Steven Crowder responds to Daily Wire: It was never about the money
(www.youtube.com)
Comments (113)
sorted by:
Daily Wire knew exactly what they were doing when they put out the video. Everyone was focused on the amount while ignoring that a) it would be over the span of 4 years, b) give Crower less of a profit over his mug club, c) would require him to spend even more on his overhead, d) any product costs comes out of his $50m payment, e) would give Daily Wire complete control over his social media, f) which is made worse by the fact that they will fucking fine him for any social media infractions.
Daily Wire is acting like they're doing Crowder a favor despite Crowder bringing more fans to DW than vice versa, but what do you expect from Shylock HQ?
Yeah, Crowder wasn't getting a 50 mil salary, he was getting a $12m/yr budget. He had to pay everything out of that to make the show- employees, equipment, studio space, insurance, security, etc. On top of that he wasn't getting any (IIRC) of the merch or ad money and losing a bunch of control.
Any money DW took wasn't just a taking money out of his pocket, it was taking away his ability to pay for the entire production- and he couldn't even reduce production quality of the show to save money as per the contract.
"Oy vey, isn't an annual budget of $12m enough? Surely, you don't need more than $10m. I would kill to have $8m every year!"
Still my favorite (New York) Jew joke.
I've only seen it in the 4 panel comic form
I couldn't tell you the original author, but it has the same decreasing-amount-of-money flow every time:
A young Jewish boy goes up to his father and asks for $20 to attend the school field trip the next day.
"$20?" says the father... "What do you need $10 for?"
"$5 is a lot of money."
I feel like I've seen Norm MacDonald tell his rendition of the joke, and I generally recommend Norm's telling of a joke over anyone else's.
DW also approached him not the other way around. They also give this contract out as standard. All the Muppets talking about how he just needed to negotiate are why we're doomed. They see zero issue with forcing conservatives to comply with big techs nebulous rules. The same ones crowder broke throughout covid, the election etc to provide the truth.
Jew puppets at dw. Time for crowder to pick a side
I've crunched some numbers. $50 mill over 4 years for Crowder would still be profitable. He has about 25 employees, and a building he rents. Including equipment, and some other stuff, this adds up to "only" a few million a year.
Since these are business expenses, he can write them down as such, meaning he isn't taxed like a normal person. This means, he'd make, I think about $7 million per year under the DW deal (if he does everything perfectly).
None of what you just said takes into account possible penalties from DW if any of his social media gets hit... social media that he would no longer run. Literally nothing is stopping them from running bot campaigns to get his accounts struck so they can punish him.
God damn, some of you are stupid as hell.
Or the taxes he’d have to pay on that money just for having it put into his accounts “business expenses” only go so far at tax time.
Holy shit that's a moronic take. If they run bot campaigns to get his accounts struck, then they can't monetize the videos and get any revenue from them. I've seen other people post similar sentiments and it's mind-boggingly stupid. The purpose of any business is to make money and you're saying they're going to sabotage their own revenue just so they can penalize him for not generating any revenue.
You're missing the point where he just becomes a jew puppet to Shapiro and his friends
is there any difference? his contents were never that edgy and never got near the jq or criticized our greatest ally ™
Crowder prob was just in normie conservative mode. Maybe now he's being redpilled.
How's the weather in Tel Aviv today?
Perfectly is a word rarely used in business
Yes, which is why I used the term Shylock.
Not only do other conservative media companies pull this crap, but it's standard in the entertainment industry in general. Machinima had such blatantly awful contracts that I don't feel sympathy for talent that negligently took shitty offers, but it's depressing how much Machinima hamstrung the golden age of Youtube content.
This sad state of affairs happened because hardware infrastructure costs were astronomical in the mid aughts, forcing the founders to take venture capital and/or get acquired. Once the non-founder MBA types are in charge, there was no hope for a back-boned owner to call the advertising hacks on their bluff, and get a better deal for Youtube and the content creators.
Edit: Examples from RTvee about other political media.
A lot of the DW people who are commenting on this keep saying something along the lines of “this was the opening offer, you are supposed to negotiate….and he was your friend why did you record him?”
Well friends do not offer friends incredibly low and stupid contracts as a starting point…. And why not record a phone call you intend to talk business on?
Yeah- why would you offer your "friend" the biolerplate deal?
Why would you even offer one of the biggest stars in conservative media the boilerplate deal?
Why would you offere someone you didn't even like a deal this bad?
My biggest concern is how absolutely awful the boilerplate is and how it's counterintuitive and destructive to conservatives to punish them for big tech
I know, $12.5 million/yr is the literal equivalent of slavery multiplied by 5 Holocausts. Tucker Carlson makes $6 million/yr but still, it's literal slavery to offer someone $12 million/yr.
The greatest irony is that Crowder actually had a skit a few years ago with Quarter Black and Dave Landau satirizing Colin Kaepernick regarding his retarded claim that he was a slave and the NFL were slaveholders.
Trust but verify, especially after all the publicized incidents of conservative grifters and lapses in judgement. And as you said, anyone that gets personally offended over recording legal business negotiations would make a very stupid and undependable business partner. Granted Daily Wire is being coldly methodological, as opposed to drama vortexes like Milo.
The damning part was that there was resistance on DW's side to the Crowders suggestion that the contract was out-of-touch and excessive with the brand and likeness in perpituity, and that up-and-coming talent should mentored. Reminds me of Steve Job's demeanor towards John Carmack. There wasn't a strong, explicit acknowledgement that the initial proposed contract was intended as a template instead of suggestion of leverage. Shapiro explained going into business with Boreing because some dinosaurs (probably Koch Brothers or Murdoch) were clueless regarding online mediums and younger audiences. DW isn't as stodgy and disconnected as legacy companies, but it's a shame they have the same top-down attitude that I presume was part of Shapiro's criticism.
In business it's okay to have a rider, like Van Halen's brown M&M clause, to make sure the other party is experienced and attentive to the venture. A shady example I've heard about personally is a independent owned establishment getting a contract from a management company that has the MC's revenue or profit share claimed before taxes, which wouldn't require MC to actually make net profit for the owners. Said management company (Destination Hotels, 5+ years ago) was being underhanded and subtle (hospitality is by and large a grimey, uninspired industry), while these indie networks are just strong-arming the desperate and impulsive.
I would lump Candace Owens reaction as a drama vortex. She seamed unhinged and went very personal very quickly which is funny considering Steven started this off without naming anyone. And even after the attacks he has said nice things about Klaven, Peterson, and Shapiro. Doesn’t matter that people speculated it was them it could just as well had been fox, tpusa, oan, newsmax, etc.
And their resistance appears to be what crowder has a problem with. Sure with unknown talent there are risks. But crowder really isn’t an unknown. They were willing to put up 50 mil over 4 years for him and he had a subscriber base a third of the size of their whole network. And they are worried about being demonetized on YouTube despite the ad reads and subs being like 95% of the income. And that would go for the younger talent Crowder was voicing concern over getting that same crap deal.
And Rekeita has pointed out on his live stream that sure you give an offer lower than what you expect to agree to when negotiating but you don’t go so low you insult the person you are offering it to. That kills any chance of them doing business together and kind of makes you wonder if it was even a serious offer in the first place.
We all knew about Candace since before KIA2 was active, but a normie coming across one of her clips shared on Facebook doesn't stand a chance. For clarity, I referring to Shapiro and Boreing (and any private investors I'm unaware of) when I said Daily Wire, not any of their other hosts or writers.
Daily Wire the business became suspect when Ben had blinders regarding the military industrial complex, promoted the vaccine (so I've heard, haven't listened for more than 4 minutes since May 2020), and provided risk-averse coverage of the presidential election and Jan 6; this recent event is just dramatic evidence. Similarly, every everyday Joe should have been outraged about potential govt. surveillance abuse before Assange and Snowden were breaking news, before the Patriot Act was a possibility.
I've never like Candace. I wasn't sure she was a grifter like everyone else says but instead personally dislike her. She huffs her own farts.
I've barely listened to Ben since 2019 but yes he was pushing the vaccine up until tech stopped banning questioning it which is a good example of the DW bending knee.
Walsh is the only one I've watched and I know he's constantly skirting the edge on social media and YouTube as to what he can say. I'm pretty sure he's only holding back because of the contract. He was also one who didn't mention the drama except to make a joke about a rivalry with Candace Owens
My personal write-off for her was listening to her Sunday interview with Shapiro where she critiqued Shapiro's constitutionally based disdain for presidential pomp and circumstance. The premise itself was interesting, that casuals and normies don't relate to formalism and intrinsic virtue, but her tone and conclusion that such people should be catered to was fundamentally leftist in attitude and rationale.
Note: I'm reverse-steelmanning her as my description makes her argument appear more profound than it really was.
I have no problem with Klaven and Walsh. Knowles I've barely listened to. When Shapiro is off, it's in the manner of legacy media and a liability to heterodox movements.
The only problem with Klavan is he still thinks that we need to have a false sense of decorum in what we do.
I like Knowles but I just stopped listening to him because of his time slot.
Shapiro is smart but establishment lite and I've seen how that turns out already.
Tthe contract was out-of-touch and excessive with the brand and likeness in perpituity."
How is it that people keep parroting this trope? There was NOTHING that said DW retains the brand and likeness in perpetuity. Boreing very clearly said that they owned all his content DURING the contract period, but after the contract ended, everything that Crowder owned BEFORE the contract and everything Crowder produced himself during the contract, would go back to Crowder. The ONLY thing kept in perpetuity was anything that DW produced during the contract period. That's it.
Additionally.... That's perpetual rights to Louder With Crowder, but IANAL. Elsewhere in the thread, you're regurgitating superficial fanboy arguments like 'hur-dur, Kapernick' so do the needful and expunge 'parroting' from your vocabulary.
Crowder also brought it up in the phone call, regarding up-and-coming talent; Boreing's hesitant, standoffish response was telling.
"Crowder also brought it up in the phone call..."
You mean the phone call that he knew he was recording and that he knew he'd play for the public? Are you telling me you're so gullible that you'd believe anything he said on that call that he knew he'd play for the public? What up-and-coming talent? That's the biggest virtue-signal I've probably ever heard and that includes virtue-signaling Liberals. Crowder doesn't give a rat's ass about up-and-coming talent.
And your YouTube link shows Crowder explaining that DW retains Crowder's content DURING the contract period. Christ Almighty, how can you people keep repeating the same nonsensical falsehood that they retain all his content in perpetuity AFTER the contract period? Look at 'b", under "Additional Rights", when Crowder shows it on the screen (the exact time stamp that you linked). It says "DURING THE TERM."
And the Kaepernick argument wasn't superficial. It was about as damning as you could possibly get. Simply dismissing it as superficial is a classic Liberal tactic. But seeing as so many Crowder fanboys are actually closet Socialists, that now favor workers over the people that build companies, it's apropos.
That's the email-list you turd. Go one section down, where it says "additionally, [blank] will have perpetual and exclusive rights...". You're so willfully illiterate that you've apparently never came across the 'IANAL' acronym, instead clinging to a factionalist train-of-thought. And, the fucking irony of using a leftist (or tradcuck boomer) social construct in the same sentence of accusing of others of being commies.
Go find an aspie to detail how Crowder's situation isn't comparable to Kapernick's.
"Go one section down."
I did. It said the exact same fucking thing about it being DURING THE TERM! I feel like I'm picking on a retarded kid. Dumbass, they don't own any of his content AFTER the contract is over. Got it? The "perpetual and exclusive rights" are to whatever DAILY WIRE produces DURING the contract period! If Crowder produces it, HE OWNS THE CONTENT, including whatever he made BEFORE the contract!
You people will create straw man after straw man to rationalize this brain-dead take. It's just baffling that there could be anyone this stupid.
And yes, Crowder calling millions of dollars "slave wages" just like Kaepernick did, is EXACTLY THE SAME! Have an adult explain it to you. This sub used to have some intelligent people on it years ago when it was on Reddit, but now it's just filled with many of the same moronic millennials whose sole existence is predicated on "upvotes" and Reddit coins.
A lot of the Crowder people keep making bad-faith arguments. Whatever argument you could make about what a friend should "offer" to a friend, you can just turn around and make the same argument as to what a friend should "take" from a friend. That point cancels the "friend" argument out in terms of BUSINESS. But what friends don't do is try to sabotage their friend's business because they don't like the business terms.
If I own a lawn-mowing business and a friend wants to hire me to cut the lawn/trim the bushes at his business and he offers to pay me less than the job is worth, I tell him that's not enough, here's what it would have to be and if he says that's too much, we both move on. We're still friends. What I don't do is go out and try to fuck his entire company over because we couldn't come to terms on a business deal.
Crowder is the snake in this whole debacle.
Except he didn’t go out and try to fuck over an entire company over. He never said Daily Wire. He actively avoided naming them. Daily wire thought it was a good idea and claim the shitty term sheet. A term sheet they admit they didn’t think he would agree to and would spend months negotiating. Why offer something full of terms you know the other side would not agree to? And guess what, if crowder was dumb and signed that term sheet it would have become the contract. So why offer terms you know someone you claim is a friend would be screwed over if they signed?
What if in your hypothetical lawn care business your friend also requests while you are cutting his grass he gets to fuck your wife? You would obviously be insulted. And his response is “well I didn’t think you’d go for it but it’s the standard offer I give all my lawn care providers”. Clearly that’s not really a friend and they were trying to take advantage of you. You then tell people at the bar that they would never guess what crap deal this anonymous person offered for you to cut their grass. Then the dumbass “friend” says it was me from the other side of the room.
There's this moron on KotakuInAction2 who gave the most moronic analogy about putting "I can fuck your wife" in a contract. This person made that moronic analogy because he couldn't make his point work without saying something that stupid. He also said something even dumber, claiming that signing a NON-BINDING term sheet, would somehow be legally binding, even though it's literally NON-BINDING.
I didn't mention this imbecile's name though so there's no way anyone could possibly figure out who I'm talking about.
Do you literally just come back every 2 weeks to make bad takes? That’s significantly more detailed than what crowder did and more detailed than my example. And yes, if he said that term sheet looked fine it would have been the contract. Have fun watching controlled opposition that funds obvious grifters like Candace Owens
Do you literally just come back the same day with the same moronic take that a 10 year-old could see is wrong? A NON-BINDING term sheet is not the same as a BINDING contract. Signing a Term Sheet is not an admission that the contract "looks fine." That's a laughable assertion. Have an adult explain it to you.
I've been watching and enjoying Crowder for more than 13 years but you people are in love with him to an unhealthy degree. It's a cult at this point.
You should probably re read what I said earlier dude. If he saw that term sheet and said yeah these are fine they would have put that in the contract. I’m done talking to you about this dude. Enjoy your 13th day of rage of people disagreeing with you that DW offered crowder shit terms. He never claimed it was DW. I actually thought it was Fox, News max or OAN. Daily wire outed themselves. Stay mad.
Crowder is 100% right. Daily Wire is marketing itself as a conservative voice in the culture war but it's clear that their priority is money, thus misrepresenting themselves. They simply exist to squeeze out as much value from their creators and fanbase as they can. With the country burning down around us, that value is going to become worthless anyway.
Conservatives are doomed to lose the culture war. There are too many snakes and grifters within the movement that dilute the message. The left is unified and simply don't care about profits. They pump out trash after trash movie, tv show, book, comic, etcetera, even though it loses money, precisely to fight the culture war. They take massive losses financially but it's one of the reasons conservatives will never win the culture war. Conservative entities are too concerned about their own bottom line and don't fight as hard.
For the reasons he points out in his videos, Steven Crowder is absolutely correct that the business model the Daily Wire adopts, hurts us in the culture war. If the US is a burning building, then the Daily Wire is the person that saves their china cabinet instead of the other people living there.
The reasons why conservatives lose has nothing to do with any of this. Conservatives and other good people on the Right lose because the other side is evil and the people they exploit are willing accomplices and supporters of evil. When your culture is corrupt and the people who make up your society are corrupt, then the corrupt leaders will win. No amount of money, influence or political power can change the hearts of a fallen and corrupt people. It’s inevitable that conservatives would lose when a majority of people who live in a country are without morals or integrity.
I never said it was THE reason conservatives lose, I said it's ONE OF the reasons they lose, but it is significant. The left is very good about being unified, the right is not. And one reason, among several, that the right cannot unify is because grifters like the Daily Wire within the movement.
Steven Crowder is a rebel, a crusader and a big fighter against Big Tech. Yet he's never been permanently banned off of any Big Tech platform in the world. Not YouTube, Facebook, Twitter or Instagram. He's starting to look like the Ray Epps of Conservative voices.
Sorry, but the unity on the Left is an illusion. The only thing they have in common is their hatred and desire to subvert what is good, but they have no problem destroying one another in the process, and they often do.
The lack of unity on the Right is just as much because of people like yourself who accuse the Daily Wire of being grifters (they aren’t) as it is due to actual grifters taking advantage of the climate of desperation on the Right.
Regardless, even if the Right was in perfect unity (no such thing), it would not be enough to turn the tide. There simply aren’t enough people who care. The problem is a moral one, not a financial or political one.
As far as the contract in general - I'm not a fan of the specific penalties based on demonetization/ad loss on specific big tech platforms - but fees are ALWAYS linked to the amount of $ you bring in (or potentially bring in). Should Daily Wire just be a charity for conservative content? If you are a youtuber and your means of making $ is youtube, yes, you're going to get paid less if you lose all youtube revenue, this isn't rocket science. Does the contract make sense for Crowder? Obviously not.
Does anyone actually have numbers for what Crowder makes off mug club now that he lost his prior subscriber list? This basically determines whether the DW deal was reasonable or not.
While of course DW comes off bad here, I'm not sure I believe Crowder's principled conservative angle - I think he may just be pissed off that DW didn't up their offer.
Lets see considering Twitter files revealed that Twitter staff themself have a hard on for suspending her for no reason, do you think that's at all a fair contract to her
And 10 to 20% is not a little less. Why dont you take a 10-20% paycut and see if it only feels like a little less
Anyone else getting the feeling that both Crowder and DW are colluding behind the scenes and that this is just one big attention seeking viral marketing campaign?
I.E. they already had preliminary talks, decided they weren't a good match but decided they could have fun stirring things up by creating a fake controversy.
The whole thing just smells of bad "and everyone on the bus clapped" story telling to their respective audiences.
Crowder skit from a few years ago making fun of Colin Kaepernick calling himself a slave for only being offered $20 million. The irony is off the charts
Seems like Crowder’s doing all this to get more interest in starting his own thing. DW’s offer is pretty standard. The entire brand was built by playing within the YouTube rules, much like Tim Pool did, and Crowder’s been banned multiple times for openly skirting them.
DW wouldn’t make any money if they gave him another offer so they gave him that one. The main issue is that Crowder’s better off going it alone, which he has to know. DW and Tim Pool and everyone would immediately give him shout outs for support. This all has to be planned. I refuse to believe this is a real ‘stand’ he’s taking, which I say as someone that’s on Mug Club and will follow Crowder wherever. I’d rather see an uncensored Crowder, which DW can’t provide. Go full Alex Jones on it.
https://twitter.com/TheQuartering/status/1616174640489021440
Even if it doesn't work like that, the whole point of having a publisher is to counter the threat of being shut down by big media. Threatening Crowder at all for daring to go against the grain shows where their priorities truly lie.
And the whole point of having a content creator employed at your publishing company, is for him to generate revenue to make your multimillion dollar investment in him worth the investment.
Why do people keep believing that Crowder is so edgy and bucks the "system?" He's STILL on YouTube and Twitter, while hundreds of other content creators were permanently banned years ago. What has he ever said that someone on the Daily Wire hasn't also said? What topic is he so edgy about?
Crowder's just like a Televangelist that says it's not about the money, it's about spreading the gospel, as he simultaneously passes the collection plate around.
Crowder has already been demonetized by YouTube in the past though.
Demonetized but still on the platform. Sounds like some Gangsta Rapper that keeps getting arrested to sell more albums in his fight against "the man" but never gets sent to prison.
That’s not how those work. You don’t add them up, they’re different things. The ad drop is the live read ads. Content strikes and bans are also different.
You don't add the percentages. They all come from different sources of revenue.
That open skirting really is “this wasn’t the rule but crowder upset people again so we are making a new rule and punishing him retroactively.”
They definitely did him dirty, like banning him for citing the CDC, but the whole point of his show is pushing that envelope in general.
His point though is that envelope is moved constantly and arbitrarily to deplatform conservatives. And penalizing talent for telling the truth is not something the right should be doing. YouTube ad revenue is nothing compared to what they make in ad reads and DW+ subs and Crowder knows this and he knows they know this and he knows they know they know this. But it’s still their boiler plate entry terms.
Every time crowder got a strike or a suspension mug club subscriptions sky rocketed. And he was already not making anything off ad revenue and under their offer they’d punish him for it and get the entirety of mug club sales. They know it’s a bad deal for the talent.
YouTube ad revenue wouldn’t even apply to Crowder because he’s been demonetized on YouTube.
Crowder’s correct that the social media channel rules are all BS but incorrect in thinking DW can really do anything about that. YouTube is their primary viewership platform which funnels people into DW memberships. It also helps with their live ad reads because it’s a larger audience.
It isn’t a bad deal for talent so much as there’s not as much reason for someone like Crowder to be part of a network like DW. There really wouldn’t be a point in DW to sign Crowder if they didn’t profit enough on it. It also puts the rest of their network at risk.
Crowder’s not Alex Jones but in terms of strikes and bans and what not and flak, he’s a lot closer to that than Shapiro. He’s a risky guy, and that comes with a price. I think him and Jeremy knew they couldn’t strike a deal that’d work so they’re mutually working to drum up a news cycle to talk about all this that will benefit both of them. The rapid rate it’s happening and all that all speak to that.
DW offer was shit. Do you like having your head pissed on and it called rain as well
It was a starting point for negotiation, and honestly isn’t really that out of the ordinary. It’s very clear Crowder’s trying to drum up trouble to promote his launch of his own service. He even recorded the call with DW and registered the domain name for ConPro already. DW may very well be in on it.
Whether or not you like the offer, Crowder’s knowing trying to stir up attention for his own launch of his own service.
You do not start a negotiation by pissing in someone's mouth. A conservative company should be bankrupted if it starts out demanding conservatives bow to big tech censorship or be punished
Which is just retarded as Crowder himself demands his people censor themselves enough to remain on YouTube. Gerald Jr. said exactly that on Tim Pool's show.
They approached him with the standard terms they give everybody, only with $50 million operating budget for 4 years.
Yes dipshit they shouldn't be offering that to anyone. That's my point
You’re probably right, they should give many away! Everybody gets money!!! Money for evabody!!!!
A more important question is whether you believe any of this drama is real, as it’s pretty clearly planned. He even registered StopConPro a month before his recorded call with Jeremy. They’re buds, this all helps them both. Crowder knows he has to go it alone and this helps generate interest for him and DW. This isn’t a real feud.
So...they're friends but they still want him to negotiate like a business but not take other business precautions. But they also want to inflict heavy penalties on him as well
Why not just ask him to bend over then 'friend'
They also offer this shit to everyone. It's an awful deal ffs
That's jew media buddies for ya!
Yeah, because you just arbitrarily pay your friends more money if they come work for you. What friends don't do however, is try to destroy their friend's company because they couldn't come to a contractual understanding. Not offering Crowder what Crowder thought he should be paid isn't trying to sabotage Crowder.
Not take other business precautions?
Them being friends doesn’t mean he just hands Crowder a 50 million dollar budget for 4 years. I really like Crowder. More than DW. Crowder’s great, but he’s overtly handling this to stir up drama, which I can do without.
Nobody is asking for 50 million with no strings. It just depends if you think the penalties are worth it considering they’re mostly not based on his shows but if he gets banned or suspended etc
DW operates within the YouTube/Social Media rules that are completely stacked against them. Crowder mostly tries not to and pushes hard enough that they at times change rules just to get him. That makes him a bad investment for them, unless there are provisions in place to protect them.
The bigger issue is that Crowder knows he can’t get the deal he wants ANYWHERE and he needs to go it alone so he can Alex Jones it, and is using this with Jeremy’s consent most likely to drum up publicity for that to have a big launch. Crowder’s an actual actor. I love him but if people that are his fans don’t see this then they don’t fully understand Crowder.
Except as someone else pointed out above , DW is the one who approached him so if he's that bad an investment, why bother
He would be a good investment at those terms, not at ones he’d like. On those terms he’s a bad investment.
They also approached Tim Pool.
So basically everything that he's currently not. Wow, everything can be a good investment then, they just need to change their mannerisms or patterns to become good investments regardless of whether they're actually one -_-
Or dwire could be less retarded and find people who fit in
This is like buying a known ip and shitting all over it cause you think it'll make a good investment.
DW approached them formally, with an offer, but they both admitted they talked many times before that in general terms.
He absolutely can't get that deal anywhere or BlazeTV would've never let him go. BlazeTV had the receipts on MugClub subscribers, so the fact that they didn't do everything to keep him there should tell you a lot.
It’s even more compelling that Crowder became monetarily unworkable due to all the bans when his own network could no longer support him. It’s not like The Blaze is retarded. If they could make it work they would have since he was already on there and was for years.
Crowder’s whole shtick here seems to rely on people not realizing how contract negotiations work, so he could try to have a big ideological movement to support him launching his own thing when the reality of it was that the guy that gets banned a lot and is demonetized isn’t profitable without his own private network like Jones. I’ll support him either way, but could have done without all this.
Oh so it's "standard" for certain groups to offer incredibly predatory contracts designed to proverbially pull out someone's tongue and enslave them?
(((Certain groups)))
Predatory OFFER. There's an oxymoron if there ever was one. This is that same gaslighting horseshit that Black people complained about when they defaulted on loans from banks and lost their houses.
If banks don't loan to Black people because they're more likely to default, it's Redlining. If they make loans to Black people and they default, Predatory Lending.
I guess you forgot about the skit Crowder did on Colin Kaepernick calling himself a wage slave at the hands of slave master NFL. It's still up on Crowder Bits, it's called "Colin Kaepernick Re-Re-Boot of Roots."
Oh come off it. It’s standard to make someone an offer that’d take into account the risks involved that’d make it work for you. Then they counter and you go from there. Crowder did make a counter offer, so he wasn’t completely against the terms.
Why would Jeremy jump in to suck Crowder’s dick? DW made Tim Pool a similar offer and it wouldn’t work for him so he turned them down and they just did work together periodically. I’m sure Jeremy’s in on this at this point too and they’re just getting themselves into the news cycle and both of their subscribers will go up.
I have to be honest. I had a suspicion it was Ben Shapiro try to rip him off…
But listening to the entire DW explanation this contract seems very fair.
Steven clearly avoided the normal healthy back and forth and guess what - as a resilt he didn’t understand the terms…
Steven can’t expect a $50m-$100m contract without penalties if he refuses to work…. $100k per episode fine is basically his pro rated salary per episode.
Steven or steven’s agent clearly never bothered to negotiate in good faith and it shows.
Hahaha dude it should never been in an offer. None of that shit should be offered by any conservative corporation. The DW was deflecting hard-core
You don’t produce a show and you don’t get paid. How is that unfair?
Hey, if this thing that we both know has already happened to you, happens to you, you lose 45% of your pay. Also, you pay for all of the production of your show. Also, you need to maintain the quality of your show. Also, you need to do ad reads that aren't in your current show. And if you don't keep everything up, despite losing half your budget, we'll reduce your budget.
The $100k per episode fine is unfair if he refuses to work?
(he receives about $90k per episode normally)
I don't believe your username.
You don't fucking penalize people for running afoul of left wing censorship unless you are trying to A. Take the revenue they generate for free or B. Chill their free speech so they can't speak about topics the left doesn't approve of. Crowder would have never been able to speak out about covid under their rules and if he did he'd have paid them a huge chunk of his money instead
You’re angry and ranting about something I never brought up?
You're saying that the contract seems fair because a single clause in it isn't bad.
That's like saying eating shit isn't bad because there's some undigested corn kernels in it.
If somebody is too dumb to figure this out, really no point in trying to explain it to them.
Well shit for brains maybe you should actually bring up the crux of the issue or stfu. Everything you've said relates back to the main issue which I addressed.