Moving Nashville from From Service City to Origin City

During the Nashville Entertainment Commission hiring process, I kept coming back to a question that sits beneath a great deal of entertainment economic-development policy:

What kind of value do we want Nashville to capture from the entertainment industry?

There is an obvious answer. We want productions to come here. We want them to hire local workers, rent equipment, use local vendors, book hotels, spend money in restaurants, occupy stages and locations, and contribute to the tax base. But it is only one layer of value.

If Nashville limits its role to servicing projects created and owned elsewhere, then much of the long-term economic value leaves with the production.

The wages stay. The hotel revenue stays. Some vendor spending stays.

The intellectual property usually does not. The distribution rights do not. The library value does not. The sequel rights do not. The licensing revenue does not. The adaptation rights do not. The underlying ownership does not.

That distinction is what led me to think about Nashville not only as a service city, but as a potential service + origin city. We should also become much better at helping entertainment originate here.

Service work creates activity. Ownership creates compounding value.

A healthy entertainment economy needs both. Service work creates jobs, vendor spend, skills, credits, relationships, and infrastructure utilization. Ownership creates something different: an asset.

When a locally based writer, producer, artist, company, or rights-holder controls meaningful intellectual property, the economic relationship can continue long after the initial production ends.

That IP may generate licensing income. It may be sold or optioned. It may produce sequels, remakes, adaptations, recordings, touring versions, publishing rights, merchandising, or international distribution. It may become part of a company’s library. It may attract capital to the next project. It may create leverage.

That is why locally owned intellectual property matters to economic development. A project can leave Nashville after six weeks. An asset can keep producing value for years.

The entertainment office should not become a producer

This is where the idea needs an important boundary. A public entertainment office should not greenlight scripts, invest based on artistic taste, become a production company., or start competing with local producers or rights-holders.

The public-sector role should be much lighter and much more connective. Its job should be to help the ecosystem function. That means identifying where Nashville-created material is getting stuck, where relationships are missing, and where local creators do not know how to move from idea to market.

The office can help with access without becoming the owner. It can help with introductions without becoming the producer. It can help with packaging without making creative decisions. It can help with market intelligence without deciding what deserves to exist. Public institutions are well positioned to convene, map, connect, and reduce friction. They are not necessarily well positioned to select commercial entertainment projects.

Identify Nashville-owned IP earlier

One of the most important opportunities is simply visibility.

A great deal of locally created material never enters a professional pipeline because nobody sees it at the right stage.

• A songwriter may have a story that could become a documentary.
• A theatre company may control material with adaptation potential.
• A podcast may have screen rights.
• A local historian may hold access to a story with national interest.
• A creator may have built an audience around a character or world.
• A novelist may have adaptation-ready IP.
• A musician may have catalog material suited to documentary, scripted development, or branded storytelling.
• A producer may have a project that is commercially viable but lacks access to financing, packaging, or distribution relationships.

The entertainment office should be able to see these things enough to understand what is being created locally and where the system is breaking down. That could begin with a voluntary Nashville IP and Project Pipeline, where local rights-holders and producers can identify material they are actively developing.

The purpose would not be to publish a database of scripts. It would be to understand the pipeline.

• What kinds of projects are being created?
• What stages are they in?
• What financing gaps exist?
• Which rights-holders need producers?
• Which producers need distribution access?
• Which projects could benefit from national or international partners?

Over time, this becomes economic-development intelligence.

The office can help build packaging pathways

One of the hardest transitions in entertainment is moving from “good idea” to “financeable or distributable project.”

That gap is often misunderstood. A project may need:

• a producer
• a director
• cast
• a showrunner
• a music package
• a distribution strategy
• a financing plan.
• a sales agent.
• a broadcaster.
• a platform conversation.
• a brand partner.
• a co-production partner.
• a stronger rights chain.
• a clearer budget.
• an experienced executive attachment.

Those pieces are what make a project legible to capital and distribution. A public entertainment office should not assemble those packages itself, but it can help build the network that makes packaging possible.

For example, it could maintain relationships with:

• producers;
• production companies;
• financiers;
• sales agents;
• distributors;
• streamers;
• broadcasters;
• publishers;
• labels;
• talent representatives;
• international screen agencies;
• co-production partners;
• and experienced independent executives.

Then, when a credible Nashville project reaches the right stage, the office can make targeted introductions. That is a much more proactive form of economic development than waiting for an outside production to call and ask about locations.

Nashville could become a better place to originate projects

This is really the larger goal. A city becomes an origin market when creators believe they can develop serious work there without immediately needing to leave. It means the local ecosystem can get a project far enough that national and international partners can engage.

The city should be able to help a project move from concept to development, development to package, package to financing, financing to production, production to distribution. The entertainment office does not own that journey, but it can make the path more visible. The more often that happens, the more local producers become experienced. The more experienced producers become, the more projects stay local longer. The more projects stay local longer, the more legal, financial, post-production, marketing, and business infrastructure grows around them.

That is how markets deepen.

A Southern Story Lab

One concept I was developing around this was a Southern Story Lab.  It would be a development platform focused on stories rooted in Nashville, Tennessee, and the broader South, particularly material with clear rights ownership and commercial or cultural potential. The Lab could identify promising projects and then help rights-holders understand what is required to move them toward market.

Potential components could include:

• rights and chain-of-title education;
• story development;
• producer matching;
• adaptation strategy;
• market positioning;
• budgeting;
• packaging;
• pitch development;
• music integration;
• distribution strategy;
• and introductions to financing or production partners.

The most important part would be the design principle: The creator retains ownership unless they voluntarily negotiate otherwise with a commercial partner. The Lab would strengthen projects without becoming the rights-holder. The purpose is to increase locally controlled IP, not to transfer it into a public institution.

A Southern Story Lab could also become a place where Nashville’s existing strengths intersect.

• Music.
• Storytelling.
• Film.
• Theatre.
• Publishing.
• History.
• Faith traditions.
• Comedy.
• Food.
• Regional identity.
• Migration.
• Civil rights.
• Southern Gothic.
• Appalachian stories.
• Black Southern stories.
• Immigrant stories.
• Rural and urban Tennessee.

There is no shortage of material. The question is whether we create enough infrastructure for that material to move from local story to professionally developed IP.

The goal should not be “more Southern content”

This is not about creating a branded pipeline of stereotypical Southern stories. It is not about trying to manufacture a Nashville aesthetic. It is not about deciding what counts as authentically Southern.

The economic-development opportunity is simpler: There is a large amount of original intellectual property being created here. Much of it lacks a structured path to industry. A development system can improve access without dictating content.

The strongest stories will often be the ones that complicate, rather than reinforce, easy assumptions about the region.

Studio residencies could deepen relationships

A second concept I explored was a Studio Residency model. Most economic-development recruitment is transactional. A company comes to town for a project, it shoots, it leaves. The relationship may or may not continue.

A residency model asks what would happen if Nashville gave selected companies a reason to stay in the ecosystem longer. A residency could be designed around a production company, studio division, independent producer, documentary team, branded-content company, or other serious entertainment business. It would be a structured period of deeper engagement with Nashville.

A participating company might:

• develop projects locally;
• meet Nashville creators and rights-holders;
• use local facilities;
• mentor or hire local workers;
• explore music partnerships;
• meet with universities;
• build vendor relationships;
• participate in industry events;
• identify potential Southern IP;
• or test whether Nashville could support a longer-term business presence.

In return, the company receives a curated entry point into the local ecosystem. The entertainment office becomes a relationship architect.

Instead of saying, “Here is our incentive package,” Nashville says:

Here is the market. Here are the people. Here are the stories. Here are the companies. Here are the facilities. Here are the partners. Let us help you understand what you could build here.

That is a much stronger embedment strategy.

A residency should have a local-benefit test

The purpose should not be to subsidize prestige. A residency should create measurable local value.

That could include:

• local hiring;
• development of Nashville-owned projects;
• mentorship;
• workforce training;
• use of local vendors;
• business-development meetings;
• co-production relationships;
• and documented follow-on activity.

The question should always be: What capacity remains after the company leaves? If the answer is “none,” then it was probably just hospitality. If local producers gain relationships, workers gain credits, projects gain attachments, and companies return, then it becomes economic development.

Film-commission referrals should work both ways

Another part of the proactive strategy was building stronger relationships with other film commissions and screen agencies. Economic development is often framed as competition. Every market wants the production. But entertainment is mobile, and no city is appropriate for every project - that creates an opportunity for a more cooperative referral network.

If Nashville cannot serve a particular project, it can still be useful. It can refer that producer to a trusted partner market. That market can do the same in return. Over time, those relationships create trust.

The office becomes known not only as a place trying to sell Nashville, but as a place that understands how to solve production problems. That reputation has value.

The same logic applies internationally. Nashville could build co-production relationships with screen agencies, producers, and regional funds in the UK, Canada, Europe, and other markets. (I was proposing relationships with Screen Scotland and British Film Commission.) Those partnerships could connect Nashville-originated stories with financing or production structures that do not exist locally. They could also bring outside projects into Nashville. The objective is not to keep every project entirely local. The objective is to keep Nashville meaningfully inside the value chain.

Co-production can be a bridge to ownership

This becomes particularly interesting for smaller markets.

• A Nashville producer may have strong IP but insufficient local financing.
• A UK producer may have access to different financing structures.
• A Canadian partner may bring distribution, tax-credit, or broadcaster relationships.
• A European regional fund may be interested in a project that meets local spending requirements.
• A co-production structure can allow a Nashville-originated project to access larger markets without surrendering all of its ownership.

That is why international relationships should not be treated only as inbound recruitment. They can also be outbound infrastructure for local IP.

The office should understand capital without becoming capital

If Nashville wants to become an origin city, its entertainment office also needs a working understanding of how projects are financed.

A project may combine:

• equity;
• debt;
• presales;
• minimum guarantees;
• grants;
• tax incentives;
• brand money;
• music financing;
• distribution advances;
• private investors;
• and international co-production structures.

The office can help make the system legible. That alone could improve the quality of local projects entering the market.

Data should tell us whether origin strategy is working

A serious origin-city strategy needs metrics - not just number of productions.

We should know:

• how many locally originated projects entered development;
• how many secured outside financing;
• how many attached producers or distributors;
• how many were produced;
• how much IP remained locally owned;
• how many local companies expanded;
• how many follow-on projects resulted;
• how much private capital was attracted;
• how many local workers moved into leadership positions;
• how much local vendor spend occurred;
• and how many projects returned value to Nashville after the initial production period.

That creates a very different picture of success. If the only metric is production spend, a city can look successful while remaining dependent on decisions made elsewhere. If ownership and project origination are included, we begin to measure whether Nashville is building durable entertainment enterprise.

This requires patience

Origin-market development will not produce instant numbers. It is easier to announce that a major production is coming to town than to explain that ten local projects are being packaged. The latter may matter more five years later. That is why this kind of work is difficult politically.

Pipeline development is slow, relationship-building is slow, producer development is slow, IP development is slow. The payoff is delayed, but so is almost all serious institution building.

A market does not become mature because one movie shoots there. It becomes mature when people know how to develop, finance, produce, distribute, and own entertainment repeatedly.

Service city and origin city are complements

None of this diminishes the value of service production.

In fact, the two strategies reinforce each other.

• Inbound productions build crews.
• Crews attract more productions.
• Productions strengthen vendors.
• Vendors increase local capacity.
• Capacity helps local producers make projects.
• Local producers create IP.
• Successful IP attracts capital.
• Capital attracts more companies.
• Companies create more work.
• More work retains experienced workers.
• The ecosystem becomes more self-sustaining.

That is the cycle I was proposing building toward.

The shift is from transactions to an ecosystem

The traditional film-office question is often: How do we get this project to shoot here?

The proactive economic-development question is broader: How do we make Nashville a place where projects are conceived, developed, financed, produced, distributed, and owned?

Those are not competing questions. The second simply recognizes that the economic value chain begins much earlier and ends much later than production.

A modern entertainment office should understand the whole chain. Its role is not to control it - its role is to make the connections easier.

That means knowing:

• the creators.
• the rights-holders.
• the producers.
• the financiers.
• the platforms.
• the distributors.
• the workforce.
• the institutions.
• the other markets.
• where projects are stuck.

Then helping the right people find one another.

From service city to service + origin city

Nashville is already capable of servicing serious entertainment. The next opportunity is to become increasingly capable of originating it. That means creating more pathways for local stories, companies, creators, and rights-holders to move into professional development. It means helping outside companies build deeper relationships with Nashville rather than simply passing through. It means building co-production and referral networks that connect Nashville to other markets. It means creating lightweight public infrastructure around packaging, introductions, development, and market access while keeping artistic and investment decisions in the hands of the people and institutions equipped to make them.

Most importantly, it means paying attention not only to what gets shot here, but to what gets owned here. A production can generate a burst of economic activity. A locally rooted entertainment enterprise can generate activity repeatedly.

That is the difference between hosting an industry and building one. Nashville should do both.