I was recently going through all the SAG-franchised agencies and looking at their websites for more information. I was wondering if it is bad (or good), or what exactly it meant, if anything, if they do not have a website. Why do some offer a lot of information, history, and show their clients, while some offer only a number to contact, and other have no site? Does this mean anything?

Thaks!

None of the major talent agencies are franchised with SAG anymore. The same is true for almost every decent film and tv agency out there. I think some little ones are still franchised but that's about it. (Commercial agencies might be different.)

As for websites, it makes absolutely no difference. I work at a fairly large company and we don't have one and we probably never will.

My first thought on reading the initial post was that people put up Web sites when they want people to know about or contact them.

Agencies like to do the contacting, and the good ones don't have to worry about the people they WANT to know about them doing so.

I'm sure some of them, if they could get their names out of the agency listings, would.

In other words, agency Web sites would be most useful to the very people agencies DON'T need to contact them.

This seems like a very good reason for them not to have Web sites.

Nicely put, Jim!

Thanks a million! I have always been curious about that, and what you guys said makes complete and total sense!