How Much Can an AVERAGE Model Expect to Get Paid? (PLEASE READ POST #1 BEFORE POSTING)

[LANZO_358]

^^ I too would like to know the standard payment for eds in the industry. How current is the above info (and those throughout the thread)? I plan to start a magazine and the info would be greatly appreciated. Can anyone with ''current'' and ''first-hand'' info confirm or deny. TIA

 

[misscheriedior]

Regarding NZFW:
I was speaking to Samantha Harris at one of the shows and I asked her if she was planning on going out that weekend, she said no because she wanted to save her money. Apparently many girls were going out but it seemed stupid because they hardly earned any money and with the expensive apartments they stayed in and flights to NZ PLUS going out they would have like $300 to go back with. Seems hardly worth it. Especially for girls who come all the way over from the US or Russia.

 

[Fontenrose]

Like actors, models are motivated by the windfall that the few lucky ones at the top get:

Not only were there big names in the front row at Roberto Cavalli Spring/Summer 2011, there were some veteran models on the runway. Natalia Vodianova was tapped to open the 40th anniversary show in Milan on Monday and WWD reports she was paid "50,000-70,000 euros ($67,000-$94,000) for both her walk down the runway in Milan and her attendance at the designer's Paris bash next month -- an event rumored to cost over 1.5 million euros ($2 million).​

huffingtonpost.com

 

[Jump]

Good question!

I never thought about that! My guess ... is "nothing" ... except exposure and a resume boost for thier models which can be used to market them to paying clients. But I don't really know the answer to this question.

some bookers get trade too.

 

[Whats Ur Name]

Wow very interesting read i've gone through all 31 pages!!! the modelling business reminds me a lot of the music business where the musician does all the work and then the record labels just take all the money. I guess the same could be said here with the agency and the models, seems like broad daylight robbery to me it comes across as a cut throat business...

 

[BetteT]

No ... I wouldn't say that. The agent serves a very good purpose .... they do things that the models can't or don't want to do.

• They maintain a roster of potential clients and contacts, so that they can promote thier models. They need to know when to approach potential clients, what the shooting cycles are, who is in charge of hiring models and all of those details.
• They hustle clients ... it's a sales job. So there's calling all these people and convincing them to call you when they need models and there's constant follow up and staying in contact, so the potential clients remember you and your agency.
• They negotiate with the clients to determine what the pay will be. That's certainly not something that most 16 or 17 year olds are not very good at.
• They handle all the billings for each and every gig that their models do and do the follow up calls, late notices and legal stuff, if the client doesn't pay.
• They must keep track of all expenses made on behalf of the model ... more accounting and paperwork.
• They guide their models in their careers and advise them of what to wear, who to test with, send them out on go see's, teach them how to act in front of clients.

I don't know many models who can do all of this everyday for themselves. That is why they hire an agent ... to do all this work on their behalf.

Agencies work for their models ... models do not work for agencies. They both sign a contract which specifies what the agency must do in order to receive commission from the model (get her jobs and collect the money). And that is why the model pays her own expenses to have the agency promote her. She's actually the employer, not the agency.

A sharp model understands that she's in business for herself so she signs with the best agency possible and makes sure she understands and can accept that contract.

 

[Fontenrose]

The model may be the 'employer', yet the contract is written by the 'employee' and it weighs heavily in the agencies' favour. The model can usually not get the terms altered in her first contract, as the agency would in most cases just say, "Fine, be difficult, bye."

So the model needs an agent, but the model is not really the boss unless she is quite successful.

 

[BetteT]

True ... true. The agency may be favored in the contract ... after all ... they wrote it (or, should I say, their legal counsel wrote it, to benefit them because they have to make a profit).

And, yes, a model does need an agency if she expects to find work. But not all agency contracts are the same ... plus, some contracts can have a few points negotiated if they really, really want you. And not all agencies are the same ... some are much better than others in getting their models work and in negotiating a good rate for their models. So, the more a model knows about all of this , the better choices the model will make when it comes time to sign.

 

[anen87]

How about the earnings of regular Top Models non-Forbes/VS/Supermodels like Marina Perez according to NY magazine

in 2004 Commands over $8,000 per runway show

This was at the lift-off of her career; it's not bad considering she is rumored to be around 5'7-5'9" tall too!

 

[BetteT]

True ... however, she's an exception because she was alread a "supermodel" when she got that rate of $8,000. That was many years in, after she became famous and a "name". She started modeling at the age of 11 in 1995, got her break in 2001 as the cover for Spanish Elle. It was 9 years into her career and 3 years after she got famous that she finally got that rate.

In general (which this thread it talking about) ... models dont' get paid anything near that. And that is the point that we have established in this thread and is something that aspiring / new models need to understand. Only one model in thousands ever can hope to make those kinds of rates ... they have to be very, very special and different from the pack.

 

[Fontenrose]

At Toronto Fashion week this year some of the agencies were holding out for the girls to get $150 per show, instead of *nothing* for most shows.

 

[BetteT]

That's fair ... and I think it's a good move, if they can pull it off.

I hate the "clothing in exchange for walking" thing ... it's like they don't value the model's services (or the agency's either).

If designers actually pay models, they will also owe 20% more to the agency the real cost for the designers would be $180 per model. But the agencies train the girls, schedule them for casting calls and fittings, etc., keep them organized and on time, and in the event that on is sick or something, the agency can quickly replace a model. The designer won't have to deal with all of that ... it's a valuable service, and the agency should be compensated, too.

 

[Unknownpleasures]

I sort of agree with this "clothing in exchange for walking" but I must say that it's a good trade sometimes especially when it comes t big designers name because the garments are probably more expensive than what the payment would ever be,but that's probably just in few cases,sometimes the clothes the models wear are not very ad-hoc for the girl's age.Money should definitely be the way of payment.

 

[agee]

Once upon a time Marc Jacobs paid models in clothing rather than money (or at least that was the rumor), is this still the case? Does this apply to both of his NY shows?

 

[BetteT]

I sort of agree with this "clothing in exchange for walking" but I must say that it's a good trade sometimes especially when it comes t big designers name because the garments are probably more expensive than what the payment would ever be,but that's probably just in few cases,sometimes the clothes the models wear are not very ad-hoc for the girl's age.Money should definitely be the way of payment.

Does anyone think that the models can buy groceries and rent with designer garments? I suppose they can sell them on Ebay or something and make some money, but then they have to do more work to see any money. They are models, not ebay store owners ... they should not have to work twice to see any cash.

So, instead of paying a model $150 to walk, they pay her in a garment that actually cost them nothing ... since they had to make it anyway for the show. It's cheap on the designer's part and taking advantage of the model, IMO.

Sorry .... I just don't like it ... I don't like the motivation behind it and I don't like that models will accept it. It just makes it more prevalent and easy for designers to continue this. It makes it harder for other models who are working for a living and need the money. And it makes it hard for agencies to stay in business because they get cut out.

 

[agee]

^ I agree but I am not as worked up over models getting paid with clothes* as I am with them not getting paid (or paid very little) for editorials. I think that it is a long-standing practice and is not going to change any time soon, but I think that it is unfair and exploitative.

I don't buy into the "it will lead to campaigns" argument, not to say that it never happens and perhaps that connection was stronger in the past, but I would be willing to bet that a significant number of models make this "investment" with no pay-off.

* Maybe I would get more worked up over it if I found out that this was a common form of payment (which it may be) as opposed to the exception to the rule.

 

[Unknownpleasures]

Once upon a time Marc Jacobs paid models in clothing rather than money (or at least that was the rumor), is this still the case? Does this apply to both of his NY shows?

I think so and apparently is usually the outfit they wore in the show.

And wow,"it will lead to campaigns" is most definitely a lie!A lot of girls walk the show and not even 40% of them will get a campaign.

 

[Fontenrose]

One model said she got points at MJ, and she was later able to go to the MJ closet and choose two items.

 

[agee]

I think so and apparently is usually the outfit they wore in the show.

He does not need to keep the item for editorials and red carpet? Does he keep the garment for a while and ship it later?

And wow,"it will lead to campaigns" is most definitely a lie!A lot of girls walk the show and not even 40% of them will get a campaign.

Yeah there are models who don't do a lot of eds and get campaigns, even relatively new ones. Plus there are photographers like Paolo Roversi and Peter Lindbergh who are great photographers, but they don't do a lot of campaign work.

One model said she got points at MJ, and she was later able to go to the MJ closet and choose two items.

OK, I wonder if he MDC Top 10 models are also paid in clothes and only clothes (as opposed to the clothes being a bonus)? Isn't this an LVMH company?

 

[Unknownpleasures]

Yeah there are models who don't do a lot of eds and get campaigns, even relatively new ones. Plus there are photographers like Paolo Roversi and Peter Lindbergh who are great photographers, but they don't do a lot of campaign work.

I so agree,especially with Roversi.Sad that when they get campaigns their work isn't really "their work".

One model said she got points at MJ, and she was later able to go to the MJ closet and choose two items.

I've heard about this too.Same with other designers like Balenciaga who apparently gives two pieces or even two whole outfits.Models like Hanne Gaby seem to be okay with this exchange.

OK, I wonder if he MDC Top 10 models are also paid in clothes and only clothes (as opposed to the clothes being a bonus)? Isn't this an LVMH company?

I don't think so,these girls are in very high demand and I don't think their agencies will just let them do the shows and take the clothes and not ask for money.