|
|
Post by Maribegood on Jul 1, 2014 2:34:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by doder on Jul 1, 2014 7:28:32 GMT -5
almost $800,000 per year for d.c. alone.
|
|
islander
Walking Docks For A Job
Posts: 46
|
Post by islander on Jul 1, 2014 8:58:58 GMT -5
Very interesting. I live in British Columbia; our Province has done the same thing for years, although not quite as generously as Alaska. Our's has been 33%. As politicians tinker with the formulae and threaten to do away with, or reduce the credit, the amount of filming happening in BC rises and falls. It brings a lot of work and money into BC -- according to the linked article above, " BC accounts for about 60 per cent of all foreign location film and TV production in Canada". Other provinces are starting to offer similar or better incentives to get more of those film dollars. I'll bet all the reality shows in Alaska are hugely beneficial for them in many indirect ways, too. People from all over the world watch them, and want to go there. I've been several times, and it is one of the most beautiful states in the USA. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2014 11:37:23 GMT -5
Believe it or not, I actually have a friend that works in the Alaska Film Production Promotion Program in Anchorage who told me about these programs several years ago when DC was just getting started. He predicted that there would be many other reality shows. More info on the tax incentives can be found here: www.film.alaska.gov/incentives/index.html |
|
|
|
Post by crabber on Jul 1, 2014 12:20:54 GMT -5
I live in New Jersey and we used to have the same/similar program. It was cut due to the budget crisis and the state lost tons of money due to film companies going elsewhere(usually NYC). They just re-instated it in January I believe, and film companies have begun to come back to film again. It brings in lots of money to the local communities.
|
|
|
|
Post by bentwillow on Jul 1, 2014 13:27:31 GMT -5
Governor Snyder in Michigan killed much of the tax incentive program for the film industry (for the most part - movies are still being made here). He is a 'numbers' man so once he crunched the numbers, the incentives looked pretty paltry in comparison to other tax incentive for business. Michigan is now having a resurgence in job growth and looks to be coming back from the brink. Business is especially thriving in Detroit.
Alaska doesn't have much business growth except for oil, pipelines and fishing so any incentives that draw any industry must be considered a plus. Since many on this forum have expressed their wish to travel to the state because of Deadliest Catch, I'm sure realities shows have brought about a surge in the tourist industry.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonesomerhodes on Jul 1, 2014 17:59:05 GMT -5
This is horrendous public policy.
When you have a unique setting, you dictate terms. Just where would Disco go to film DC? All the man vs. element shows? Essentially, Alaska has paid Disco's labor cost. Why not just give that money to a few dozen Alaskans if this is actually about creating jobs?
There is not a production house in existence who is unaware of the incredible Alaskan topography and beauty. Alaska does not need a single frame's worth of PR or promotion to attract productions. If a given show needs a winter backdrop - like The Last Ship, they are going have to figure out ways to avoid using Alaska, not look for reasons to use Alaska.
I have a decades-long animus for marketing generally and most especially when politicians spend our money to burnish images. Marketers notoriously over-promise and under-deliver. But, they are great at claiming successes which are not real. To be sure, advertising goods works. No doubt. However, it is a waste of resources to try to sell water to a thirsty man.
|
|
|
|
Post by devilstattoo on Jul 2, 2014 3:25:46 GMT -5
Original Productions has a policy to hire Alaskan residents in each "department" whether it be producing, camera, technical, production, etc. That's where most of the tax breaks come from, hiring Alaskans. It didn't used to be that way, as the vast majority of labor in the industry is based in Los Angeles, yet the law was revised recently. The shows also bring in a ton of money to local businesses such as hotels, freight, car rental, local property rental, a generous per diem to spend at local restaurants, as well as scholarships to local high schools, to name a few. But we're just here to exploit locals and deceive audiences right?
|
|
|
|
Post by seasick on Jul 2, 2014 6:05:52 GMT -5
Just where would Disco go to film DC? All the man vs. element shows? Well, where did they go to film Yukon Men (presuming the title isn't misleading)? Or a significant part of Ice Road Truckers? I'm pretty sure the Canadians fishes crab too. A lot of those shows are also filmed in the lower 48, and there appears to be lots of elements there too. Discovery are not looking for the most magnificent nature, they are looking to get as many viewers as possible for the least amount of money. I have no doubt they wouldn't hesitate to replace DC if the production costs rose too much. Yes, they do have a big audience, but most of them would be happy watching reruns, or could easily be guided over to other shows. Besides, when most of the shows are scripted, they can be filmed anywhere. |
|
|
|
Post by scottsgirl on Jul 2, 2014 23:23:57 GMT -5
Alaska has received a boom lately in reality shows: Deadliest Catch, Gold Rush, Alaska State Troopers, Alaska Bush People, and I know I'm missing another one. As a life long Alaskan, I have mixed feelings regarding this. It is attracting attention to our state. We've always had a lot of tourists, but now they are asking tour guides about these shows. I took my mother-in-law shopping, and we spotted Deadliest Catch shirts and hoodies at the local grocery store. I know Discovery Chanel is making a profit here.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonesomerhodes on Jul 3, 2014 2:56:40 GMT -5
One man's millions in subsidies is another man's millions of plunder.
If DC can't produce a viable show in Alaska, fine. The issue here is that they can not create DC without Alaska and they would still be making millions from it. This one show has translated into tens of millions in value to the brand aside from the millions in cash profit generated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maribegood on Jul 3, 2014 5:16:37 GMT -5
Yes, it has, but the law applies across the board, not selectively. The credit is for filming in Alaska, they aren't making anyone submit a position paper on whether or not they could film elsewhere and making the credit based on that.
I am no Discovery fangirl, but what they are doing is perfectly legal, they are taking advantage of a tax break open to all companies filming in Alaska.
My concern is that someone is crunching the numbers for this program every year to ensure that it is actually bringing in money, and not actually costing more than the revenue being generated by the shows. Alaska depends on natural resources and tourism for a tax base, you can't blame them for trying to enhance the attraction of either, or blame companies or people for using the tax breaks available.
|
|
