Exploring the $100 Million Question of the Lively v. Wayfarer Studios LLC Lawsuit
How Blake Lively’s unsigned Actor Loan-out Agreement may have led to the crash out of the century
For the last six to seven months, I’ve been asking why has Blake Lively been so pressed about Steve Sarowitz allegedly having a $100 million war-chest, easily deployable to punish her. I’ve been pulling at that assertion over numerous posts and comments on Reddit, and now, finally, we’re getting answers.
Before I continue, let’s refresh our memories on what Blake said exactly.
Perfect. We’re all caught up. Now let’s quickly review my previous points on this issue.
☘︎
Called from Day One
I’ve always felt that assertion was yet another example of how Esra Hudson creatively writes things to misconstrue the truth, what some people call ‘clever lawyering.’
I asked on Sunday, July 6:
Isn’t it funny that Blake claims Sarowitz pledged to deploy $100 million to punish her? How many lawsuits would it take to spend that money? How many years would it take to fully deploy that amount? Upon information and belief, it’s my opinion that Blake is a flaming liar who just can’t help herself.
And upon information and belief, Steve, or the person who was recounting to Blake, was probably talking about Steve’s investment in Wayfarer, which he needs to protect. And Blake somehow mistook that to mean Sarowitz was gearing up to fight her. Then she went ahead and misrepresented what happened because, well, she can. And well, she has done exactly that a million times over.”
Again, I drilled in on that claim Wednesday, September 10, 2025, saying in a Reddit series:
“$100 million is a shit ton of money! So again, I say there is no way Steve Sarowitz would have said that, because as Blake and Ryan keep telling us a million times, he is a billionaire—and there is no financial upside to deploying that much cash on Blake. Someone thinks too highly of herself.”
☘︎🏵️
They were Lying All Along
First thing out of the gate, we now know that I was categorically right and Blake Lively and Esra Hudson were lying in their filings—or at the very least, stretching the truth.
And we know this because Danny Greenberg straight up said in his deposition, I ain’t lying for Blake Lively.
Quick refresh: Danny Greenberg is Justin Baldoni’s former WME agent, who Blake had quoted in the $100 million allegation, which she and Esra Hudson went on to distort. Well Greenberg in his deposition went on the record to say, I don’t know who this woman is … sorry to this woman.
Blake Lively also mischaracterized and distorted another quote she alleges Sarowitz made about her to Claire Ayoub. Wayfarer Parties called her out on yet another lie of hers. She then had to change her story in her response to their Rule 56.1 Statements of Undisputed Material Facts, stating their version of what happened was undisputedly true.
So Blake Lively fucking lied again, to the surprise of nobody in the damn whole world. That girl is a liar. She lies. Whenever her mouth opens, she lies. Period.
Okay, so, gathered.
☘︎
The Real $100 million: Following the Money
So where in the hell does the $100 million come from? Would it surprise you that that’s the amount Wayfarer/Sarowitz got from the profit payout?
Again, a reminder for the rest of the class: Justin Baldoni optioned It Ends With Us in 2019. He spent five whole years developing the film. Justin is the co-founder of Wayfarer Studios, and Sarowitz is the other co-founder.
Justin Baldoni is also the director and lead actor of the movie. And he was also a producer before Blake decided to steal—no, hijack—his producorial role like the creativity-vampire-sucking banshee that she is.
This woman has NO talents. None.
And so her form of girl-bossing is to have someone who has already done all the work and finished the project hire her. Then she proceeds to take ownership, authorship, of the project. She does get mad if you are shocked or slighted about her said authorshipping of your said project though.
Because how dare you not bow to her creativity, one that involves wearing multiple beanies and multiple boxers and shorts, like a bad take on a satirical depiction of a homeless person that someone once made a caricature of?
We all caught up? Perfect.
It Ends With Us’ production budget was $25 million. Wayfarer Studios then gets into a co-financing and distribution partnership with Sony in 2019. Then the movie’s SPE was created: It Ends with Us Movie LLC (IEWUM LLC). As such, Wayfarer Studios and Sony are the “parent” organizations of IEWUM LLC, although we still haven’t seen the partnership agreement, so we can only speculate on how exactly things work.
IEWUM LLC then goes on to make $351.4 million in box office revenue and some other undisclosed amount in streaming revenue.
Maximum Effort, being the shitty marketing company they are (still not sure why Hollywood doesn’t see ME for the money-grubbing grift it is) blows up the P&A budget to $60 million.
So the COGS is basically $85 million. Could have been less, could have been way less, is all I’m saying. So realistically, profit is at least $266.4 million.
$266.4 million plus undisclosed millions in streaming, because baby, Netflix paid for the streaming rights.
Amen.
And all that money goes back to IEWUM LLC, which would then be split into dividends and actor bonus compensation.
IEWUM LLC shareholders or stakeholders are Wayfarer Studios, Sony, and whatever individual investors (accredited ones) who put money into the pot.
And since Wayfarer Studios—co-founded by Justin Baldoni—owns the rights to the movie franchise, developed the movie, financed it, and produced it, a large bulk of the profit would go to Wayfarer Studios. And Sarowitz is the money guy of the co-founding duo.
When you put all that context together, you can infer that Wayfarer Studios got over $100 million in profits, and Sarowitz got close to that amount back since he invested $30 million in the film, which we see him say in his deposition:
And we see Blake's lawyers asking Justin Baldoni about some $100 million question, to which he said this:
That’s where the $100 million came from.
Side bar real quick: Why is Blake’s lawyer asking Justin Baldoni about documentation of any payments he may have received from IEWUM LLC if this case was about sexual harassment and retaliation?
Why is the question “have you produced those to us” even necessary?
Because it's not really about harassment. It's about the money. We always have to follow the money.
↸🏵️
Tying it Back to Blake Lively’s Unsigned Contract
So if you’re like, “But how does it tie to Blake? Why is she so pressed by how much Sarowitz and Justin Baldoni got from the movie?”
What if I told you that, in my opinion, upon information and belief, Blake fucked herself royally by not signing her Actor’s Loanout Agreement, and that cost her receiving $36.39 million plus in bonuses?
Yep. And it’s why she is so pressed about the lawsuit.
Confession time: When this was first theorized to me and I thought about it and all the pieces clicked, I felt a little more respect for her. Because logically, I can understand this glorious fuckery of a crash-out knowing it’s because Wayfarer could not legally give her the compensation bonuses she would have been entitled to if she had signed the damn ALA.
Like, that fucking makes sense.
$36+ million in cash. Do you understand how life-changing that amount is? That is her entire net worth. That is the speculative amount someone might be willing to believe if you combine her brand, her earnings, her assets (especially marital assets), and her future earnings, you could potentially land at $30 million.
$36+ million, which equals and supersedes her net worth, would have been given to her in cash. IN MUTHAFUCKING CASH.
Crash out warranted. I mean, she is still dumb as a rock and talentless like a she-goat thinking she’s a chicken on Christmas Day. But all I am saying is her crash out is understandable and somehow palatable.
But she still lied. She still falsely claimed sexual harassment and retaliation. So fuck her. I’m always going to be on this stance from now till Kingdom come. Even the heavenly Lord has accepted that this is where we are with things.
What can I say? She shouldn’t have lied, and she shouldn’t have fucking brought the motherfucking New York Times into this mess of a fuckery.
So.
☘︎
“I’m Sorry, Where Is Your Proof?”
Great question, bro. Well, number one, we know she didn’t sign her ALA.
And we know her ALA has a contingent compensation clause that states Blake’s loan-out company is entitled to 10% of the movie’s gross proceeds—which is basically the amount the movie makes before any deduction is done. So Blakel Inc would have been entitled to 10% of $351.4 million in box office revenue and some other undisclosed amount in streaming revenue.
In addition, there is also the box office bonus that entitles Blakel Inc to at least $1.25M and Blake herself as the actor to another $1.25M of the Defined Gross Proceeds.
We can theoretically conclude that Blake would have netted $35.14 million plus $2.5 million plus additional bits if she had simply signed her ALA.
People of the Lord, that is $37.64 million plus in CASH—cold, hard cash. $37.64 million for the butchery of acting she disastrously did playing Lily.
Think of what that money would have done to her life and Ryan Reynolds’ alleged cash flow and liquidity issues.
Crash out indeed, as you can see in her complaints.
“Mr. Sarowitz, Mr. Baldoni, and Mr. Heath that have reaped the greatest financial benefits from Ms. Lively’s hard work.”
Lol!
She is bloody pressed about the money they so made on this film.
Spectacular, give me 14 of them right now!
⎙🏵️
Email Trail: As the Wheels Go Off
I looked further. Thankfully, we now have the Wayfarer Parties’ privilege record and Steve’s call with Ayoub to categorically tell us what happened.
We can surely see the pattern in Wayfarer Parties July 29, 2025 Privilege Log.
While I don’t have actual emails because they are so bound by client-attorney confidence. Blake did try to pierce them, putting them among other disputed documents, but nah, she can’t get them.
⁌
On August 20, 2024, we see Sony’s Duane Larkey email Imene Meziane, Esq., Wayfarer’s contract negotiation lawyer, regarding “compliance with box office bonus payment provisions of Lively actor agreement,” cc-ing Sybil Cuzzo and Polly Kwok, Esq., all Sony employees.
Duane Larkey is a finance person at Sony. Not sure of her current title, but she used to be Analyst Lead Contract in the Corporate Finance department a decade ago. While Sybil Cuzzo is currently the Executive Director, Participations Reporting at Sony Pictures Entertainment, and Polly Kwok, Esq. is a Sony Pictures Entertainment lawyer.
The next day, DeShawn McQueen, Esq. gets added to the thread. McQueen is a Sony Pictures Entertainment litigation and IP lawyer, with a Business Affairs Executive title.
Follow my thread.
A money guy at Sony reaches out to Wayfarer’s contract lawyer to ask about how they’re going to address Blake’s box office bonus payment, in compliance with her ALA. So then they loop in one of the lawyers that handle deal negotiation, compliance and who can act as a liaison.
Why? Because she did not sign her ALA, which means they needed to find out if it was indeed valid, and they were bound by the terms specified within it.
No matter what the reality was, paying Blake would have legal, IRS, and stakeholder repercussions. As such, they had to pull in more lawyers and money guys to discuss and address this glaring issue.
Five days later, on August 26, you have Schuyler Moore, Esq. emailing Wayfarer’s contract lawyer Imene Meziane, Esq., “seeking information to facilitate providing legal advice regarding negotiations over Lively actor agreement and box office bonuses.”
Schuyler Moore, Esq. is a veteran film finance lawyer and former William Morris agent Gary Pearl’s co-founder. Since there is a WME connection, I am going to assume that this reach-out was on behalf of Blake.
And then you also see Wayfarer CFO Brian Singer bringing up compliance with her nudity rider. Because the lawyers be lawyering all throughout that time period, and every document was being peered at closely and dissected with a fine-tooth comb.
By August 28, it is of my own cognitive information and belief that Sony and Wayfarer had realized that there was no legal way Blake could receive the bonus compensation that Blakel Inc would have received if the long-form acting agreement (ALA) had been signed.
☘︎
Quick Timeline Check Before the Plot Thickens
August 20, 2024: Blake was still getting more organic negative press, including the Guardian’s “Sorry, Blake Lively: using a movie about domestic violence to sell stuff is not a good look” article.
August 21, 2024: Stephanie Jones seized and stole Jen’s phone on this day. And later, at 5:52 pm, Melissa Nathan receives a call from Leslie Sloane (Lively’s publicist), who tells Melissa that she has “seen her texts” and that Melissa will be getting sued.
August 23, 2024: This was the date that Jen Abel’s self-offered six-week notice ended.
The rest of the month is just continuous negative reviews of Blake’s promotion of the film.
August 29, 2024: Claire Ayourb records her call with Sorowitz.
So with all of that happening, do you think Wayfarer and Steve were like, “Yes, let’s give Blake Lively over $35 million in bonuses, even though she stole our movie, bullied Justin, and is currently running her own smear campaign against Justin that we were actively having to put out, hence why we hired TAG”?
Do you think they said to Sony, “Yes, we will give her the $36.39+ million”?
☘︎
Back to Compensation Bonuses
Sony and Wayfarer start to wrap up conversations about actor bonuses, and Jamey is looped in on September 13, 2024.
Upon information and belief, Blake was only paid her $1.25M box office bonuses.
Wayfarer subsequently discusses firing Stephanie Jones on September 15.
Jen Abel then texts Justin Baldoni the next day, September 16, about hiring external counsel, and then they all started discussing “potential litigation.”
Now, Blake has always framed them preparing for potential litigation during this period as being triggered by the call Melissa Nathan got from Leslie Sloane on August 24.
Let me ask you: Which scenario is more likely?
Jen Abel advises Justin Baldoni to onboard outside counsel on September 16 in relation to a call Melissa received August 24, wherein Leslie Sloane threatened to sue Melissa Nathan?
Or, did Jen Abel advise them to gear up for possible litigation because they just told Blake Lively a few days ago she ain’t getting the $36+ million she had been counting on since August 11, 2024, when Sony’s Angie Gianetti allegedly texted her “Blake 50m dollars!” about the box office opening number?
I think Sarowitz finally had the opportunity to tell Blake whose money she had been fucking with. It turns out it was hers.
I fucking love me some Karma!
We now know which battle Wayfarer Studios had been gearing up for. You know, the one Sarowitz said he was ready to defend the studio about.
I don't think that week went well for Blake Lively. Well, because September 15, 2024 was when we were breadcrumbed in Life and Style Mag and Y! Entertainment that Ryan Reynolds had attempted to buy the IEWU sequel rights.
The $36+ million cash influx would surely have helped them fund all the delusional dreams they spewed above.
Isn’t it interesting that the very next day, September 16, was when the word “potential litigation” shows up on the privilege log?
Shout out to Emily Baldoni! May your foresight and wisdom continue to abound, increase, and shield your family and friends. I am humbly a fucking fan.
☘︎
The Legal Question: Can an Unsigned Contract be Enforced?
California contract law requires “mutual assent” for contracts to be valid, meaning both parties have to agree and sign a document. But we know that Hollywood doesn’t always wait for signatures. Actors start working under letter agreements while lawyers hammer out the long-form contracts.
Which made things dicey in this case. And I wager Blake tried arguing promissory estoppel, quantum meruit, and partial performance—all of which went nowhere.
Basically, she said that she did her job, so they need to pay her. And Wayfarer and Sony were like, “Sorry, your ALA is not valid. It’s unenforceable. It just causes too much trouble.”
Which Alex Shapiro also tells Blake a million times in her gloriously written motion for summary judgment (MSJ):
You have the accounting issue: If they pay Blake her 10% plus other bonuses without a signed ALA, how do they book her profits? What about the other stakeholders? Might they be pissed and sue? How do you even distribute the proceeds formally? IEWUM LLC most likely has multiple investors, lenders, and rights holders. Everyone already negotiated their piece based on specific waterfall provisions. Blakel Inc’s uncertain payout screws up the entire calculation.
Then there’s the image issue: What if word got out that Blake didn’t sign her contracts and still got that massive of a payout? Then why are contracts even necessary at all?
☘︎🏵️
In Conclusion, Blake Lively Fucked Herself out of over $36 million
Blake used her unsigned contract as leverage, as a bargaining chip. And someone, definitely not Lindsey Strasberg, must have told Blake that her acting in the movie in itself established the contract, making the signature a formality. And she fucked herself out of a pretty penny.
That is why L. Strasberg is nowhere near this fuckery of a shit show.
The above is the only time Blake uses anything related to L. Strasberg in her entire case.
Blake gambled, she lost, and now she's trying to rewrite history. And ladies and gentlemen, that is how perpetually lying Blake Lively pivoted hard to this nonsense, falsely claiming sexual harassment and retaliation.
☘︎
Second Conclusion, What a Triple Bluff!
The sexual harassment claim makes her lawsuit viable. Without it, her entire grievance is dead on arrival. But it turns out the retaliation isn't even her real painment point.
They fed us a triple bluff.
Her retaliation vexation turns out to also be a diversion. I'm not saying she ain't bigly mad about it. I'm saying the retaliation part is just an added bonus.
The core reason for her NYT-front, full-blown smear campaign was so she could claw back the $36.39+ million she lost by her own negligence. A bigger goal of her lawsuit is to get a court to validate her unsigned ALA, to rule that it’s a valid document.
If Judge Liman rules her ALA valid, Blake now has a way to get the $36.39+ million in cash she had to forfeit in September.
Now, if you’re in a twist because you’re thinking, “But where does the weekend before Christmas come from? How could she predict Wayfarer Studios would call her bluff and result in all of this?”
▿
May I humbly suggest that the answer is that Blake Lively had no great strategy.
Her and her husband’s orders to their lawyers were simply: throw a bomb at our opponent and fix it. They have been flying by the seats of their pants from Day 1. That’s why Blake Lively’s case is a legal shit-show mess of epic proportions.
No clear thoughts, just reactionary legal actions layered with proactive media onslaught smearing.
What a glorious twist to the saga.
Blake Lively is publicly crashing out over money she lost because she never bothered to sign the one document that would have made it hers.
That’s why she kept repeating non-fucking-stop that Sarowitz is a billionaire who has $100 million he can deploy to address her fuckups. Dumb dumb is just pissed she lost so much money being a despicable, stealing twat.
☻✌︎
She tried to hijack a film and succeeded in mean-girling the actual force behind the movie and the reason the movie exists today. And all she got paid was $1.75M upfront fee and the $1.25M comparable box office bonus, as specified in her Offer Letter. Meaning she most likely got paid $3M in total.
All because she didn’t sign her ALA. Shapiro’s MSJ even reads punchier when reading it with this knowledge in mind.
🧉
And that, ladies and gentlemen, might just be the story of one of the most expensive unsigned contracts in Hollywood history.
⇱
⌘🏵️
⇲
⌘🏵️
For your reading pleasure, here are the relevant documents discussed in the article:
1. Blake Lively’s IEWUM LLC Offer Letter:
⇱
2. Relevant excerpts of Blake Lively’s Actor Loan-out Agreement (ALA)
⇱
3. Relevant excerpts from the Wayfarer Parties Privilege Log
⇱
4. Relevant excerpts from the Wayfarer Parties’ MSJ
⇱
5. Relevant excerpts from Blake Lively’s response to the Wayfarer Parties’ Rule 56.1 Statements of Undisputed Material Facts
This is amazing. Blown AWAY. Well freaking done. The amount of absolute shit they've thrown at Justin and Wayfarer because of Dumb Dumb using an unsigned contract to hold them hostage to every demand for only 16 days on set is WILD and so simply unethical (IMO) that I can't believe it's allowed to continue for so long. It makes some $en$e but not to the degree they've used it to destroy their entire careers over. Not only did they kiss $37 million goodbye but their legal fees have surely doubled (more?) this amount and future earnings completely decimated it. Karma is glorious…and always shows up in the end.
This is amazing thanks for doing the work to pull this together. I still can’t get over Ryan Reynolds being paid $60 million for that shit show of a marketing campaign. Didn’t he do the same to Deadpool? Spent 3 times the film cost on marketing? And I don’t know about that film but the floral stuff and what was created for IEWU was not worth anywhere near that. Some of the promo material is so cringe and amateurish. Especially the flower display “chat” between IF and Blake Lively. I’d be mortified having my name associated with that.