfighterX 1 year ago
ok 1) why is she so hot for her age?? my grandma is 50 and blah =PPPP
Keonna61 1 year ago
Does anyone have a torrent for her show strip mall ? i miss it so bad. they need to put it out on dvd.
eatthemoon13 1 year ago
Julie's still hot at her age. She's like a hot older version of Alicia Silverstone. Julie needs to bone me, I think.
TheGringoLoco 2 years ago
Yay! Julie Brown!!!
toribaltimore 2 years ago
P-E-R-F-E-C-T-I-O-N!
Jamesisaairplane 2 years ago
Julie, you are briliant! I appoligize for youtubers. Comments should be for compliments, not arguements.
briancfcht 2 years ago 7
Memo to Membership First: Julie received her SAG card in 1980 while still residing in San Francisco (she moved back to Los Angeles a few years later). If Lily did not give Julie her SAG card, she would not be in favor of U4S.
GateStudios 2 years ago
First of all, I had moved to LA when I got my SAG card for Incredible Shrinking Woman and Lily Tomlin helped me get it. But having a SAG card is not why I'm in favor of U4S. I think it's crazy that there are 2 unions and I believe if the unions got together our one contract would be the strongest contract it could be.
Kielan2154 2 years ago 2
Watching this makes miss the "Cleavage Cam"
Hankster
IndianaHankster2008 2 years ago 3
Boh: We hope to God you don't have a SAG card. But, in case you do... please turn it in. You're part of the problem.
MembershipFirst 2 years ago
Regarding merging SAG's P&H and Aftra's H&R, two words: Mercer Report. Look it up. Regarding doubling Management's tip money of $23... ? Do you honestly think, Boh, that that's what Doug Allen was fighting for? The original Negotiating Committee didn't want a fixed amount... they wanted a fair formula that would protect the SAG actor in the future of New Media. A FAIR percentage from dollar one. The actors only made money if the Studio's did. Who the hell have you been talking to?
Bezel333sBrother 2 years ago
Comment removed
HoorayForHollywoody 2 years ago
I suggested that doubling the rate we got for online streaming wouldnt have satisfied critics of the TV/Theatrical deal (and it wouldnt have). Your response being its not about a fixed payment, its about getting a first-dollar share of the distributors gross receipts (DGR). Two things:
1) Getting a first-dollar DGR formula for streaming in this round of negotiations was the longest of longshots. It became a pipe dream after DGA & WGA made their deals and a complete fantasy after AFTRA's.
BrotherBoh 2 years ago
2) A pure DGR formula would still have left critics VERY unhappy since so little money is changing hands for streaming rights. There will be plenty of examples where actors make more even from this contract's modest fixed payments. Whats critical (that you seem incapable of understanding) is that we signed a deal which provides BOTH models of compensation for streaming: fixed payment & DGR. Fixed pays only apply for the 1st year then move to a DGR formula allowing us to see which works best.
BrotherBoh 2 years ago
If streaming becomes a working business model & producers are raking it in, well move the DGR part of the formula closer to dollar one (progressively shortening the 1-yr fixed pay window) over successive negotiations. But its unsure if streaming will be profitable. The only reliably profitable online platform is electronic sell-through (iTunes, etc.) where people pay to download and own programming. And we have first-dollar DGR there. Even those profits are tiny compared to network
BrotherBoh 2 years ago
Awesome. Your boobs are so big and hot, even us gays want to just play with em!
briancfcht 2 years ago
How sweet are you?! You darling gay hottie!
bogmire777 2 years ago
You go Julie! You're lookin' good!!! Wanna come sing at my 60th birthday party in 4 years? LOL
ThomBabs 2 years ago
We understand, Julie. You've forgotten about the residuals that paid your rent and that you qualified for SAG Health Insurance before you started making a name for yourself. Now you have a pension which I'm sure you're thanking God for now that... you know... you're not working as much. Did you know that if UforS was in power 30 years ago your career would have been working at Starbucks to afford the gas to get to an open mic? Management is supporting UforS. Doesn't that tell you something?
UnionUndergroundACT 2 years ago
Rubbish. Bruce Dow who runs our P&H plans says the differences between the SAG and AFTRA plans are NO REASON not to merge. Unions with different benefits plans merge all the time. Example: airline personnel are usually represented by separate unions (pilots, attendants, mechanics) in different companies. Each has its own differently structured benefits plan. Yet when the airlines merge so do the unions and so do their plans. It's not always quick & easy, but they ultimately get it done.
BrotherBoh 2 years ago
It's pretty simple. Unite For Strength is willing to sell the middle class actor down the river to avoid any confrontation with the AMPTP. They proved it with their firing of Doug Allen. SAG will cease being a Union and become a clearing house for whatever is left of our residuals. When those dry up, and we're all working as hobbyists, SAG will be a distant memory ... along with the brave SAG founders who'll be rolling over in their graves for eternity.
Bezel333sBrother 2 years ago
Is this the same Doug Allen who failed in overseeing a single contract successfully negotiated? Who was SAG's highest-paid official, earning $593,363 up 30% from the previous fiscal year despite MF controlled SAG's $6 million deficit? Who wrote an open letter attacking AFTRA just months before we were to start joint negotiations with them causing pissed-off AFTRA leadership to break ranks & (much to the studios' delight) negotiate a wonderfully lame contract of their own? Yeah, he'll be missed.
BrotherBoh 2 years ago
We're assuming you're serious, Julie, about voting in U4S so here goes; If you want a Management compliant Union, vote U4S. If you think it's okay to merge with AFTRA at the risk of your P&H being eroded along with no added leverage, vote U4S. If you actually think that the New Media deal voted up in the last Theatrical Contract ($23 six month residual) is a "solid deal", vote U4S. If you never want SAG to own its own building but continue to flush millions in rent down the toilet, vote U4S...
MembershipFirst 2 years ago
AFTRA had already set the package for actors. (Solution? Merger.) We could have yelled and screamed until we were blue in the face and all that would have happened is that SAG would have lost 100% of new television, versus the 90% we ultimately lost. We would have ended up with the same deal eventually, but we would have lost our ability to negotiate in sync with AFTRA in 2011. It just boggles the mind that some think we were in a position to demand more.
BrotherBoh 2 years ago
You harp that a day player will receive $23 for 6 mos of streaming vs $759 for a network rerun. So lets say we went to the wall and DOUBLED the formula. Would you have been happy with $46? Hell no! Youd still be screaming wed sold out our children & grandchildren. MF engage in some bizarre magical thinking allowing them to believe we can get equal to or more for streaming plays as we do for network repeats. The economics of internet and broadcast television simply aren't in the same universe.
BrotherBoh 2 years ago
I miss Just Say Julie
meghanchavalier 2 years ago
LOL You are so Funny Julie!! Keep up the good work!!=o)
Stephenboi77 2 years ago