The Golden Globes have announced a number of new ways to drive revenue this year, including charging $5,000 to put a film on their viewing platform. But nothing has raised eyebrows in Hollywood as much as the so-called “Variety Golden Globes salon dinner series,” in which a trade publication owned by the awards show’s parent company is selling dinners that offer access to Globes voters.

The dinners cost a stunning $70,000 and consist of “a panel conversation with contending talent followed by an upscale dining experience with a guest list of 30-40 voters,” according to a sales deck obtained by TheWrap. 

“I think it’s insane – as does everyone else, I am sure,” one consultant who handles awards campaigns for both large companies and indies told TheWrap. In fact, multiple campaigners who spoke to TheWrap used that same word — “insane” — to describe the offer that Variety calls “a smart, sophisticated and elegant way to put your film foremost in the minds of the voters.”

“Good God,” texted another consultant when asked what he thought of the dinners.

The expressions of shock are because of the trade’s naked offer to sell access to Globes voters, whose attendance Variety can guarantee because Penske Media owns both Variety and the Golden Globes. Globes voters are contracted to the awards, a new structure that was meant to end corruption in the then-nonprofit organization.

“Variety is not selling any stand-alone dinners as part of the Golden Globes,” a spokesperson for Penske Media Corporation said in a statement to TheWrap. “The information shared in previous articles on this subject was done without any request for comment by Variety or any verification that the deck was veritable. This is a misappropriated deck, not in circulation, and was published by competitive websites portraying journalistic intent with an intent to mislead and misinform.”

Richard Rushfield, who published the deck on The Ankler newsletter, told TheWrap that he obtained it from a client who had received it from Variety as part of sales outreach.

In a separate statement to TheWrap, Variety said, “Stories recently published by the Ankler and Puck are nothing more than reckless virtue signaling from niche newsletters that contain significant inaccuracies and were not fact checked with Variety. Variety hosts a wide range of events every year involving awards voters from across the industry. The sudden scrutiny of our sales activities is coming from outlets that have tried and failed to replicate our award season coverage and events.”

The industry criticism comes as Variety faces a lawsuit from director Francis Ford Coppola for libel over an article that claimed he inappropriately touched women on the set of his new, self-financed film “Megalopolis.” Coppola, 85, said the trade humiliated him deliberately and denied the allegations.

News of the dinner offerings broke last week, along with the info that the Globes  would require films to be hosted on its own streaming platform for that $5,000 “administration fee,” among other new charges. But while the mandatory new costs annoyed studios, the dinners struck some as the kind of ethically dubious territory that caused Hollywood to boycott the Globes in 2022 over the makeup of its voters and the perception that they could be wined, dined and flattered into handing out statues.  

At that time there were fewer than 100 voters for the Golden Globes, so even a small number of votes could mean the difference between winning and losing. (According to the organization’s website, there are now 334, which also means just a few votes can sway a category.)

In the aftermath of that boycott, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (HFPA) was dissolved, though many of its members continued to be Globes voters, along with about 250 foreign-based critics and journalists recruited to give the organization more credibility. Last year, the Globes were acquired by Dick Clark Productions, whose ownership includes Eldridge Industries and the Penske Media Corporation. Penske and Eldridge also own the Hollywood trade publications Variety, The Hollywood Reporter and Deadline.  

According to a strategist who has worked frequently with Globes voters since the show was run by the now-defunct HFPA – and who, like all the reps who will be working with the Globes and their voters this year, declined to be identified – Golden Globe members themselves were unaware that their presence was being hawked by Variety.

“For that particular group to experience what it did, only to be told by the company that bought them, ‘We’re going to do the same thing you guys got blasted for,  but it’s OK because we’re going to do it under the auspices of Penske and Variety’ – it makes literally no sense,” the consultant said.

The offer given to studios says that potential locations for these dinners include Los Angeles, Toronto, London and New York. But is the cost worth it if you’re only sitting down with 30 voters out of 334 – and can Variety even supply that many voters in a city besides Los Angeles?

In the HFPA days, all 90-odd voters were required to live in Los Angeles County, and studios used to be in the business of holding screenings and catered dinners for the entire group, which were usually well-attended. But when the HFPA was dissolved and the number of voters expanded from fewer than 100 to more than 300, the Globes recruited film critics and others from around the world.

Based on the site’s voter bios, there are likely fewer than 10 voters based in Toronto and slightly more than that in New York and London – but probably not enough to hit that 30-40 mark in either city, unless the dinner took place during an event like the Toronto Film Festival (which is already over for this year), the New York Film Festival (happening now) or the London Film Festival (which takes place in October).

As far as Los Angeles voters, the bios suggest that about 70-80 current voters are based there, which means there are enough people to hit the target if about half of them are available. (“All they have to do is boycott and not show up,” one critic suggested of the plan.)  

All of the consultants that TheWrap spoke to were adamant that the companies that they worked for would not pay for Variety’s “salon dinners.” “You can’t get a budget like that through a studio these days,” said one, who added that the only possible takers would be well-heeled streamers like Netflix.

Plans are currently underway for the 82nd Golden Globe Awards in January on CBS, with the reaction to the show owners’ new cash grabs restricted to independent voices like Puck (“Variety is now pimping for the Globes”), The Ankler and TheWrap — competitors with the Penske trades who have no stake in the Globes.

“It would be one thing if these grifters were only skimming off, say, all of the cream on top of this sector,” Rushfield wrote on The Ankler, “but now that they’re on both sides of the fence, they are leading the charge to make this whole slog so tiresome that it actually drives people away from films.”

Meanwhile, many of those on the receiving end of Variety’s sales pitch are wondering why the idea wasn’t casually floated to them in advance, the way the $5,000 streaming platform fee had been. But then again, they know exactly why it wasn’t.

“If they had asked me about it ahead of time,” one said, “I would have told them what a stupid idea it was.”