I know, I know. You’re wondering when I’m going to mention the incredible cluster(word that rhymes with “muck”) surrounding Rick Olney and TightLip Entertainment.
For those who haven’t been paying attention, let’s let Gail Simone set the scene:
Rick’s got a LOOOOOOONG history of meltdowns on the internet. People have some hilarious stories about him, and I doubt none of them. The guy is, to be kind, odd as hell.
He’s one of those guys that talk about honor and integrity as if he were the only one that has those qualities, despite regularly being in the middle of serious ethical problems such as repeatedly not paying people when promised.
He talked me into paying my own way to his ‘convention (which was a nightmare, but I felt bad for him at the time), to be reimbursed before I actually left home.
That was a lie.
Then I was to be paid when I got there.
That was a lie.
Then I was to be paid immediately after (the check would ‘beat me home,’ he said.
That was a lie.
You get the picture. My mom was in the hospital and I needed to be reimbursed. Rick’s defenses got angrier and more bizarre, but I tried to work with him and be polite for a long time. Finally I got the bulk of the payment, months after being promised. But the remainder, a hundred dollars by his account, he continued to lie about, ’til after TWO YEARS (I kid you not), I finally told him to keep it, I didn’t want it anymore and I never wanted to deal with his bizarre excuses again.
Lesson learned, right? Now I get lots of references from people I trust for every small con I attend, and have never had another problem, not one. Every other con I’ve gone to has been well-run and extremely honest in their dealings with me.
Anyway, Rick, who fancies himself a huge wheel in comics (for reasons that are beyond me even though he spent hours talking about himself after the con), decided to start a comics company called Tightlip Entertainment. Predictably, he isn’t paying people when promised. They were supposed to be paid in fifteen days, but haven’t been paid yet and it’s months later. Pros with sterling reputations for honesty and professionalism have not only not been paid, but are being threatened with lawsuits by Rick Olney for having the ‘disloyalty’ to speak out, so other creators won’t be taken in.
A more repulsive display of unprofessionalism I can’t imagine.
Anyway, there’s more, a lot more. I’ve spoken out, and Rick has repeatedly threatened to sue me. Hilariously, I have saved every email he ever sent me (once I realized he wasn’t trustworthy), and in his own words, he lies to me over and over again.
I was willing to let the matter die. It was worth it to be rid of him. But I am furious that he has not only not paid these hard-working professionals whose only crime is trusting Olney, but that he’s threatening them all with lawsuits when HE is the one who broke the agreement and acted in bad faith.
…I keep getting email from other people who have been stiffed by him, and now he’s lost Ronee Burgois, one of the kindest and most generous people I’ve ever met, and Rick’s former PR manager. The reason? Surprise surprise, he hasn’t paid her in seven months.
It’s been the story that just won’t die - Gail’s thread, for example, is now at 267 pages as I write this, and for those who don’t have the time or inclination to read through all of that - me included, because, seriously, 267 pages? - then Rich Johnston has a nice story-so-far at LiTG this week:
For brevity, Mark Waid has offered to pay for anyone owed money by Olney or TightLip to file a suit, if they can’t afford the legal fees. Kurt Busiek has provided a business plan for creators to use the work they provided for Rick. Gail Simone has started posting emails from Rick that promised payment that never arrived. And a number of other industry names have turned up to make disapproving comments in Rick’s direction who has, to every point, batted them back, even stating that he’s now spending more on legal instead of paying back the owed creators. Tim Tobolski has posted one of the infamous NDAs and has drawn the conclusion that there’s nothing there to prevent unpaid creators from talking about it. Other named creators who appear to be owed money include Mike Bullock, Flint Henry, Dave Lanphear and Sergio Cariello. But there seem to be a fair few more unnamed. And now Ronee Bourgeois has expanded on her resignation in her new Mike Netzer-hosted column.
You see, it’s the Ronee Bourgeois column that caught my eye. Ronee, you may remember, was the woman who announced to the world the Taki Soma allegations at WW:Chicago last year, albeit in a way so vague that rumors started flying about the wrong people almost immediately. Anyway, she starts her latest column like this:
I know what you and everyone expected me to do with this particular column. I was to come out full throttle and make the kind of statements and expel the piss and vinegar I am known for. Honestly, I wanted to. I wanted to come out with this huge exposé letting everyone into all the things I know and was made privy to in my time working for you and TightLip.
And come on, honestly, that is what everyone wants to read whether they would agree with my tactic or not. Because this kind of shit is entertaining! And truthfully, watching your very public mental breakdown HAS been amusing while digging you further and further into the hole you have made yourself.
All of which would lead you to think that, well, maybe Ronee has wised up to the game that is internet spectacle, and won’t write an angry column exposing dirty laundry, instead showing restraint and tact in a situation where there hasn’t been any so far.
Only joking! No, Ronee has written a bitter rant:
Just show me one… ONE happily paid person that is or has ever been, employed by you. And yes, I know you say you want to protect them and other such bullshit, so have them write or call me in person. I just want to talk to one. Not too much to ask. I will publicly post any and all statements in your defense and do so happily Rick. Just send them my way.
As for your personal threats to me. Bring it on. In fact, give me the name and number of your lawyer; I really want to discuss some things with him. If you want to get dirty and go personal, well I have no problem with that either. I just doubt you want to go to that level with me now do you??
You say all I have to do is sign the NDA and contract (that you had ME rewrite and last I checked I have NO law experience) and I will get paid. Well, you said months ago that I was being paid. The check got lost in the mail. You sent it two-day air WEEKS ago. Yet it never showed. And now you want me to sign a meaningless contract and NDA that I wrote myself so you can do this properly and legally. You idiot.
Sue me. SUE ME! You won’t get shit. I worked for you. I got nothing. Nothing but truth on my side and the knowledge that comes with learning a hard lesson.
(Of course, it wouldn’t really be a Ronee column without some patronizing commentary slipped in to show how much she cares: “I truly feel sorry for you. Since comparing notes with others it is all so clear now that you have this sick cycle going on. And we can all see that you seriously need to seek professional help. I urge you Rick, to do just that.” Such caring may cause others trouble, but she’s still unrepentant, bless her.)
Now, you may wonder why this column is posted on Mike Netzer’s site, of all places. Well, Mike explained his love for Ronee previously:
Her huge heart became evident in the comics community last year when Ronée stepped out on a limb to expose an incident of sexual assault at the Mid-Ohio Con, in her What A Girl Wants column at PopCultureShock, perpetrated against popular fan personality, Taki Soma. Hinting at the accused without specifically naming him, Beourgeois was taken to task as industry reporters errantly attempted to name the assailant. When his identity was finally revealed as that of director of the CBLDF, the comics press rallied to his defense, watering down the veracity of the assault and criticizing Beourgeois. Though the assailant confessed to a diluted version of the incident and apologized to his victim, Beaurgois continued to absorb criticism for her courageous reporting.
But the real reason may be the role he has chosen in this particular comics Civil War:
In an effort to bring the disputing parties together and avoid an ill fated litigation process, a peace initiative is in the works to bring the two sides to the negotiating table. The planned 346 page document outlining the initiative, lays out the history of the dispute and proposes the following steps to mending bridges and bringing peace again between Tight Lipped Entertainment and the creartors whom they owe funds to… It’s understood that this is a first rough draft of the initiative and that some minor adjustments might be made during the negotiations. The comics community awaits the response of the parties involved and looks forward to putting this fiasco behind us.
Call me insane, but I really want to read that 346-page document. Of course, this wasn’t the first time Mike had gotten himself involved in the situation, nor would it turn out to be the last.
There is perhaps only one way for this whole mess to get more entertaining and indicative of the comics industry today - TightLip becomes a Marvel studio, a la Dabel Bros, and suddenly Joe Quesada and Mark Millar get themselves involved. Imagine the Christmas songs we could hear!





RAMPAGE!
Oh, wait…
Comment by Neil Kleid — January 9, 2007 @ 11:37 am
I like Ronee and Mike, but I think it is funny that there are different spellings of Ronee’s last name in one paragraph of Mike Netzer’s description of his respect for her.
That 346 page document will be a paperweight. Olney will never negotiate.
Comment by KHuxford — January 9, 2007 @ 12:40 pm
What Neil said.
Comment by Tuckenie (Chris Tucker) — January 9, 2007 @ 12:43 pm
Er, um, I thought the line about the 346 page document was a joke.
Comment by Elayne Riggs — January 9, 2007 @ 1:26 pm
People suck…film at eleven
Comment by duh — January 9, 2007 @ 2:17 pm
“Beaurgois continued to absorb criticism for her courageous reporting”
Took a lot of courage to passive-agreesively imply that it’s one person working for an organization who has a completely different purpose than the organization of the actual guy.
Comment by Live Free or Dan Coyle — January 9, 2007 @ 3:31 pm
Actually Dan, it took a lot of courage to expose a story that blemished a respected industry figure who had a lot of support from the comics press. It took a lot of courage knowing the fire she’d come under and personal price she’d pay. What you said was due to her vague reporting, which is understandable and justified. The people to blame for naming the wrong guy should be the actual people who named him, not Ronee. But what’s a small misrepresentation of courage amongst friends, eh?
Comment by Michael Netzer — January 9, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
Hey Elayne, I worry about readers who really think there’s a 364 page document. It almost makes me want to write one.
Comment by Michael Netzer — January 9, 2007 @ 4:01 pm
I don’t deny Ronee’s courage so much as her judgment. Why don’t you ask the guy her “vague reporting” pointed to if it was understandable and justified? Yes, she didn’t name the person, but she described the perpetrator in such a way that it more accurately described the wrong person than the individual at fault. Some of her writing in particular pointed AWAY from the responsible party.
Seems like the major criticism she gets is NOT for breaking the story, but for doing it so poorly.
Comment by Jeff Albertson — January 9, 2007 @ 7:44 pm
Why have no fingers been pointed at the reporters who named the guy? Ronee’s descrption was vague enough not to specify anyone with certainty. Jeff, even you say: “…more accurately described the wrong person than the individual at fault.” Well, even if it’s seen this way, saying it’s more one guy than another doesn’t constite a specific person. Ronee has taken the heat on this unjustly while the other reporters who jumped to coclusions, and later pointed the finger at her when they discovered it was their friend and not the guy they thought, are all off the hook because there’s no one to call them on it. Why doesn’t their wrong guess put their own judgement to question?
Comment by Michael Netzer — January 9, 2007 @ 9:21 pm
New story, guys.
The villain here is not Ronee. She is the victim. The villain is the guy she wrote about in her column this week.
Gail
Comment by Gail — January 9, 2007 @ 10:06 pm
Mr. Netzer:
The problem with Ronee’s “reporting” was that someone innocent did get painted with the ugly brush she wielded: specifically, Jim McLaughlin.
I don’t think many faulted Ronee’s intentions. It was her sloppy practice of journalism and subsequent attempt to hide behind “it’s only an opinion column” defence that irked many, including myself.
Ms. Bourgeois opened herself and PopCultureShock to civil action. I can appreciate why you see her reporting as “courageous,” but it was also irresponsible.
Mind you, that shouldn’t mean anyone should celebrate her being shafted by Rick Olney. They’re separate issues altogether.
Comment by Don MacPherson — January 9, 2007 @ 10:34 pm
I don’t know who any of these people are and for that, I am eternally grateful.
Back to my bliss…
Comment by Barry — January 10, 2007 @ 12:04 am
Mr.MacPherson,
I’m inclined to take Gail’s que and let the old story make room for the new. But being a long-standing fan of your reviews and editorials (The Wonder Woman press release T&A critique from Sept. was a masterpiece), and knowing your regard for criminal law, and completely in understanding of the unnecessary grief Mr. McLaughlin has suffered, I’d like to offer the following thought.
Though it’s easy to threaten with legal action (as we’ve seen with the near comedic overtures from Rick Olney) It’s not at all clear that PopCultureShock or Ronee could be held responsible for the actions of others who errantly named Mr. McLaughlin as the accused in that incident. For such a case to be accepted, proof would have to be provided that PopCulureShock and Ms. Beaurgois specifically named Mr. McLaughlin or left no doubt whatsoever as to his identity. Neither of these two conditions were present in Ronee’s reporting.
Additionally, PopCulutreShock ultimately stood by Ronee, in light of threats of legal action against them, indicating they understood the injustice perpetrated against her by the industry press.
I believe Ms. Beaurgois has paid a dear and heavy personal price for her perceived “sloppy” reporting. While some comics reporters who rose to the defense of their friend by shifting the attention to her and dilluting the severity of the dangerous behavior of someone they wished to protect, still do not realize the professional shortcoming of what they’ve done.
But as Gail says, this is a new story. I only hope you’ll understand my concern for the truth of the old one, which is no less than my concern for the injustice that Jim McLaughlin himself suffered.
And thank you for the wonderful volumes of excellent reviews and opinions. They are a credit to the industry.
Comment by Michael Netzer — January 10, 2007 @ 12:13 am
Perhaps Gail’s que is the best one to take here, Don. I’ll let the old story lay for now. This comments thread hides some rather persuasive powers, it appears.
Excellent review site you’ve produced, btw. The Hughes/Wonder Woman commentary is a masterpiece.
Comment by Michael Netzer — January 10, 2007 @ 4:27 am
Thanks for the kind words about Eye on Comics, Michael. And though we don’t agree about about the Taki Soma journalism issue, I think we do agree it shouldn’t and doesn’t come into play in this new Tight Lip Entertainment controversy.
Comment by Don MacPherson — January 10, 2007 @ 7:17 am
If I was robbed like this and I wrote a story about it…I think anything short of 10 expletives would qualify as professional journalism. Glad people are talking so others don’t fall prey.
Comment by Justme — January 10, 2007 @ 8:06 am
Ronee, you may remember, was the woman who announced to the world the Taki Soma allegations at WW:Chicago last year,
Um … That wasn’t at WW:Chicago.
Google is your friend.
Comment by Jim Caldwell — January 10, 2007 @ 10:59 am
Dammit, I mixed the convention up with the BB rape allegation thing, didn’t I?
Comment by Graeme McMillan — January 10, 2007 @ 11:02 am
Damm Internet Spectacle. Mixes convention assault allegations with convention rape allegations every time. Not your fault man.
Comment by Michael Netzer — January 10, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
First, I should say I know nothing about the indentification/mis-indentification on the earlier story. I will google what I can to learn more on that. I am no more than a fan of the medium here, and don’t always follow the online press.
But my hat’s off to Gail Simone for shining a light on the current story, to Ronee Bourgeois for helping focus it, and to Michael Netzer for giving Ronee a place to do so.
It needed doing from what I can tell, having read 360 pages of that ever-growing thread.
Comment by S. Carey — January 13, 2007 @ 8:36 pm