I’m a character actor. Believe me, when I work the pay is incredible. Depending on the contract I make between $800-$1500 a day, BUT the problem is I only work at that rate 4 or 5 days a year. I survive on residuals and unemployment benefits. (Wish I hadn’t screwed up my callback to be in the American cast of The Office.)

Porn performers (I can’t call them actors) make most of their money either from regular jobs or as “models, masseurs and escorts”, NOT from working in front of the camera.

Now, the profit margin for porn is sky-high.

A S.A.G./A.F.T.R.A. production is considered ultra-low budget if the production costs is around $50,000-$100,000.

That sort of budget would be astronomical for a porn flick! Most porn requires less than $10,000 to make.

And that’s for the glossy stuff you can find in your local adult bookstore. Thanks to the internet many producers first put their stuff online and charge by the minute. When they have enough capital built up it goes onto dvd’s for sale. Several examples can be seen in the works of Dink Flamingo, Corbin Fisher and Randy Blue, who video most of their stuff in their own homes. Very low cost, to say the least.

An outlay of $10,000 to $15,000 for a good computer and editing software and you’ve got yourself a business.

Dvd’s cost little to produce. Between $.50 and $1.00 complete with graphics and even when they go into the remainder bin they’ll cost you $5.

And the performers receive nothing after that first payment.

It makes me thankful that I get paid as much as I do, not complain that since I work for a multi-billion dollar company I should be paid even more.

The 2 days/week was an arbitrary number to demonstrate my point. The rate at which models are paid is quite good compared to most of the rest of us slobs who work 5 days/week yet earn less on an annualized basis.

You are right to point out that the opportunities to work at such a generous rate may not be as frequent as 2 days/week, but that doesn’t mean that the rate they are being paid can be characterized as ‘VERY little’.

If Lucas is paying his models anywhere close to the amount that Palmer indicated was the industry average then they are being paid well for the time they are employed and describing that as amassing a fortune “off the backs of others” is inaccurate.

You have also pointed out that in addition to the monetary compensation that Lucas provides, models get the added benefit of enhanced income potential in their other endeavors. That sounds like win/win/win to me. It’s not suprising why models would work for him, even if he is the ahole you think he is.

We are both correct. As Palmer noted the amount per day, you jump to a conclussion that all models film at least two days a week, and that they all make the upper scale. That would be a flase assumption.

Porn Actors do not make very much money at PORN. However, as Palmer stated, they certainly make a lot in the Pay For Gay industry (Yes, that means Hooker).

Many underpaid actors would indeed work for him at low wages as his films are quality made in production value, and as ssuch give those gay for pays a better chance at making the escort dollars.

By my math, $500/day * 2 days/week gives about 50K annual income. Which would put them in the top 25% of income earners in the US and on par with someone with a Bachelor’s degree. I don’t see how this qualifies as “VERY little” or a particularly onerous work environment.

Perhaps Lucas pays his models significnatly less than the average, but then why would any of the models work for him?

Lucas’ perspectives are probably more common than many bloggers and blog readers suspect.

In regard to those that you excerpted in your post, that is almost certainly correct, given that in the last two national elections, LGBT people voted 31% Republican, if I don’t have those figures wrong. Even if I do and they’re somewhat lower, you still are incredibly likely to be right about this.