Models Switching Agencies

[Paws]

^She is still on Elmer Olsen's website - I think she switched DNA to IMG but Elmer is still her mother agent.

 

[Yorka]

Masha Tyelna: Joy -> Elite Milan

 

[modela]

^She is still on Elmer Olsen's website - I think she switched DNA to IMG but Elmer is still her mother agent.

What does this mean to Elmer's relationship with DNA? Is Tara the only one switching or are the other Olsen models leaving?

 

[Pricciao]

Some info behind Karmen's & Anna's agency switches i assume (via THE CUT). They sued Next!

I hope Next would be quiet a bit after this, they keep acting like they are sharps. I really don't care, but these suing, scratching models and abuse things are really annoying.

 

[markese91]

I'm kinda hellbent on figuring out the Soul Artist Men's Board ASAP. I saw that you guys already have River Viiperi and Simon Nessman, here are a few more:

Arthur Sales- from Major NY
Lowell Tautchin-from Major NY
Patrick Kafka- from Major NY
Seth Kuhlmann- from Major NY

That's all that I have small but I think it's a pretty strong board all things considered. If anyone knows anyone else I'd love to hear about them!

 

[SoBlonde]

Wow, yeah, they have some good guys over there. I'm glad Lowell Tautchin is there. I think he could do well with some personal development.

Just curious, I was wondering on how any of you obtain your information? Agency blogs?

 

[markese91]

Agency Blogs, other Fashion Blogs as well as just paying attention to the credits.

 

[mainstay]

...knowing bookers and the models..

 

[Fontenrose]

Once Simon Nessman's mother agency Mode Models pulls him from Major to Soul no doubt the rest of their men (like Lowell) will follow suit. There's a fair number of them.

 

[Flashbang]

Jason Kanner leaves Major Model Management and takes male talent

The buzz at fashion photographer Morgan Miller's birthday at the Chelsea Room the other day was about the shakeup at Major Model Management. Industry powerhouse and former men's division head Jason Kanner abruptly left the agency after nine years. Kanner started his own shop, Soul Artist Management, and brought close to 40 male models with him, including Justin Hopwood, Simon Nessman, Sean Harju, Brian and Travis Davenport and Patrick Kafka, a source said. Kanner told us, "I have love and respect for that agency." A rep for Major Model had no comment.​

nypost.com

 

[markese91]

Tyler McPeak- Major--> Soul

Also apparently these models are all apart of Soul


elieschmidtt photography blog

Brian Davenport(from Major)
Doug Porter(from Major)
Brian Shimansky(from Major)
Mitch Baker(from Major)
Oraine Barrett(from Major)

Does Major have any men left?

 

[1FashionVictim]

I feel bad for Major: their Women's board only has Sessilee and now they're losing quite a few top male models from their Men's board.

 

[fritmayo]

I feel bad for Major: their Women's board only has Sessilee and now they're losing quite a few top male models from their Men's board.

I dont follow at all male modeling, so dont have clue about it, but for girls, Major was since a few years like "stuck" at a level, and it is never good for any business when at a moment seems like it will never move up better than it is.

Their Paris office is let's say a failure, which of course did not help the network, and many mother agencies have also let them down in the last 2 years, some of them which was exclusiv to Major.
That makes their scouting to come rather complicated i think, as they have no more network of mother agencies working closely with them,and they also dont have the power to poach girls...

i m not exactly optimistic for their futur... :/

 

[markese91]

I actually think that Major has really been based on the mens board up until this point. Major Paris in my opinion has and is developing a solid mens board.

The NY Mens Board was very solid, especially editorially. But as posted earlier Jason took almost 40 of the men with him and I looked up all those names above and they all have threads which mean that they are working.

Then again now that I think about it... editorial work doesn't really translate into money :/ I mean Conde Nast magazines are rumored to pay $250 tops for a day rate for female models

 

[cologne_rocks]

Editorial work seems to translate into money in the long-run but rather as a form of worthwhile investment. Without relevant editorial work, you don't make progress and you will hardly receive well-paid advertisement bookings as you are not "hot". I don't think Anna J would have a day rate of $15-25k for money jobs without having done an extremely low-paid Vogue US cover shot in her career. Sooner or later, it pays off....

 

[agee]

Editorial work seems to translate into money in the long-run but rather as a form of worthwhile investment. Without relevant editorial work, you don't make progress and you will hardly receive well-paid advertisement bookings as you are not "hot". I don't think Anna J would have a day rate of $15-25k for money jobs without having done an extremely low-paid Vogue US cover shot in her career. Sooner or later, it pays off....

I think that this is the conventional wisdom and it makes sense up to a point, but I have two issues with this: one is that, between all the international editions of Vogue, Harper's Bazaar, Numero, i-D, Muse, V, W* and the rest, there are way more pages in magazines to fill than there are campaigns to go around, so while the investment may pay off for some models, for most it does not and therefore I respectfully disagree with the "sooner or later, it pays off" comment. Also, being an in demand editorial model like Eniko Mihalik, Karlie Kloss, Constance Jablonski and others seems like a mixed blessing, because she may have to book one or two big campaigns or quite a few small campaigns to help subsidize her "investment" in editorial work.

Secondly, if being in Vogue and other prestigious magazines is both an honor and an investment for a model, then dammit the same logic applies to photographers, makeup artists, hair dressers and freelance stylists that contribute to these magazines, so why aren't they being paid 250 bucks a day? Now I will concede this, I can definitely see the "investment" argument applying to a newbie model or a model who is trying to redirect her career or work with a photographer or editor who she has not work with before, and those kinds of negotiations seem to be commonplace when it comes to runway bookings, but a model at Anna J's level has a pretty thick and diverse portfolio that someone looking to possibly hire her for a campaign can peruse, so why does she need to work (virtually) for free to build an already thick and diverse book? Don't get me wrong, I know that her book should have current work in it, but then again that circles back to my previous comment, that same logic would apply to everyone who contributes to what we see on the printed page / computer screen. I am not trying to jump down your throat cologne, but this is just a hot button thing for me, so your comment gave me the opportunity to vent.

* ETA:
Actually, Muse and i-D may not have international editions.

 

[wednesdays child]

It's called economics.. Supply vs demand.. Every model wants to do Paris vogue and they are willing to work for nothing .. So they pay the rate they do .. Because they can..

 

[fritmayo]

I think that this is the conventional wisdom and it makes sense up to a point, but I have two issues with this: one is that, between all the international editions of Vogue, Harper's Bazaar, Numero, i-D, Muse, V, W* and the rest, there are way more pages in magazines to fill than there are campaigns to go around, so while the investment may pay off for some models, for most it does not and therefore I respectfully disagree with the "sooner or later, it pays off" comment. Also, being an in demand editorial model like Eniko Mihalik, Karlie Kloss, Constance Jablonski and others seems like a mixed blessing, because she may have to book one or two big campaigns or quite a few small campaigns to help subsidize her "investment" in editorial work.

.

i completely agree with you, editorial are absolutly needed to get any chance to have progress BUT, it obviously dont give any guarantee, for the simple reason that u point, there is just not enough well paid job compare to the number of editorials.
(at least if u consider only the "high fashion" jobs, if u consider more commercial jobs so it is a different matter, hence why overall there is proportionally more commercial girls making good money of modeling than high fashion girls...)

if you take let's say the 3 months around a fashion week season, that make maybe if u consider the 4 big cities, 250 shows possible to book where it needs around 15-40 girls in EACH!
it makes maybe in 3 months around 40-50 "high fashion" editorials, where often just 1 or 2 girls are needed in.
and it lakes maybe 20-30 really well paid high fashion jobs, which usulally needs just 1 girl.

so obviously it is like a pyramid...at every step it gets thinner, so there is never guarantee that a girl who succeed at one step will still be in the ones to succeed at the next step...

this of course just very general number and very basic analyze, but it gives an idea why there is such number of girls who disapear in the processs....

 

[cologne_rocks]

Secondly, if being in Vogue and other prestigious magazines is both an honor and an investment for a model, then dammit the same logic applies to photographers, makeup artists, hair dressers and freelance stylists that contribute to these magazines, so why aren't they being paid 250 bucks a day? Now I will concede this, I can definitely see the "investment" argument applying to a newbie model or a model who is trying to redirect her career or work with a photographer or editor who she has not work with before, and those kinds of negotiations seem to be commonplace when it comes to runway bookings, but a model at Anna J's level has a pretty thick and diverse portfolio that someone looking to possibly hire her for a campaign can peruse, so why does she need to work (virtually) for free to build an already thick and diverse book? Don't get me wrong, I know that her book should have current work in it, but then again that circles back to my previous comment, that same logic would apply to everyone who contributes to what we see on the printed page / computer screen. I am not trying to jump down your throat cologne, but this is just a hot button thing for me, so your comment gave me the opportunity to vent.

When talking about top talent, it's probably about enforced "loyalty" of the girls to the photographers & stylists. I don't think the Templer/Meisel crew would be amused if agents constantly turn down their VI inquries on top talent due to the low payment rates for editorial work. Why should they use Anna J for a campaign if she refused to shoot with them a magazine spread? It would come off slightly arrogant and substitution is easily given.

 

[bothsidesnow]

It's called economics.. Supply vs demand.. Every model wants to do Paris vogue and they are willing to work for nothing .. So they pay the rate they do .. Because they can..

I agree, and I also think the same applies to certain campaigns. I suspect "status" for some models can come at a high financial cost.

Now I will concede this, I can definitely see the "investment" argument applying to a newbie model or a model who is trying to redirect her career or work with a photographer or editor who she has not work with before, and those kinds of negotiations seem to be commonplace when it comes to runway bookings, but a model at Anna J's level has a pretty thick and diverse portfolio that someone looking to possibly hire her for a campaign can peruse, so why does she need to work (virtually) for free to build an already thick and diverse book?

I don't think its so much about the perusing of her pics. The campaign manager will also want to know if the girl is still on the rise, or at least holding her status - they'll want value out of the girl they book and they'll generally be paying a price based on her portfolio... her price however may seem excessive or poor value compared to another girl with a lesser portfolio who's exposure is increasing by way of editorials or other means (the "hot" girl)... just because a model reaches a highish level of status does not mean that her modeling life becomes so much easier... I like this quote from fritmayo:

and it is never good for any business when at a moment seems like it will never move up better than it is.

(and I know you were applying this to an agency but I also think it is relevant to a model too)

The agent has not only the model's profile to consider but also the agency's profile!! Once a model has reached a certain elevated status they do not want to be seen managing her career if she's accepting jobs that are perceived to be of lesser "quality" - this is where her management is more about restricting her work than anything else. The agency's scouting operations will try to ensure that they'll have another girl who can step in and who's profile they can "build" with those 'lesser' jobs!
The agency will always try to be seen as building.. building.. building.. the profiles of their models.. they do NOT want to be associated with a model who's career is in reverse! That's why it seems (for so many girls) just as they become visible in the industry... *poof!* they evaporate...
I think the pyramid is constructed of smaller pyramids!