5 ms·

If I tried to sell my story, I wouldn’t even be able to buy a tent with the proceeds. Maybe 250k isn’t such a bad deal for the rights to his story.

Firmwarrior 4y ago
To be fair, the story for you, me, and everyone else on this site is just the show "Silicon Valley"
- tekknik 4y ago
  Hardly. Some of us are things like protected wartime veterans. This is one of the more shallow insights I’ve seen on HN recently, and is quite offensive.
ausudhz 4y ago
The fact that your story is worthless doesn't mean that a multimillion dollar story can be bought at 250k Just saying
- ekianjo 4y ago
  there is no multimillion dollar story before the movie is actually out.
  - ausudhz 4y ago
    There's if they're willing to invest 60 mil for the movie...
    - Tor3 4y ago
      There are lots and lots of movies which invested that and more and lost big time. Some of them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biggest_box-office_bombs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biggest_box-office_bom...
      - ausudhz 4y ago
        This doesn't mean anything. Is really hard to have a constructive conversation with people that read to reply instead of understanding the point. The production has decided to invest 60 million dollars, these money are going to be wasted ok? They have to do the production, pay the actors, technicians, marketing, royalties etc. Whatever is the case, BEFORE the movie is out, they lost 60 millions. That's what an investment is, losing money in the short term, with the intention to make more on the long run. So, in any case, someone smarter than me and you, decided that this guy story is worth, at the very least, an investment of 60 millions dollar. THIS IS MY POINT! The fact that they did more money, good for them, no problem at all that's their business. If nobody went to see the movie, they'd lose 60 million dollars. Not a big deal, cause the production will make not 1 movie but plenty, so from a diversification point of view, they're covered. They can make the 60 million or more in the next movie if this would've had a bad result. Is that clear? Replying with the fact that movie lose money too, doesn't change anything upfront. Cause the production spent 60 millions, so for them IS A MULTI MILLION DOLLAR STORY
        SideQuark 4y ago
        Given this story has been around so long, and you're such a vocal advocate of others giving him money, how much of your money did you give him?
        ausudhz 4y ago
        Yay, lets move the conversation into something totally irrelevant since you can't argue on my point.
        SideQuark 4y ago
        I can argue your point. You want others to spend money on your wants, then get upset when asked if you spent any of yours on it. Why are you so angry at others not spending more than the $250k they did when apparently you spent none? I'm always amazed how people are so quick to demand others give to some cause when not giving even a penny. So it's not irrelevant. It demonstrates quite clearly the issue. Once you understand why you gave zero, you're closer to understanding why someone else didn't give a million.
    - ekianjo 4y ago
      And there are many movies that never make the investment. Should we put the poor guy in debt if the movie goes in the red? The logic goes both ways...
      - ausudhz 4y ago
        I replied already here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33582060 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33582060 Also, actors don't get paid if the movie doesn't go well? How about the technicians, crew, marketing etc? Lol
        rad_gruchalski 4y ago
        > Also, actors don't get paid if the movie doesn't go well? Sometimes they don’t. It depends on what deal they are on. Heh, you need to follow your own advice you gave to some random person on this website some days ago. You should google before you say something.
        ekianjo 4y ago
        > get paid if the movie doesn't go well? There's something called contracts and not all actors are paid in the same way. "LOL" as you said.

Firmwarrior 4y ago

To be fair, the story for you, me, and everyone else on this site is just the show "Silicon Valley"

tekknik 4y ago
Hardly. Some of us are things like protected wartime veterans. This is one of the more shallow insights I’ve seen on HN recently, and is quite offensive.

ausudhz 4y ago

The fact that your story is worthless doesn't mean that a multimillion dollar story can be bought at 250k Just saying

ekianjo 4y ago
there is no multimillion dollar story before the movie is actually out.
- ausudhz 4y ago
  There's if they're willing to invest 60 mil for the movie...
  - Tor3 4y ago
    There are lots and lots of movies which invested that and more and lost big time. Some of them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biggest_box-office_bombs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biggest_box-office_bom...
    - ausudhz 4y ago
      This doesn't mean anything. Is really hard to have a constructive conversation with people that read to reply instead of understanding the point. The production has decided to invest 60 million dollars, these money are going to be wasted ok? They have to do the production, pay the actors, technicians, marketing, royalties etc. Whatever is the case, BEFORE the movie is out, they lost 60 millions. That's what an investment is, losing money in the short term, with the intention to make more on the long run. So, in any case, someone smarter than me and you, decided that this guy story is worth, at the very least, an investment of 60 millions dollar. THIS IS MY POINT! The fact that they did more money, good for them, no problem at all that's their business. If nobody went to see the movie, they'd lose 60 million dollars. Not a big deal, cause the production will make not 1 movie but plenty, so from a diversification point of view, they're covered. They can make the 60 million or more in the next movie if this would've had a bad result. Is that clear? Replying with the fact that movie lose money too, doesn't change anything upfront. Cause the production spent 60 millions, so for them IS A MULTI MILLION DOLLAR STORY
      - SideQuark 4y ago
        Given this story has been around so long, and you're such a vocal advocate of others giving him money, how much of your money did you give him?
        ausudhz 4y ago
        Yay, lets move the conversation into something totally irrelevant since you can't argue on my point.
        SideQuark 4y ago
        I can argue your point. You want others to spend money on your wants, then get upset when asked if you spent any of yours on it. Why are you so angry at others not spending more than the $250k they did when apparently you spent none? I'm always amazed how people are so quick to demand others give to some cause when not giving even a penny. So it's not irrelevant. It demonstrates quite clearly the issue. Once you understand why you gave zero, you're closer to understanding why someone else didn't give a million.
  - ekianjo 4y ago
    And there are many movies that never make the investment. Should we put the poor guy in debt if the movie goes in the red? The logic goes both ways...
    - ausudhz 4y ago
      I replied already here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33582060 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33582060 Also, actors don't get paid if the movie doesn't go well? How about the technicians, crew, marketing etc? Lol
      - rad_gruchalski 4y ago
        > Also, actors don't get paid if the movie doesn't go well? Sometimes they don’t. It depends on what deal they are on. Heh, you need to follow your own advice you gave to some random person on this website some days ago. You should google before you say something.
      - ekianjo 4y ago
        > get paid if the movie doesn't go well? There's something called contracts and not all actors are paid in the same way. "LOL" as you said.