Ugly Betty moves; 300+ Angelenos lose jobs

New York has introduced tax incentives to get film crews to shoot there. Which is great! For New York. Apparently Los Angeles has no such incentives (which I find incredibly hard to believe, as I know the studios themselves get all sorts of insane tax breaks), and Ugly Betty is the first production to announce that it will be moving East.

The Los Angeles-based crew is laid off and pissed off, and they’re expressing their anger in an ad that will run in tomorrow’s Variety, sponsored by vendors who are losing Ugly Betty’s business. From the ad:

Instead of making good wages and paying our fair share of California state income tax, we will all be collecting Unemployment Benefits. In addition, we will certainly be cutting our spending back to the bone, which will not only cut back our sales tax contributions substantially, but it could end up costing the jobs of the people who provide services and products to us. Not only are these crew positions being lost; all of our local vendors are losing our business.

Full ad text and further commentary at Deadline Hollywood. Via Watchers Watch (formerly Writers Strike).

Related posts:

  1. Betty Blue Director’s Cut–Two More Nights
  2. An Ugly Utopia
  3. Auto Manufacturing Jobs returning to the Valley?
  4. GOOD Magazine moves to survive
  5. Sunset Junction destruction: Are we about to lose the heart of Silver Lake to a developer’s wrecking ball?


10 Comments so far

  1. RumorsDaily (doorframe) on May 8th, 2008 @ 3:21 pm

    I’m sorry, are we in favor of tax cuts to big companies or against it? I get confused sometimes.


  2. Annika Barranti (annika) on May 8th, 2008 @ 3:31 pm

    I’m not sure who you mean by "we" (there is certainly no metblogs hive mind) but I personally am undecided as I can see both sides. However, I am unquestionably in favor of people having jobs.


  3. David Markland (markland) on May 8th, 2008 @ 3:34 pm

    I see a big difference between tax cuts for companies and tax breaks for production crews, just as I see its possible for being film friendly AND critical against abusive location managers and film crews.


  4. RumorsDaily (doorframe) on May 8th, 2008 @ 3:52 pm

    Maybe I don’t understand the economics in play here, aren’t production crews just agents of a larger company?

    I too like more jobs, and tax breaks to keep film crew in Los Angeles (and in the country generally). Go film crews!


  5. laexpat on May 8th, 2008 @ 4:12 pm

    To all of you who voted for Ahnold — enjoy!

    For the rest of us — told ya so!


  6. doran on May 8th, 2008 @ 7:13 pm

    I bet half of Californian don’t even remember why or how Schwarzenegger was originally elected. Things would have been so much better if Gary Coleman had won.


  7. Will (Liam) Keightley (feverblue) on May 8th, 2008 @ 7:23 pm

    My buddy works on Ugly Betty, but he’s one of the few that’s actually making the move. We were gonna look for an apartment to share. Now I’m looking for a one BR by myself.


  8. Dave Bullock / eecue (eecue) on May 9th, 2008 @ 11:23 am

    The city of Los Angeles doesn’t tax media or entertainment companies. The state does.


  9. Annika Barranti (annika) on May 9th, 2008 @ 11:25 am

    Oh, that makes sense. Thanks, Dave!


  10. New York snags “Ugly Betty” as California sleeps « California Faultline (pingback) on May 9th, 2008 @ 1:24 pm

    [...] Annika at LA Metblogs writes that an estimated 300 Los Angeles residents will lose their jobs as a result, accounting for crew and vendors. [...]



Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.