MIPTV Preview: eOne’s John Morayniss

March 27, 2012 World Screen
ADVERTISEMENT

LOS ANGELES: John Morayniss, the CEO of Entertainment One (eOne) Television, talks about the value of production partnerships, the various forms of co-productions and MIPTV’s Drama CoProXChange Summit.

 

eOne is bringing a broad slate of programming to MIPTV. Many of these shows were produced with partners and Morayniss talks about the various co-production and co-financing formulas and the advantages of working with like-minded broadcasters, producers and distributors.
 
WS: The term “co-production” has so many different definitions.
MORAYNISS: That term means so many different things. Everything from putting together official treaty co-productions among multiple countries, with the purpose of sourcing subsidy money and premium license fees by meeting regulatory and cultural/creative requirements, to purely commercial arrangements based on creative, financial and production partnerships among channels, producers, distributors and/or financiers that are not based on securing incremental tax credits or subsidies by virtue of such partnerships.
 
Television programming that arises through partnerships with broadcasters, producers and distributors from multiple territories is something that will continue to grow. But in this new world order, we are seeing more of these partnerships coming together without qualifying under an official treaty co-production structure. In other words, creative decisions are being made based solely on what works for the show; not what works to access subsidies or other soft-dollar incentives. These “co-productions” are purely creative-driven, not regulatory-driven, not driven by the rules of a specific treaty where you have to have certain talent from certain countries with certain passports; it’s all about making sure that the best creative elements are driving the project. Those kinds of co-productions are very interesting to me because, as an independent, it’s a way to get projects triggered or well-financed without necessarily relying on an initial U.S. sale. But, at the same time, we are not saddled with creative restrictions that may impede an ultimate sale in the U.S. at a later date.
 
For example, Haven on Syfy, for which the first commissioning broadcasters were actually the international Syfy channels, not the U.S. Syfy channel, or a show like The Firm, which was initially commissioned by the Sony AXN international channels and the U.S. broadcaster, NBC, was the last broadcaster in. In both cases, we received premium license fees from our international broadcast partners in exchange for more editorial input. However, in both cases, these international buyers wanted series that “felt American.” You are going to see more and more of those kinds of projects from us and from other independents.
 
WS: MIPTV is organizing the Drama CoProXChange Summit. eOne already has had several co-production partners. Is a forum like this useful?
MORAYNISS: We have great relationships but they can always grow. I don’t think anyone, whether they are an up-and-comer or have been doing this for years, can ever lose sight of the fact that co-productions are about initiating and building new relationships and continuing and nurturing existing relationships. At the end of the day, working with partners is about trust and comfort, which is something that you can only really build through real interaction and ultimately a positive working relationship. So what I love about these kinds of forums, whether it’s connecting with old friends, colleagues and partners or meeting new potential partners, is exchanging ideas. It’s so incredibly informative to exchange war stories because this business is constantly changing and what worked five years ago doesn’t work now. Sharing of information is crucial and such exchanges are always better in person. Our partners live and work all over the world, so anytime there is an opportunity to get together as a group, it is absolutely impactful.
 
WS: eOne is quite flexible in the way it approaches partners and constructs deals.
MORAYNISS: The studios develop their own shows and produce and finance them. They have production deals, they have pod deals and they will pick up distribution rights to third-party shows. Certainly we act and look like a studio in that respect, but we take an indie approach to how we construct such arrangements. We tend to be more flexible deal-makers and offer our partners more upside and more control and autonomy. Decision-making also tends to be quicker.
 
Certainly, there is a growing list of independent studios that are infiltrating the U.S. market and operate like eOne in terms of offering the kind of flexibility that the major studios can’t. But most of them have their main base of operation outside North America. I think our significant U.S. and Canadian presence and our lengthy track record of getting (and keeping) shows on the air in the U.S. gives us an advantage over our competition.
 
But what is also interesting is that indies are more open to partnering with their competitors. A prime example is eOne’s series on AMC, Hell on Wheels, where we ended up entering into a distribution partnership with Endemol where we split territories. The bottom line is that with the growth of independent studios in the television space, you are seeing more partnerships and more co-financing arrangements, gap deals, etc. that are similar to what has been employed in the independent film world.
 
WS: Is it very important for you to always have a U.S. broadcaster attached to a project, or to be one of the first sales that you make on a given project?
MORAYNISS: It’s very important to us but it’s not sacrosanct, in other words, we have a really strong Canadian development team at eOne in our Toronto office and we are developing shows for the Canadian marketplace with all of the broadcasters, from CTV to Shaw/Global to CBC to Rogers to TMN/HBO Canada, etc. and those shows are targeted and meant to be ultimately made for a Canadian audience. Then, of course, we are always looking at a global market. Whether a show is developed in the U.S. or in Canada, we’re always looking beyond that one market, but first and foremost a show has to make sense for the anchor channel that initially put the show into development. Do we want a U.S. sale? Of course we do, but it’s not necessary. There are some shows that we develop that are molded to only make sense if they have multiple markets involved, whether it’s because of the size of the budgets, or the nature of the deals, or whatever it is that requires us to seek multiple channel partners in multiple territories.
 
Our new drama series Saving Hope was always thought about as a show that makes absolute sense for CTV and it’s definitely intended to be an anchor series for them. But at the same time, it was put together with particular creative elements and a target budget to increase the likelihood of a U.S. sale and, quite frankly, the financial model was not very attractive without a U.S. sale at that budget level. Thankfully, we achieved that result with a sale to NBC. So strategically it was always meant to have a U.S. home partnered with a Canadian home.
 
But again, there are some shows that we develop in Canada that while we’re hopeful it will make sense for the U.S. market, it’s not a necessity. For example, a show like Call Me Fitz, which we produce for TMN in Canada, was ultimately sold to DirecTV/The Audience Network. We were always hopeful and desirous of a U.S. sale, but that show was put together in such a way that it made sense with only a Canadian network involved. We always knew that it would do well internationally and that the financial model made sense with or without a U.S. home.