re: Crowder was on TimCast tonight and didn’t do himself any favors

quote:

---

He wasn’t going to to sign the initial term sheet therefor rejecting it

---

quote:

---

He never rejected any offer.

---

quote:

---

He said he wanted DW to resubmit a new offer sheet with his $30 million/yr guaranteed on it.

---

quote:

---

He never counter-offered, so the offer was never rejected.

---

anyway, I do agree that the recorded phone call should not have been done

quote:

---

I don’t know what the issue is with Not Gay Jared or if that’s just some kind of smokescreen daily wire, is throwing out there to distract people.

---

Not Gay Jared is under a NDA, but has been liking DWs posts on Twitter about this.

I had hoped they parted ways on good terms but it doesn't seem to be the case.

quote:

---

Oh look, progressive soldier Roger thinks Crowder looks bad.


Oh no.

---

Mugclub member since its creation here, Crowder looks bad here.

quote:

---

I just think that telling Daily Wire they can't have demonetization provisions in contracts with future talent is completely irrational.

---

New Commentator: MAPs are Pedos
Big Tech: Here’s your censorship.
Daily Wire: Here’s your contractual monetary penalty.

That’s Crowder’s other issue with the penalty.

quote:

---

Oh look, progressive soldier Roger thinks Crowder looks bad.

Oh no.

Mugclub member since its creation here, Crowder looks bad here.

---

There’s just no scenario where I’m taking Crowder’s side here at this point despite being a very longtime listener.

Was the offer bad? Maybe? We’re the terms about cancellation/demonization unrealistic? Maybe.

Was airing the whole thing publicly and secretly recording JB a scumbag self promotion move? 100%.

I’m very happy at my job but have had competitors attempt to poach me. I’ll always entertain the conversation, but I don’t air it out to my boss or people in our community to let others know that XYZ will lowball you. I hear it out and then politely decline.

quote:

---

New Commentator: MAPs are Pedos
Big Tech: Here’s your censorship.
Daily Wire: Here’s your contractual monetary penalty.

That’s Crowder’s other issue with the penalty.

---

If Crowder is banned from YT today he takes a financial hit.

Why should DW assume that risk?

Here we have Owen Benjamin:

He used to write for Crowder. He is a LOOOOOOONG time defender of Crowder.

He also hates DW and Ben Shapiro.

Here he is talking about how the Not Gay Jared situation, and how Crowder lied to everyone about it, caused Benjamin to bail on him.

LINK

quote:

---

New Commentator: MAPs are Pedos
Big Tech: Here’s your censorship.
Daily Wire: Here’s your contractual monetary penalty.

That’s Crowder’s other issue with the penalty.

---

Boering did a nice job of explaining this. This is no different at all from his Piss Off YouTube segment. DW would have loved for him to continue this same practice with DW, and they themselves have adopted it in existing shows. But they need to be able make money off his show for the arrangement to make sense.

They hate Big Tech censorship but are trying to build a business that will one day fund the infrastructure and parallel economy to no longer rely on YouTube and others. So they are asking him to share in the economics if he does get kicked off. They aren't running a charity. Others may disagree with this approach, but it's a valid one. Having a conniption and stabbing his friends in the back over it is pathetic.

One other thing that has kind of gotten lost in all this. Crowder is a whiny lazy bitch for complaining about taping 192 days a year (4 days a week plus approx. 3 days of vacation), and comparing that to slavery.

I was never a huge fan of his style but supported him because I think more conservative voices is a good thing. Like a lot of other people, I lost any respect for him after this.

quote:

---

They offered $50 million for 4 years, with possibility of going to $75 million over 6. He wanted $30 million per year fully guaranteed, no contingencies on volume of content or social media access/demonetization.

He asked for that because he’s knows no business would ever do that and they’d say no, and then he gets to do the song and dance we’ve all seen.

---

The terms were still egregious....what he is claiming as far as DW pandering to Big Tech is dead on...lets not forget that is the main issue....every time i hear Crowder speak of this he never speaks of the end dollar...he speaks of the terms in which it is to make the big dollar and the penalties if you do not....

I understand he wants to keep it about the viewer and not about the advertiser and i think he is correct once you make it about the advertiser then the viewer is the product whereas the advertisers should be the product

point blank if you want your stuff advertised then pay and be advertised dont dictate on what Crowder can and cannot say

You can't say he is only bitching about the terms. That is BS. The terms are about $