Do they also have strong relationships with distribution? The article suggests that studios are losing distribution power to streaming networks who completely own content after production.
> you diagram extended families, or at least groups of tight friends, moving through the industry
In these network diagrams, do clusters of family/friends bypass agents during negotiations?
As for agents, sometimes they are just a tax dodge. The ultra-rich are always worried about moving money between generations without taxation. Calling your kid, your nephew, your agent allows you to move a chunk of money to the next gen without worry of estate taxes. It's part of estate planning. A similar tactic works with jobs such as personal assistants, trainers or "producers" whereby a slightly lesser rate is paid to a celeb in exchange for a child being hired on. That money comes into the 'family' at a lower tax rate and avoids estate tax.
Hollywood acting talent has moved behind the camera. Those owning and producing content have far tighter personal relationships with those on camera. They are married. The are each other's kids. That's what happens after a couple generations in a business where workers age-out of on-screen work very quickly. The days of studios treating actors like commodities are over. If a production turns zero profits, but everyone walks away with a big paycheck, that's a good day for those involved. The wishes of the stockholders are way far away. (See Goodfellas, a "not profitable" production on paper.)
Remember that game "seven degrees of kevin Bacon"? It wasn't a joke. Every wonder why the same actors end up working together year after year? Throw directors, producers and studio execs into the mix and you diagram extended families, or at least groups of tight friends, moving through the industry.