Filmmaking / Directing : Producer Proposed Co-Development Instead of Option — Has This Happened to You?" by Ugur Kayikci

He is a fraud. Run away. Some time ago, a 'producer' offered me the exact same thing.

Hey @Ugur by co-development, do you mean a shopping agreement? That is a pretty standard show of interest. It benefits you both because you get a set period of time to develop the project together and improve it to attract talent/production companies/studios, and you the writer retain the rights. Then by the end of that set period - if the producer was unable to attach strong enough talent to get it set up at a studio or prod co - you get the project back to do with it what you please without any complications. It's speculative like everything else in this business, but shopping agreements do benefit both parties. For the payment piece, the producer knows that if he can get the project developed to a strong place with great talent attached and get a studio on board, that will likely lead to you the writer getting the highest financial outcome.

Was this Buffalo8 by any chance?

This has actually come up more often in recent years, especially with newer or independent producers.

From my understanding, “co-development” can be legitimate — but it heavily depends on structure. The key difference is that with a traditional option, the producer pays for exclusive rights for a limited time, whereas in co-development, you're essentially investing your time without guaranteed compensation.

That’s where it becomes risky.

If the project is already completed, I personally lean toward an option agreement, because it protects the writer’s position more clearly. Co-development can make sense only if:

- rights remain fully with the writer,

- there is a defined timeline,

- and there are clear terms about what happens if the project doesn’t move forward.

Without those, it can easily become a situation where the writer gives away value without real return.

So I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily a scam — but it’s definitely something that needs to be approached with caution and very clear terms.

Michael david Buffalo8 No, not that

Honestly, the tone of your first message made me feel that there was genuine interest in my projects, and I naturally assumed we were moving toward an option or production deal. That's why I shared detailed information about my work.

Receiving a co-development proposal approximately 18 hours later was unsettling — especially since there had been no mention of an NDA or any protection for the materials shared.

The excitement I felt suddenly turned into disappointment. Given the belief I have in these projects and the hopes I had invested, that feeling was inevitable.

For completed projects, my approach is an option or direct purchase model. Co-development can only be considered if the terms are clearly defined and the material is properly protected.

I wanted to share this experience here — others may have faced a similar situation.

We can't definitively call someone a scammer, but staying alert is always wise. We should trust our instincts. Especially when it comes to my work or a contract, I think 100 times before signing anything or taking any step — and on the 101st, I act.

Ugur Kayikci This is a great question and something I think a lot of writers run into as they move closer to the industry side of things.

From what I understand, co-development usually means the producer wants to actively shape and package the project with you (attachments, strategy, pitching), rather than just optioning it and taking it out themselves. It can be collaborative, but also comes down to how clearly roles, rights, and credits are defined.

I think the key is making sure everything is clearly outlined especially ownership, decision-making, and what happens if the project moves forward or stalls.

Curious to hear from others who’ve gone through this what were the pros and cons in your experience?

Ugur Kayikci I would hesitate to call anyone a "fraud" because he or she offered a coproduction deal. That's a cynical statement, and actually quite behind industry evolution (by about a decade). While that is a different thing than just handing you money and running away with your script, it does mean that he or she is going to be putting time and effort into getting something to screen and does imply you will control your own product. The wave of the future, and already the present, is creator-producers and that is just a fact. Less and less likely that you are going to sell a script to anyone, ever. It's more and more likely that your avenue is creator-producer.

I don't think that what I said is a cynical statement. I shared this opinion because a 'director' contacted me in the exact same way and offered me the same things. Subsequently, another member of Stage32 had written that the person in question is a scammer, and I even contacted the actual director, who stated that his identity had been stolen. But if the person who offered something to the man is indeed genuine, I apologize for my words.

"What you're describing may well be a legitimate business model in the industry — and I respect that perspective. However, as a newer writer still developing my projects, I've done extensive research on this, including studying both U.S. contract law and Turkish contract law, and they are fundamentally different frameworks.

Here's my point: if the goal is to co-develop material together, the professional approach is to send a contract first — not request the material upfront. If the terms are transparent and fair for both parties, the contract gets signed. Then the materials are shared.

That's the standard I hold myself to, and the standard I expect from anyone I work with."

Abhijet Aade

"Absolutely. If this is meant to be a professional collaboration, a contract should come first — always. Thank you for the insight."

"Lately I've been asking myself something — and I think it's shifted everything for me.

You are not a salaried employee working under someone else's company in this industry. You are the CEO of your own work. And just like any CEO operates with professionalism, structure, and a clear business language — that's exactly how I have to carry myself from now on."

"And I want to be clear about something — I have never been a difficult person to work with. I've always tried to be constructive, collaborative, and solution-oriented. No one will ever say 'this writer is impossible, we can't work with him.'

But there is one line. If I ever feel like I'm being deceived or treated like I don't know what I'm walking into — I will burn every bridge without hesitation. Even if there's a million dollars on the table."

Yes.

Ugur Kayikci Exactly having things clear upfront makes the process smoother creatively as well. Glad we’re aligned on that. Open to exploring something together if it feels like the right fit.