@@billD.Boomer Well, the sentiment is spot on, at least, the idea being that a successful negotiation is typically one where neither side is exactly thrilled.
@@blksbth1 No way. A deal where both/all parties feel they lost is the definition of a bad deal. Most deals are struck because they're in the interest of both/all parties... This is regurgitation of old-wives tale bullshit, repeated by people who don't negotiate business deals. Good deals leave everyone happy. Period.
@@billD.Boomer It's not that both sides feel that they "lost" but rather didn't get everything out of it that they had hoped. And, no, it's not "old wives tale" bullshit. I deal in large business contracts DAILY and I can assure you the sentiment is alive and well. Usually if one side is ecstatic, the other side got the shaft. The idea is that compromise RARELY ends up with both sides feeling they got the better deal. Both sides usually have to give something up in order to meet halfway and that often stings, even if the eventual agreement is seen as satisfactory by both parties.
@@miketyson3824 I have to admit, it is pretty entertaining seeing two channels I've watched pretty frequently over the years get into a kerfuffle. I hope it is resolved though nonetheless. They both have done very important and significant things for our society. It'd be a shame if they caused a fragmentation in the general conservative movement.
The thing no one mentions about this deal is Crowder is right about the RUclips strike laws. RUclips will just strike him for anything even though that content may be a grey area. In other words, big tech will hold the keys to his future if he signs this deal.
Crowder censors himself. He does not say anything on youtube that would get his own channel taken off so he can continue to advertise for his mug club .So basically does the same thing DW does. How is DW supposed to pay him if he gets demonetized ?
@@thespymawsta With the buttload of money from his 300,000+ Mug Club members (me included) willing to pay $100 a year for his content. That's 15-30 million dollars each year. Without sponsors or ad reads, even. DW wanted to give him 12.5 million per year, and that's only if he's monetized on RUclips (he *hasn't* been since the Vox Adpocolypse) That reduces it to 9.3 million per year to start.
@@Auroralawnservices so lets say RUclips bans him...….. how does he find new people to join MugClub? Rumble? rumble is mostly people who already agree to him or are apart of MugClub rumble has a celling. RUclips does not, also you want your clips out there to be see by people in the middle not just yell at people who are already voting the same way you are. DW is trying to move to a point they don't need RUclips and apple podcast but that takes time to build and to reach enough people that they don't need it. that's why they do movies, docs, sports, podcast, kids content soon, reporting, and books. they are creating an entire ecosystem that they control from top to bottom. MugClub is not to the level that DW is and I don't believe it ever will be.
@@Auroralawnservices the business model with RUclips, not DW. That's not DW's pervue. Crowder can make all the points he wants about RUclips, but none of that is on DW. Since he already censors himself enough already, he hardly has anything to worry about.
Crowder got this proposal 3 months ago. It wasn't even a contract. It was a list to propose terms. Then 2 months ago he asked for 30 million a year which daily wire declined. Then one month ago he made the stop big con website. Also one month ago is when he planned on leaving The blaze. This was premeditated and done in an ugly way
I'm 100% with crowder on this, you're justifying the big tech censorship by enforcing it for them with fines. Hypocritical to claim to be fighting censorship
No it won't. Start boycotting anything Jewish. Why are you all letting them play you like this? I can't believe how they have had their way with you all
I listened to talk radeo for 30 years and the last 15 I felt they were leaving out info. I finally came to the conclusion that they were controlled. That's what crowder was trying to get across to new content creators. Once you sign on to the big contract you will be forsed to avoid certain topics and the whole story is what the audience expects.
@@jamesanthony5066You obviously don’t understand the bigger picture here. Big tech telling creators what they can’t say IS the problem, and conservatives kowtowing to these ridiculous terms and the whims of these big tech oligarchs is indicative of the absolute wrong way to combat this culture war. DW proved themselves to be establishment cowards at best, and cronies at worst.
@@jamesanthony5066 Yeah crowder is off his rocker with this one lmao. Completely wrong and hurting the conservative movement to Garner attention to himself. Crowder is very talented and funny, but he clearly doesn't understand Business or wants to enrich himself at the expense of the movement that he pretends to care so much about over "money"!!. Lmao
this was exactly the case. proving that the daily wire folks arent nearly as free as they say they are when it comes to using social media. crowder currently isnt monetized on youtube, so how is dw gonna fix that because once he signs the contract they own the account. so does he start out getting slapped with fines? crowder did the right thing. knowledge is key no matter how its learned.
I'm glad to hear crowder is coming on next week. In his first video he said he was gonna be doing some interviews and podcasts and I immediately hoped and thought he would do this one. It seems to me his reason for making this public is to get support behind his idea of creating a network if "big con" (DW) doesn't adjust their model to benefit conservatives as a whole instead of worrying about money as they seem to be doing. Crowder seems to be very idealistic about the conservative movement and is adamant about protecting free speech and ownership of ones content since he's been demonetized for 3 years and has been banned several times. We'll find out next week for sure
THIS! And people keep glossing over the fact that this isnt about the money, its about integrity and Conservatism as a whole. DW always preaches about how they are against Big-Tech and Big Ad companies, and how they are more than a company/business, yet their business tactics in private clearly show they are just hypocrites and only care about money and protecting every single penny. Penny pinchers more or less. Greed. Conservatism is all rooted in religious values, yet these practices completely go against that. People also seem to think you can only run a business with pure greed, and this is simply just not the case. None of my contracts to my employees look anything like the DW's and I am a firm believer in my own values and integrity, which is why I am willing to take my own risks and treat my employees fairly without trying to control every aspect of their image and brand.
The big issue as I see it is that he cannot do business under the contract that they want to put him under as every time he gets a strike or banned or whatever, it is by companies that have already proven themselves to be on the opposite side of his beliefs. Crowder would be required to do these shows that he wouldn't be able to do because the only way to be reasonably sure that he didn't get struck or banned is by caving to the woke agenda which he refuses to do. I respect him for his beliefs. I don't always agree with them but his need to stay focused on them despite the bad publicity this is likely to cause is laudable imho.
@@newuserandhiscrew2278 Just fine, as plenty of people are independent and do their own thing. That is the entire point. Crowder is trying to move the Conservative business model away from sole reliance on Billion-dollar Ad companies and Big-Tech dictating their every move. People Like Crowder and Tim Pool are proof you can sustain just fine without Big-Tech ad revenue and sponsorships.
From what I understand, Crowder didn't want big tech to control the money Daily Wire was paying. He wanted to Daily Wire to be less dependent on big tech, and did not want new talent to be docked pay based on the strikes or banning or de-moneytizing from the big tech monopoly. Basically, he wanted the talent to be paid regardless, and able to own their content and move from platform to platform.
Yes, he wanted all the rewards, but none of the risks. Why he chose to air dirty laundry in public instead of man up and simply say "Thank you, but I think I can do better on my own" is a mystery.
Basically Crowder wants the company to foot the bill and the creators keep everything. Crowder acts like these are lifetime contracts. They are for a few years. New talent learns the business and get a paycheck then MOVE ON or negotiate a better renewal contract. That is business and that is how kids learn early in their career. Play within the system or eventually create your own. Crowder never owned a business but publicly demanding a company bend to HIS standards is insane.
I'm not seeing your side of the logic. Idealistically, no one wants to be controlled but part of having a $50M deal is the exchange of ownership. They are willing to pay you but will profit off of your content. Its the same as any job. Whether you make more than what you offer is the baseline risk. You could pay someone 1M/year and he may only earn you 500k and you lose money or he may earn you 2M and you make money. Crowder making the deal is basically mitigating the risk of high and low profit to daily wire while he gets a guarenteed 50M. He does not have to care about how much his show is going to make. There is no risk for him. He is going from owning his own business to working for someone else. However, no one is going to be ok with the channel being terminated and still making payments. The way I see it, its less of a follow the lines of Big Tech but more of a if your platform closes and we cant make revenue off of your biggest platform, we wont pay you either. Nobody hires someone to willingly pay them even if they stopped working in the middle. They may not make the amount you pay for them but they have to atleast work. Or does he just expects Daily Wire to accept the loss of millions if his channel ever gets banned. Seems to me that Crowder wants to do whatever he wants and thats respectable but it also means it does not work with being under another company. He could have just said that he did not want this deal as it is restrictive for him. It does nothing but shows that ....big suprise.... Daily wire is a for profit company that wont make bad investments.
@@ArmandoRodriguez-pu6pr different cultures. Western culture is MUCH different than asian. Asian women are still ok to do "women things". Here in the west they tell you you're oppressing them lmao.
Steven and Jermey aren’t at odds over money. It’s about their approach to big tech. Jermey believes you gotta maneuver through big tech rules to spread influence, which is what the big ad revenue penalties are for in the opening contract. Steven says if you get demonetized, o well, you rely on fan support so as not to compromise any virtual ground gained.
Glad to see someone understands the upset Steven is having instead of solely focusing on the numbers and positions of fame. I believe why he said he was upset was true to his beliefs in the movement just the same as he has fought being deplatformed from big tech the many times through his career. Jeremy just tries to spin it with Crowder is unhappy about the money. I like both and understand both parties, crowder a little more but their past discrepancies with big tech show the truth in the deal. Crowder refuses to play ball with ever changing rules yet somehow the Daily Wire seems to have few issues while "pushing the envelope". How does that happen unless what Crowder says is true.
I'd say I'm a little more agreeable to DW's side on this because if you really want to increase influence you have to go where the eyeballs are. Most of those eyeballs are on the major platforms of big tech.
@@terryrichardson2354 Yes, but you shouldn't bind your employees with incentives regarding that matter when it is on moral grounds. If YT demonetizes DW, clearly, the DW makes less. What the contract should say instead is, "We will give you x% of the total revenue we make." Rather than "Get ready to get your A#$hole f@$ked if you cross big tech, we are idiots, and we don't understand what it means to be complicit and incentivize people to do the wrong thing."
@@ProjectBlowed ... Not really, watching this it's clear they didn't watch DW's video, and maybe even Crowders video. They seem to be going off some general points found on the internet. Like, they didn't even know that Crowder rejected the "initial" proposal, didn't even try to negotiate.
@@ProjectBlowed It seemed to me that while he was prepared to touch on the topic he hadn't watched all of both videos before shooting this. Jeremy repeated several times that what he sent Crowder was just prospectus.
@@IvanGonzalez-kf4lp DW made an offer, Crowder turned it down. DW broke off negotiations and wished him well. Months later you get a call talking about you can't un-see what they did. That's some real Ex-girlfriend, "What time is it", shenanigans.
Yes it's all just drama content and nobody needs to watch it. I subscribe for 2 years to Mug club and Crowder didn't put out even half of what he promised. The dude's a piece of s***
I'm behind Crowder 100% on this. He's not doing it about the money or "clout". He explained why he's doing it. Because these big CON's are doing the SAME as legacy media, meaning they will become beholden to the ads rather than the PEOPLE supporting them. Once the ads become the power behind the message it losses value. Crowder is talking about the message not getting watered down like FOX NEWS.
Dude...In a perfect world you would be the company Crowder calls home. You have a great podcast, a good backbone, and I am proud of the work you do. You are truly a strong, patriotic American. and a badass...
PBD is not going to pay 140 million to SC, PBD is rich, but SC is not going to generate enough revenue for PBD to get him 140 million, PBD doing shows is just side hustle, SC is not going to bring a lot of business to PBD's main business to sustain that 140 million that SC think his worth.
I think that at the beginning it might have been the lawyers but after they had the "face to face" (over the phone I know don't sue me that's why I put parentheses) and then Steven did a Steven and went over the top
Actually, the contract Crowder is raging about was written by lawyers. And Jeremy Boreing explained that some of the conditions "would have obviously been removed during negotiation", as "you can't start a contract with a 40% penalty on one side's income being applied from the start", which would be the case if that draft had been signed by both sides as Crowder is already banned from 2 of the 4 distribution channels listed in the document. On the other hand, DW could have probably gotten him unbanned from RUclips if they argued he will keep his most offensive content restricted to the DW website and follow RUclips guidelines for the duration of the main show (the DW is totally right about this - even if you don't like the rules, you have to follow them as long as you can't change them if you want to get your message to as large a range of people as possible, which DW is doing very successfully while Crowder will end up preaching to the converted). Crowder's show always was and now once again is in constant financial difficulty, and if he tries to go it alone, doing so will be a lot harder than he thinks given that he's gotten himself banned from the two biggest distribution channels.
@@AAWT Don't forget DW said that Crowder's lawyer is the one that told them they need to raise how much money they are offering significantly and start over.
@@AAWTfinally, a rational argument. No one seems to know how these types of things actually work. Which is fine, I get it, most ppl never have to deal with this. But some ppl r acting like the SJWs we complain about and just taking a side based on little more than whatever emotional connection they have with either side.
@@midnightzgamer20k Nah man, Steven already had his own media company lined up to launch. He literally just used Ben as a way to paint himself as the anti establishment voice to paint himself as a hero, and boost the launch of his own media company. This is why being anti establishment on everything is just as stupid as trusting the establishment. You are essentially the same thing.
Guys - DW simply provided a Term Sheet - a starting point, with the belief there would be several changes/iterations. It was far from the final draft of a deal.
You don’t send stupid term sheets to a creator knowing full well that he’s is already in violation of many of the penalties imposed by the contract. That’s just a stupid way to go about it
They have no clue. They just wanted to jump in immediately to catch the wave of reactions, they should listen to Jeremy’s side before talking. I like Steven, but he seems to lack the understanding that money and technological infrastructure drives the culture war. He cannot eat his cake and have it. If he is confident in his abilities to wage the culture war on his own, then he should go ahead and do so, there was no need to make this go public. You are given a term sheet you don’t like negotiate it, if it works out fine, if not move on, no need to bitch about it in public.
@Encrypted628 i agree, Why don't other people understand that so easily. Maybe he is after all trying to grab a piece of the pie to grow his separate platform, unfortunately i don't think he has the skill to grow it as DW, DW hate or not has a good solid working plan and the numbers show
@@Encrypted628 That is exactly what I thought and commented that on Crowder's vid. He seemed really whiny to me. If you don't like it, dont' sign it or go back to negotiations. Seems very silly to me. He keeps saying "protect the talent"......whatever. There is a bunch of that on youtube!
Crowder didn't give too shits about that contract he cares about principal and what he stands for which is incredibly rare. They set that bridge on fire the moment they offered him a contract that empowers big tech.
If he didn't like the contract, he should talked in person, instead of blasting it out on social media. All parties involved need to put their big boy pants on, and act like ADULTS!!
So the initial offer was made back in October, and Crowder said no. Then nothing happens. Then he buys "Stop Big Con" website on 12-12-22. Then he quits the blaze on 12-15-22. Then a week ago he calls Jeremy to talk, and he records the conversation. Then unleashes the drama. This appears to be a deeper situation than what's on the surface.
Agree, Crowder is narcissistic. He does have a big following on paper, but given his personality I’m actually slightly skeptical as to how natural that is. Some of what he does is good work but there’s lots that operates in the ‘bully principle’ where he controls the narrative and situation, he rarely allows free debate. Those change my mind videos are the exact opposite of his willing to have his mind changed. Although I can’t stand Sam Seder - look what happened when he turned up unannounced to that debate. Crowders arse fell out and he acted like a bully who had finally been challenged properly by someone. Crowder is out for Crowder. Arnt we all, but I get the same feeling I get with James Corden and Ellen with Crowder. Behind the camera his attitude is horrible and they way he threw his ‘friends’ under the bus with this one highlights that to me. If you didn’t like the initial terms fine but speak to them about it. He ranted back to them 3 months after rejecting them for 140 M dollars. Think that tells you everything about this. I don’t think he’s a good guy at all.
@@VaderGhost124 Seder showed up because the initial debater bitched out and threw Sam in there as his stand in without even giving notice that he wasn't going to be there. Steven got blindsided and was understandably pissed because Sam was not supposed to be there.
With crowders history of being banned and not wanting to break for ads like the daily wire if this was the first draft then the daily wire presented it in bad faith. Which is why I believe Crowder is doing what he is doing.
@@azraeldemuirgos9518 Did you not see how they made a video Too? Even Ben shapiro made a video... And the contract to force censorship.... While at the same time those people are claiming to be for open and free speech..... That's is the disgusting part. So I'm all behind Steven crowder here. Expose the frauds. It's not all about the money... Its about being two faced as dw is
Yup. We now know who it was but the point isn't who, it's why ARE we doing it the way they want us to. He wants to split from Big tech and DW wants to play within the confines of big tech. Their fighting different battles and, while I respect DW's decision and road they wanna take, I'm with Steven. Stop trying to play THEIR game and do your own thing to take power away from them. At some point we have ask what are we really doing here if we're not trying to build the parallel economy we always talk about. Is it just lip service?
@@Sweeptheleg83 No, he wants to join DW, have DW split from big tech, and get paid like DW is still getting paid by big tech. Or ... if DW doesn’t split from big tech, DW has to take the risk of Crowder getting censored. It makes no sense to negotiate with a company whose business model you don’t agree with ... unless it isn’t really a negotiation and is more of a publicity stunt to use DW to announce your new channel.
@@Tropicoboy I'm assuming you are basing that off of the number of subscriptions he claims he would bring with him? He was asked to support his claim, but apparently he doesn't know the actual number as BlazeTV never shared it with him. Likely half of his viewers already have DW subscriptions. And not all would follow him over. But he would have brought them in plenty of money, no doubt. And had he submitted a counter offer indicating that he would have legs to stand on here. He didn't.
@@joelt2002 The Blaze refused to give him the email list and the majority of us who were formerly part of that Mug Club immediately cancelled our subscriptions when Steven told us last year that he was going to be leaving.
But Crowder made a video and said it wasn't about the money. He was saying their business model revolved around kneeling for big tech. I hear both sides. Dailywire wants to maximize profits like any other business but Crowder doesn't think you should be promoting conservative views and attack big tech for censorship when you are being a slave to big tech for more money.
crowder was upset that the contract punishes for demonetization from big tech companies (youtube, apple, spotify, etc etc), becuase if your pay means you have to keep big tech companies happy you are beholden to them and their political agenda. and since crowder is specifically in the realm of politics it is that much more absurd to even consider signing such a deal. he has the luxury to walk away, but he is upset that those coming up and trying to make a name for themselves are going to get taken advantage of by the Daily Wire
@Alex Ulmen you obviously weren't listening. He was mad about giving power to big tech companies who obviously have a political agenda. You can monetize in other ways, just like he does and you could put in stipulations of reducing their pay based on other criteria as well. Such as him not bringing Subscriptions to The Wire or a million other ways that doesn't give big tech the ability to shape the narrative. Plus in his particular scenario he wasn't even monetized by youtube lol so based on their reasoning they should already be docking him bc that revenue stream doesn't exist like they were counting on.
@@markstone6263 the problem is, Crowder is trying to tell the DW what the contract “should be.” Then he put DW on blast and recorded conversations to make DW to look like they only care about “money.” Crowder is in the wrong here. He’s right about not giving the power to tech companies (right on principle, wrong on reaction).
it's a ploy fake outrage. He had the contract months ago and even appeared on the daily wire election coverage after he received the contract . He just wants to get attention to open his own platform. And crowder himself does not say anything on youtube that would get his own channel taken off so he can continue to advertise for his mug club .So basically does the same thing DW does.
I’ve got that knot in my stomach that comes when I feel like me and my friend aren’t getting along but it’s like an empathy version for crowder and Ben Shapiro
@@TruStoogeDrew.if he only cared about making money do you think he’d be going against the grain vs with it? 2+2 does not equal 5. No matter how bad you want it to
I can tell you that Steven is NOT ABOUT THE MONEY! I know him well. He is sincere about the two things he talks about. He truly cares for his fans. He does not leave an event before he signs every autograph and connects with every singe person that waits in line to get a picture and sign items. He’s also 100% patriot and holds the constitution of the United States in the highest regard and protects it from all enemies foreign and domestic unlike the platforms that are patriotic unless it costs them a nickel, at which time they will sell their own mothers up the River. He is also 100% sincere about helping others succeed. I personally think he will construct an alternative platform that will be an amazing success and give opportunity to up and coming comedians and podcasters.
I hope so, too ❣️He’s absolutely about the Constitution and our rights. He’s a hero for not bending the knee to censorship. He deserves our support and he definitely has mine. Can’t wait to have him back ❤
LOL...yeah sure..not about the money but counter offered a much larger sum...Both Crowder and DW are Conservative INC who are actually just controlled opposition. The truly independent conservatives called out these so-called conservative grifters for who they truly are. Mark Dice and Anomaly had just called them out.
A lawyer broke down both videos and the contract unbiased, Nick Rekieta. Best commentary on the subject I’ve seen. Bottom line, the contract is not what you give to a “friend” or “ally”. It’s what you would give to a nobody or adversarial party and then start negotiations. They know if Crowder was demonetized from a platform it would bring in More money, literally admit this, yet the contract penalized him. Watch the lawyers video, very worth the time
Except it's not a contract. So the lawyer talking about it as a "contract" seems to be fairly biased to even take it as such. The full offer was shown, and it makes clear that it was a non-binding list of items as a *starting point* for the two sides to discuss. As in they did not expect the actual contract to even look close to that. This was only necessary as when they reached out to Crowders team to see what he would be looking for, they were told that they just needed to submit an offer. As in not a very cordial response (as in of a friend). So they did. Then he waited 4 months to whine about it and launch a competing enterprise in a self serving fashion. Do you offer 50 million dollar pay outs to nobodies? I'm questioning the legitimacy of this lawyer. Just those two things alone show that his take is less than good.
@@joelt2002 It still holds water. If Crowder is a blue chip you dont offer him a end of career type contract. You sign him up for a long time. Its like trying to offer Super Bowl winning QB a 1 million dollar contract for 5 years and throw all the money into performance packages...just so you can skirt the cap. Eventually another team is going to pay that QB 10 to 100 times your offer, but hey that's a non binding negotiation point right? The terms of that deal even non-binding is insulting, its similar to what Music Talent has to face on the daily. A predatory offer built for desperation. Also yes that's how offers are, if that was their boiler plate offer....and I was Crowder who received that...I would be insulted. Worked X years at the blaze, have close to 6 million subs...revenue outside of RUclips support being 10-20 million a month. Then get this 50 million Shug Knight offer when it should have been a hand crafted offer at the beginning...were they trying to pull a fast one. So no I think you kind of got it wrong and Nick got it fairly right.
@@grygaming5519 except the story coming out of blaze is that Crowder was losing them money. So using your analogy this amazing QB has a history of getting suspended and has a decent chance of not even playing in the SB or any important qualifying games. As such he could be the best QB ever and still wouldn't warrant the payout you think he is worth.
Bryan asks a very reasonable question. "Was this the first draft?" Patrick goes on a 2 minute story about his own experience with negotiation. Which was his way of saying, "I don't know, I didn't watch even the first 30 seconds of the DW response video." Why even breach the subject and bring it up if you know so little about it?
Nad PBD was making a bigger point, doesnt matter if its first draft or not, understand that lawyers ruin deals. This is the advice he’s giving to Crowder, saying he should of called up DW
As a daily wire member I felt deceived.... Did not know that they were bowing down to Facebook RUclips Etc... This wasn't about money this was about integrity
As a dailywire subscriber, you should log in and listen to Jeremy Boering's reply to Steven's misunderstanding of the terms... it's not even a contract, its an initial offer that can be negotiated and Steven completely misconstrued the nature of the proposed agreement. I subscribe to both DW and Mug Club... both are very important voices in the conservative media space, but they can't continue to be such if they don't make money.
Crowder censors himself. He does not say anything on youtube that would get his own channel taken off so he can continue to advertise for his mug club .So basically does the same thing DW does. How is DW supposed to pay him if he gets demonetized ?
@@lominero5 a terrible sheet noone would every agree to Even officer tatum said he wouldn't sign Candace herself said terms made 0 sense Many others all agree it was bad Yet people think "it's just a start" Yes let's start at the lowest and dirtiest starting point lol
Funny when you say that. If he thinks he can do better he needs to make his own platform. He asked for them to start again. Thinks he's worth more then he's Worth. Go build it. Rather then shitting on his friends
Fighting who?? His contact said that if he didnt earn money on youtube then he didnt get paid. Is the free market a problem for you? Or are you for socialism ?
@@offgrid1356 fighting big tech. The contract Or "terms" actually favor youtube/ big tech. It's not a level playing field for anyone on the right. The business model of DW is skewed left.
@@ultrasigmadude101 DW makes money off videos on platforms. If the videos dont make money there is no pay. What about that doesnt make sense? The business model is flawed??? Like how they cant pay out what they dont make??
@offgrid1356 This is true my friend but the daily wire knows that crowder is banned across many platforms and yet they still send him penalties for that. Crowder doesn’t care about the money he just cares about the conservative movement. This offer effectively silenced crowder’s voice for the money. Crowder believes the conservative movement is more important than money and he believes the daily wire should hold that same belief
Crowder is gonna be insane on Valuetainment. That podcast is gonna be fire and Patrick if your watching this I'm gonna keep working hard on my videos on youtube and one day I'm gonna be on your show. Love the work, keep it up!
Crowder is a prime example of an emotional man. 99% of his content is hating on his fellow countrymen, he is all about tearing shit down instead of building it up.
@@niftyp2320 You're right about SC being emotional. It now puts me off. Patrick's panel interrupts and talks over each other too much as it is. I sort of dread to think how counterproductive having Crowder on will be, without having an adult in the room to keep the cross-talk down. It's pragmatic: no voice is louder acoustically than any other in the playback from the internet, and so the listener can decipher NOTHING.
@@6sixtysix you bought that gullible ...hook line and sinker. Find out the entire story and then rethink the premise. Nice name btw.... not. And you obviously have no clue about business. Crowder blew it on this one.... esp after recording him last week. Obvious setup to make himself look good. obvious
I’m not a business expert, but I thought if a business takes all the benefits they also take all the risks. It’s not like they offered profit and risk sharing. It was a lump sum budget offer . If crowder made them excess over the 50 million for four years he wouldn’t see a penny more, but if he was demonetized he’d lose up to 20 percent regardless of how much he profited them from ad reads, merchandising, dw subscriptions, rumble ad monetization, video backlogs they would have profits from, etc. they easily mitigate the ¨risk¨ of demonetization and banning by owning the entire brand and being able to capitalize on funneling people to their site and other more independent sites in the event of banning as well as offering new products to ‘fight the power’ so to speak.
There could have been progress made had Crowder not been such a douche. This is a conversation worth having but he turned what could have been a conversation into a fight where each side [supporters and the public figures/company] is going to dig in their heels and all this drama will be for nothing but destruction.
Speaking of big game... If a football player goes streaking across the field every time he scored a touchdown and gets the NFL fined millions each game by the FCC, should he still get millions of dollars from the NFL to keep playing? Should the NFL even allow him on the field? And if so, should he still get paid a multi-million dollar salary?
It's not about the money it's about the threats of the fines and being able to remain free and say what he wants and keep his true format one ad read that's entertaining not reading ads every eight minutes slipped in to the show
Not only was he afraid of a debate with despicable Sam Seder, he wanted to call cops and some dude who was painting a small picture on a wall. Crowder is coming of as a coward. Crowder Coward. That should be his name.
@@DefeatLust it’s funny you say that I was personally waiting for Tony Yayos opinion on it. I’m totally a free and complete thinker too btw. I am a patriot who is an individual but I need online personalities to justify my thoughts 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
It was good to hear your take on this. Frankly, I understand why Crowder came put: it wasn’t just about ownership, it was very heavily about censorship/politics, too. I am glad if it doesn’t go full on war, but political content creators under a constant threat of censoship, so I think it is good that Crowder got laud about it.
Crowder censors himself. He does not say anything on youtube that would get his own channel taken off so he can continue to advertise for his mug club .So basically does the same thing DW does. How is DW supposed to pay him if he gets demonetized ?
It is hardly a secret that YT likes to censor people. Crowder got butthurt that nobody is willing to give him the money he thinks he deseves. Now he is trying to save face by sticking up for a hypothetical little guy that he does not even know, to "protect" them from a contract that does not even exist.
The problem is NO ONE has addressed Crowder's complaint that EVERYTHING centers around doing what Big Tech says. It appears Daily Wire is playing to favor the big tech censorship wokism extreme. Do what RUclips, Facebook, Twitter, etc says or you will pay the price. Crowder has a point, Daily Wire is more interested in money then they are the cause.
You guys aren't getting it. Daily Wire is supposed to be anti liberal establishment. The contract would force his hand to never talk about the EXTREMELY important topics that The Daily Wire is supposed to support. I love that he came out with this. Needs to be said.
It's not about censorship. Steven would still be able to say what he wanted to behind the paywall, kind of like he already does (or did? Not sure) with Mug Club. The point is reeling people in through his free RUclips content and getting them to subscribe, as Jeremy Boreing said in the DW response video.
@@offgrid1356 Well he doesn't make money from these platforms already and he's making alot of money. Obviously, or they wouldn't want him on their network.
@@adamhamel9784 Actually he currently breaks that contract already in multiple ways. He's gotten multiple strikes and is not monetized by any of the media platforms listed in the contract. Which he would now have to be.
Timcast IRL discovered that Steven created his big con URL back on December 12th. Then the phone call he recorded of his "good friend" Jeremy at Daily Wire was recorded last week. This was all setup by Steven to get attention and start his new business. Also, Steven kept saying it wasn't about the money, yet he counter the Daily Wire and wanted 140mill and they said no so it was about the money at first and now its about him trying to start his own thing and getting as much attention as he can.
Exactly. The offer was made 4 months ago. Yet he is *now* is magically just so mad about it he has to air the dirty laundry? More like he didn't like their offer, or had no interest in ever accepting their offer and he has spent months trying to create a competing enterprise. He is using this drama to stir interest so he could then announce his new enterprise and bring in donors/content generators. It's a malicious scheme. The phone call he made almost immediately before this video and he secretly recorded a frank conversation with a person who had considered him a friend for the last decade. Then he proceeds to context crop 3 word sound bites from said recording to try and smear the DW CEO. This is bottom of the barrel scummy.
If I'm not mistaken Crowder didnt name drop at first. Jeremy confirmed that the beef was between Crowder and DW. I do think that Crowder could have handled this a little differently but totally understand where he is coming from on this issue. Like maybe try to negotiate before putting them on blast. This video was super enlightening to how contracts can be inflated with lawyers wanting to get the best for their clients. The contract still seemed ridiculous though.
Instead of calling out DW, he called TheQuartering and spilled the beans, and TheQuartering released his Indiana Jones video of Shapiro stealing TheQuartering’s white labeled drop-shipped coffee. TheQuartering leaked this before DW confirmed.
Its not about the money, he is saying the company is relying on big tech and using it to profit off talents instead of working to separate from big tech and work on making the talents obtain more and be independent better.
He wanted the company to foot the bill on strikes and such, and still pay the full amount to the artist, the company said they should share the burden, even though it was the actions of the artist, and then Crowder was like It isn't about money it's about "The country"... which is him being a baby and admitting defeat, because his argument is dumb. you don't understand math if you think you can get paid even though you make 0 revenue for 9 months... ... go back to school.
Yet all of his complaints lead back to money. The two are not separate. Seriously. If DW removed all stipulations about social media/Big tech revenue generation and reduced their offer to 15 million do you think Crowder would accept it? You know he won't. He is full of shit. "Well why can't he get 50 million and not have those stipulations". Because DW bean counters have relied upon revenues from the various streaming and social media platforms to justify the 50 million dollar pay out. As in based on their estimates Crowder would not be worth it without those sources. Now Crowder may think differently, it then behooves him to show how he can generate revenue in other ways that makes up for this loss. He doesn't though, because his intent isn't to actually work DW, it never was.
@dr.decker3623 you are missing the point...if you are threatened with loosing massive amounts of money (in which he owes his employees too) then you are very likely to give into temptation to say and do things you don't agree with, just to make sure food is on the table
@@kinjunranger140 That was 100% what it was about. Tell me this, if all Big Tech revenue generation stipulation were removed from the offer, but the fee they offered Crowder was 15 million dollars. Do you think he would have been happy with it? You know the answer. And when you know that answer you also know Crowder is full of shit on it not being about money. The 50 million dollar offer by DW was based on assumed revenues from all the outlets (including big tech). If those revenue sources are shut down (fairly or not) DW doesn't want to be stuck paying the full 50 million while not getting the revenue they were depending on. Crowder believes he is worth more. But he was unable to demonstrate that and didn't provide a counter offer. Thus he whined like a bitch and pulled this move. It's quite possible he is worth 50 million without big tech venues, but DW team has no data in which to collaborate that.
You’re right. He is the man! Love the fact that he can sit down with anyone from Sammy the Bull, Donnie Brasco, Trump or whoever and just has a normal conversation and he can pull nugget out that are pure jewels. He’s freaking awesome!
@@quilope Patrick Bet David knows a thing or two about bad contracts because he runs a life insurance pyramid scheme. he is a great podcast host i must agree lol
Most of the people reacting to this situation with a negative slant towards Crowder are missing his main point. It's not about the money HE would get. It's about the TERMS that EVERYONE would be held to. In this era of cancel culture and censorship, a contract like that is absurd. It would hamstring anyone that signs it and keep them form speaking out on issues. If you somehow missed that in his first video, go watch the second one because it's impossible to miss it in that one.
Would you pay an employee their full wages when that employee doesn't make you enough money to do so? Where will DW find the money to pay SC in full when they are unable to make enough money from him?
@@azraeldemuirgos9518 But he's bringing his own base? Do we cow tow to the left for fear of a little revenue loss? Or better yet do it a different way.
@@IntentionallyBlank996 a little revenue loss? If it is so little, why can't SC agree to it? After all, he says it isn't about the money, If he gets banned, they would have to take money from their other projects to pay him his full fee, which would affect those other projects, you are asking them to jeopardise their plans for SC, would you do that?
Pretending to be against big tech and just following the rules for money is not being against big tech. You guys are putting so much on the money and not on the principles.
Including Crowder. His RUclips channel is an advertisement. Now he betrayed his friends for publicity. Yes let’s swap out the big tech model for big tech + backstabbing
whatever SC did, is about money, nothing else. using big tech as a pawn, and using DW to virtual signaling, I am pretty sure he is going to keep his youtube channel and continue to bend the knee to big tech, while continue to try to get people into his own platform. let's come back 6 months later, and see if he is still on youtube.
Crowder was one of the few that had Callen on during his allegations and let him speak his side completely. As much as their lives seem separated, Crowder being a conservative talk show host and Callen a Hollywood actor, they both are technically entertainers. And it's cool that they give each other room to speak and never assume the worst.
Steven Crowder is pure talent, DW is just backed by lots of money.. and Crowder is right, predatory contracts have plagued the entertainment industry for decades and now he is calling it out..
I'm Glad to see crowder stand up like this. I do get concerned when I see big conservative names feud like this. I worry it divides us when we need most to be united. But perhaps I'm over thinking it.
I over think things, too. This one seems a simple as DW saying, "Be polite in public (on the major platforms), and save your colorful comments for the family (behind the paywall)." That is reasonable. SC is reacting like a teenager, idealistic but not understanding that he still has freedom to cover his topics, just be discerning. In the end, though, it was an opening offer that all SC had to do was say "no" to if he didn't like it. I wish the best for all parties involved, because we need SC and we need the DW.
No..this is super important ! If we are going to fix &nsave this country. We NEED 100% truth & transparency. DW. Is not doing that. They haven't been for a while. With the exception of Knowles & sometimes Walsh. There are trrue "people owned & controlled" platforms out there. Hopefully this will point them out & help them grow. When the majorjty , stop using and supporting this stuff. Things will change for the better.
I am sobexcited to watch your interview with Crowder! It will be nice to hear from someone who has no previous relationship with either party. Besides you PBD are by far my fav when it comes to interviews. I love the way you talk with people!
Crowder wants it public. He’s trying to launch his own studio and is using this situation as a springboard for that. He’s basically trashing the competition and posturing as the new game in town. If it works it’s a smart idea but his points on the contract are super skewed and cherry picked. He’s pretty much either lying, or is an idiot.
It’s less about the money or more about bending the knee to big tech. The guy is demonetized already, so him signing a contract that penalizes him for that would be a dumb idea
@John Anthony this is correct I think. It was telling that Jeremy said Steven has no idea how many Mug Club subscribers he even has because that information has never been disclosed to him. And Steven openly admits this by building a website and begging for Mug Club subscribers to recreate the list for him. Listen Steven is an incredible talent, but it’s clear he’s just drumming up drama to promote going out on his own and becoming a competitor to DW. Which is fine. Do it, but don’t make false claims, show us edited portions of the first draft, and now edited recordings of your phone call with Jeremy. It really stinks.
It was more about ownership of his own materials and his team. Plus, he reportedly would lose 20-25% of his contracted amount per unmonetized platform. He told them he thought they should change their business model so they aren't beholden to Silicone Microdosing Valley.
He wanted the company to foot the bill on strikes and such, and still pay the full amount to the artist, the company said they should share the burden, even though it was the actions of the artist, and then Crowder was like It isn't about money it's about "The country"... which is him being a baby and admitting defeat, because his argument is dumb. you don't understand math if you think you can get paid even though you make 0 revenue for 9 months... ... go back to school.
I see where crowder is coming from, but DW is a proven and stable company, growing rapidly and strong, yet a person never running something similar has feedback that he thinks they are doing it wrong...
@@dr.decker3623it’s a bad deal all the way around. What a mess. For crowder it seems like indentured servitude for 4 years, and I don’t think that 50 million deal factors in the operating costs of running his show in addition to taxes (which can eat up your profits at that tax bracket 20-40% I’m guessing) DW has to cover their assets and ensure the $$ invested in crowder turn a profit, hence the high penalty for being deplatformed (which can happen easily given BiG tech censorship) and not delivering at least average 4 shows per week. I can see both sides of the argument. If it’s a bad deal (wether it’s a contract for a mortgage, military, professional fighting, pro sports, music industry, media, time share, car lease, etc.) there’s no shame in walking away in order to have a better life. If crowder is missing out but he’s better off going solo, then that’s his prerogative. DW will find ways to increase their revenue.
@@dr.decker3623 That's the issue isnt it. The Daily Wire pretty much said "Hey if this guy gets into trouble by sneezing we're going to make him pay." Knowing full well that there's a bunch of unhinged psychopaths' on Twitter who spend every day looking for that 'gotcha' to start a campaign on. If that's the case the Daily Wire should have never entertained the notion of fielding a offer to Crowder whom by far is quite low (assume that his personal subscription brings in 20-30mil a month). Then you add on top that the Daily Wire goes out of its way to not touch subjects for the sake of not touching them, and then you have a lot of pink haired crazies who are mad that Michael Knowels is not banned off the internet for his book to this day.
@Gry Gaming I highly doubt he gets 20mil a month from mug club. Also the idea was that most of the stuff that would get the show struck should be behind the pay wall. Crowder strikes me of someone bitching about a problem and when a compromise is talked about, screaming louder than before.
This is 100% for views on Crowders part. He's using this to launch a competing service. You have to admire how much downside DW was covering with their initial term sheet. The gap between business and talent may get smaller but will never go away.
It wasn't even about how much he was getting paid. It was about being under someone else's control. I'm with crowder on this one. He should stay independent. Not many people can do it, but guys like crowder and Tom McDonald can. They have enough of a following.
But why bash the contract and record their calls? It's just an i initial talk and not even a contract? Crowder was scum recording that call for obviously publicity reasons. I get it he is riling his mob to get publicity but doing it low blow against a professional business that is engaging clearly good faith but tough bargaining is just bad. It's like imagine you are offering a cutting your lawn service and the owner of the house low ball you. Instead of walking away or haggle you video the person and upload it in the internet. That is not how you conduct price negotiations... not only unprofessional but downright scum because anyone with common sense can see Crowder is just using it as an excuse to build his upcoming business model.
I can understand not liking the deal.. fair enough, you can say no thank you. I don't like the way he gave only part of the contract and then recorded a phone call on purpose so everyone could hear.
And yet Steven self censors all the time by staying on RUclips. A platform he allegedly hates and is part of the evil "big tech" empire. But why does he stay? Because he can use it to push mug club subscriptions. If he wants to become independent (remember he was only recently a part of Blaze) fine, but don't throw half the conservative movement under the bus in the process.
He wanted the company to foot the bill on strikes and such, and still pay the full amount to the artist, the company said they should share the burden, even though it was the actions of the artist, and then Crowder was like It isn't about money it's about "The country"... which is him being a baby and admitting defeat, because his argument is dumb. you don't understand math if you think you can get paid even though you make 0 revenue for 9 months... ... go back to school.
In my view I think Steven threw the first punch as he was friends with Jeremy at DW. It was just as PBD said, it was a first draft of a contract, common practice in contract talks. I think Steven should have realize that it is all companies intentions to make sure they come out on top, and if they are willing to spend the money they need certain things to ensure return on money spent. The only reason I feel Steven might have done this was because he felt because of their friendship it was dirty pool to have a contract with things he did not like. I think it was wrong to go public until the deal was finished and both parties agreed to sign or not.
It could be that DW and Crowder were never really friends to begin with, and that Boering & Shapiro were just currying favor with him so they could snatch his show up when his contract with TheBlaze ended.
Opening negotiations with terrible negotiations is a sign of bad faith. Friends dont try to take advantage of friends. Also, using the term "wageslave" when talking about your employees makes my blood boil. I will never feel sorry for the corporation over the little guy.
It wasn’t only about himself , he disagreed with the creator being punished for for demonetization in a time where expressing your opinion makes you a target to be censored and them “playing ball with big tech” He wanted to lead by example and show that everything’s not about the money. It’s about standing up for what you believe
One of your friends, is a deep fake and only loves money, not people's rights. The friend that refers to their contracted workers as wage-slaves, is not a friend, they've been playing you for a putz.
It was a first draft. Crowder took it very hard that there would be penalties for deplatforming. He felt that would crimp his free speech. Daily Wire felt they needed to protect their investment.
This is the problem w DW... "Tired of giving your money to brands that hate you, and don't share your values?" - Jeremy's Razors. You don't contract penalties that use the arbitrary banning or censoring of your political rivals like FB, YT. Etc.
According to Crowder, it’s not really about him. His issue is with how the “big con” business model affects up n comers. (It’s highly punitive.) It’s also about the excuse that “it’s just business”. For SC, it’s a MISSION to preserve liberties and the Constitution. A *calling*. He challenged them to change their business model to not just make a profit, but help creators succeed. When they succeed, we ALL do.
How the hell do you expect to compete with disney and and big media if you don’t make a profit. he barely negotiated, if at all, after the initial conversation starter offer that DW sent him. it’s perfectly fine to believe you’re worth more than the offer and to disagree with bits of the contract, that’s what the lawyers are for. DW were expecting to negotiate with crowder. I’m certain he could have gotten a much better deal and brought down the penalty fees. DW gotta start somewhere and given that this was a conversation starter offer, I imagine they fully expected to offer him more money and potentially bring the penalty fees down somewhat. but you’re an idiot if you think they should take a loss just to make crowder happy. it’s business.
The contract was ridiculous. There was NO risk on DW's part. ALL the loss seemed to be passed onto Crowder. The 50 million is over 4 years, so 12 M a year. But then if he gets demonetized he gets hit 25%, then 20%, then 10%, then another 25%. At that rate the 12M goes down to 3M. And is that just for him or for his whole crew? SC has had to deal with A LOT of demonetization over the past years...this is a nightmare for him and DW isn't giving him a good deal at all. God bless~
@@garymillerjr4452 Not if they don't have to pay when any demonetization happens. There are many other platforms that pay out not on that list that would be streams of income for DW as well as the Mug Club Forever subscriptions. God bless~
His novel 'Another Kingdom' (I think) is excellent! Deep, action packed fantasy. There's an audio version read by Michael Knowles. Also pretty stellar.
The only thing that matters is that Crowder was censored and banned from RUclips for discussing topics that were off limits to society, while also being correct and telling the truth.
it wasn't a contract. It was a terms sheet. - Registered domain 3 days before he leaves the Blaze - counters for $120m - records Jeremy - uses opportunity to launch new website.
I think Crowder wants to be The Daily Wire’s direct competition, and he is using this OFFER SHEET (and calling it a contract) as a way to sign some of the younger talent moving up in the conservative world using fear of contracts most don’t understand as a weapon. Change my mind.
Crowder censors himself. He does not say anything on youtube that would get his own channel taken off so he can continue to advertise for his mug club .So basically does the same thing DW does. How is DW supposed to pay him if he gets demonetized ?
@@thespymawsta no DW needs to change that clause completely. So that 50 mil for 4 years buys them all the rights to merch and mug club and basically any revenue from Crowder. Not to mention that they would own a percentage of Crowder's name and brand for life. Also that 50 million has to be split between all of Steven's crew that help put the show out as well as cover any expenses on studio. Seeing is how mug club alone brings in about 40 mil a year not to mention the add reads he'd have to do etc that 50 mil is a low number considering what he'd being in. But none of that matters. What is important is that we thought that these guys could say whatever they wanted without worrying about being cancelled and report on the news items that the left tries to ban and hide. This contract shows that isn't true and that they need watch what they report on and say so that Twitter or Facebook or etc. Doesn't ban or strike them. Imagine being told well just be a wage slave for five years while you guys your brand then maybe try to do this on your own but either way we still own a percentage for your whole life. It makes it impossible for a up and comer is o exceed. We are about free speech and this contract limits your speech and if you can't see that you are a fool
Crowder asked for 30 mil a year. He's greedy and all about the money. He didn't make any changes to the terms lol and also he does the exact same thing, he censors himself on RUclips just like DW were asking
@@californiapoontappa He did though, his agent countered the 50mil with 130. Then when DW said no, Crowder waits months to "come out" with his outrage for the little guys. Ffs
It was the first draft. Crowder claims that is not for the money but according to the DW video he did ask for 30 million a year and when they said no he made the thing public. To be honest, I would be shocked if PBD does not push Crowder back on his desition to create all this drama that only divides the conservative audience.
That's the point, it's a bad faith deal. It's a slap in the face when supposedly they are "friends" or at least fellow "warriors" in the culture war. Instead, all this demonstrates is that DW is a grift just like Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS, etc. Think for 2 seconds, is it really so difficult for them to bring forth a fair/reasonable deal off the bat? Instead the argument is that Crowder must redline the offer (that is time/money) and kick it back to DW or hire an expensive lawyer (more time/money) to redline the contract on his behalf and kick it back to DW. This is patently ridiculous to expect Crowder to bother doing so when he doesn't need the money. This is the sort of thing you bother with when you really need the money.
Maybe it’s not but it’s shocking to anyone who’s been hearing these companies claim they’re fighting Big Tech and Conservative Principles while bending over for Big Tech and saying “Yes Daddy”.
no one in the comments is summing up crowders take correctly. he said specifically many times: this has to do with the contract dinging a creator for being censored by big tech platforms like RUclips. which then makes the creator beholden to big, existing tech instead of disrupting. i think both sides have totally fair points. definitely comes across as a lack of communication. but it had nothing to do with money and everything to do with Daily Wire seemingly tying the contract to corrupt streaming/content platforms. Crowders point is we should do away with them.
"The fairest deal is when both parties are upset about the final agreement "
-Dad
Literally not true.
@@billD.Boomer Well, the sentiment is spot on, at least, the idea being that a successful negotiation is typically one where neither side is exactly thrilled.
Asset emancipation Executive order 14067 section 4
@@blksbth1 No way. A deal where both/all parties feel they lost is the definition of a bad deal. Most deals are struck because they're in the interest of both/all parties... This is regurgitation of old-wives tale bullshit, repeated by people who don't negotiate business deals. Good deals leave everyone happy. Period.
@@billD.Boomer It's not that both sides feel that they "lost" but rather didn't get everything out of it that they had hoped. And, no, it's not "old wives tale" bullshit. I deal in large business contracts DAILY and I can assure you the sentiment is alive and well. Usually if one side is ecstatic, the other side got the shaft. The idea is that compromise RARELY ends up with both sides feeling they got the better deal. Both sides usually have to give something up in order to meet halfway and that often stings, even if the eventual agreement is seen as satisfactory by both parties.
Looking forward to when you and Crowder can hash this out on the show. Should be a great podcast, keep up the great work!
He will be on Timcast on Monday.
This entire drama shows that even conservative men have become fangirls.
Lol, yup. Conservative men are the fangirls 🤣
@@miketyson3824 I have to admit, it is pretty entertaining seeing two channels I've watched pretty frequently over the years get into a kerfuffle. I hope it is resolved though nonetheless. They both have done very important and significant things for our society. It'd be a shame if they caused a fragmentation in the general conservative movement.
If you see Tim and crowder as men please seek actual help these guys are pu$$ys.
The thing no one mentions about this deal is Crowder is right about the RUclips strike laws. RUclips will just strike him for anything even though that content may be a grey area. In other words, big tech will hold the keys to his future if he signs this deal.
Crowder censors himself. He does not say anything on youtube that would get his own channel taken off so he can continue to advertise for his mug club .So basically does the same thing DW does. How is DW supposed to pay him if he gets demonetized ?
@@thespymawsta With the buttload of money from his 300,000+ Mug Club members (me included) willing to pay $100 a year for his content.
That's 15-30 million dollars each year.
Without sponsors or ad reads, even.
DW wanted to give him 12.5 million per year, and that's only if he's monetized on RUclips (he *hasn't* been since the Vox Adpocolypse)
That reduces it to 9.3 million per year to start.
@@thespymawsta That is literally Crowders point. The Business model NEEDS to change. Crowder has done it without youtubes money for awhile.
@@Auroralawnservices so lets say RUclips bans him...….. how does he find new people to join MugClub? Rumble? rumble is mostly people who already agree to him or are apart of MugClub rumble has a celling. RUclips does not, also you want your clips out there to be see by people in the middle not just yell at people who are already voting the same way you are. DW is trying to move to a point they don't need RUclips and apple podcast but that takes time to build and to reach enough people that they don't need it. that's why they do movies, docs, sports, podcast, kids content soon, reporting, and books. they are creating an entire ecosystem that they control from top to bottom. MugClub is not to the level that DW is and I don't believe it ever will be.
@@Auroralawnservices the business model with RUclips, not DW. That's not DW's pervue. Crowder can make all the points he wants about RUclips, but none of that is on DW. Since he already censors himself enough already, he hardly has anything to worry about.
Crowder got this proposal 3 months ago. It wasn't even a contract. It was a list to propose terms. Then 2 months ago he asked for 30 million a year which daily wire declined. Then one month ago he made the stop big con website. Also one month ago is when he planned on leaving The blaze. This was premeditated and done in an ugly way
Crowder L
Spot on. The idiocy of all these people commenting is overwhelming.
Yes
30 mill and removing the penalties so he can speak freely
@@Auroralawnservicessounds fair. That $30m requires him to still pay all his employees
I'm 100% with crowder on this, you're justifying the big tech censorship by enforcing it for them with fines. Hypocritical to claim to be fighting censorship
I agree
Look at Daily Wires response video
This will be the biggest Change My Mind episode ever for Steven. LOL
He only does that against 18 year old kids
No it won't. Start boycotting anything Jewish. Why are you all letting them play you like this? I can't believe how they have had their way with you all
@@DeathsInversewhy is this an argument? Who gives a shot how old you are? You should be able to defend your beleifs
@@kklh7918 so you're just as knowledgeable today as you were at 18 🤔 that's actually not surprising.
Steven Crowder: "Only I can make money off Big Tech...Change My mind"
I listened to talk radeo for 30 years and the last 15 I felt they were leaving out info. I finally came to the conclusion that they were controlled. That's what crowder was trying to get across to new content creators. Once you sign on to the big contract you will be forsed to avoid certain topics and the whole story is what the audience expects.
Except this wasn’t the case. Crowder could have talked about whatever he wanted, just not on RUclips, could have
The extended bit on DW+
@@jamesanthony5066You obviously don’t understand the bigger picture here. Big tech telling creators what they can’t say IS the problem, and conservatives kowtowing to these ridiculous terms and the whims of these big tech oligarchs is indicative of the absolute wrong way to combat this culture war. DW proved themselves to be establishment cowards at best, and cronies at worst.
@@jamesanthony5066 Yeah crowder is off his rocker with this one lmao. Completely wrong and hurting the conservative movement to Garner attention to himself. Crowder is very talented and funny, but he clearly doesn't understand Business or wants to enrich himself at the expense of the movement that he pretends to care so much about over "money"!!. Lmao
this was exactly the case. proving that the daily wire folks arent nearly as free as they say they are when it comes to using social media. crowder currently isnt monetized on youtube, so how is dw gonna fix that because once he signs the contract they own the account. so does he start out getting slapped with fines? crowder did the right thing. knowledge is key no matter how its learned.
So dont sign contracts and move on.
I'm glad to hear crowder is coming on next week. In his first video he said he was gonna be doing some interviews and podcasts and I immediately hoped and thought he would do this one. It seems to me his reason for making this public is to get support behind his idea of creating a network if "big con" (DW) doesn't adjust their model to benefit conservatives as a whole instead of worrying about money as they seem to be doing. Crowder seems to be very idealistic about the conservative movement and is adamant about protecting free speech and ownership of ones content since he's been demonetized for 3 years and has been banned several times. We'll find out next week for sure
And how do you suppose the model will sustain itself without money?
THIS! And people keep glossing over the fact that this isnt about the money, its about integrity and Conservatism as a whole. DW always preaches about how they are against Big-Tech and Big Ad companies, and how they are more than a company/business, yet their business tactics in private clearly show they are just hypocrites and only care about money and protecting every single penny. Penny pinchers more or less. Greed. Conservatism is all rooted in religious values, yet these practices completely go against that. People also seem to think you can only run a business with pure greed, and this is simply just not the case. None of my contracts to my employees look anything like the DW's and I am a firm believer in my own values and integrity, which is why I am willing to take my own risks and treat my employees fairly without trying to control every aspect of their image and brand.
He will be on timcast on Monday, Candice was on tonight.
The big issue as I see it is that he cannot do business under the contract that they want to put him under as every time he gets a strike or banned or whatever, it is by companies that have already proven themselves to be on the opposite side of his beliefs. Crowder would be required to do these shows that he wouldn't be able to do because the only way to be reasonably sure that he didn't get struck or banned is by caving to the woke agenda which he refuses to do. I respect him for his beliefs. I don't always agree with them but his need to stay focused on them despite the bad publicity this is likely to cause is laudable imho.
@@newuserandhiscrew2278 Just fine, as plenty of people are independent and do their own thing. That is the entire point. Crowder is trying to move the Conservative business model away from sole reliance on Billion-dollar Ad companies and Big-Tech dictating their every move. People Like Crowder and Tim Pool are proof you can sustain just fine without Big-Tech ad revenue and sponsorships.
“Independent media” isn’t all that independent when you got a bunch of elite billionaires funding it 😂
I didn't know the daily wire was owned by a billionaire, i thought they were owned by Shapiro and Jeremy. This is why we cant have nice things
@@Tropicoboy they are owned by shapiro and some
Ben and Jeremy do own it but they got the money to start it up off a billionaire so they have a silent partner like nearly EVERY business
Exactly
You mean like literally every Job Crowder has had? Lol.
From what I understand, Crowder didn't want big tech to control the money Daily Wire was paying. He wanted to Daily Wire to be less dependent on big tech, and did not want new talent to be docked pay based on the strikes or banning or de-moneytizing from the big tech monopoly.
Basically, he wanted the talent to be paid regardless, and able to own their content and move from platform to platform.
Strikes from RUclips or what?
Yes, he wanted all the rewards, but none of the risks. Why he chose to air dirty laundry in public instead of man up and simply say "Thank you, but I think I can do better on my own" is a mystery.
@@kev3d if you got. Nothing to hide
Dont be scared what they show
Only if you got dirt on you do you decide to keep it private
Basically Crowder wants the company to foot the bill and the creators keep everything. Crowder acts like these are lifetime contracts. They are for a few years. New talent learns the business and get a paycheck then MOVE ON or negotiate a better renewal contract. That is business and that is how kids learn early in their career. Play within the system or eventually create your own. Crowder never owned a business but publicly demanding a company bend to HIS standards is insane.
I'm not seeing your side of the logic. Idealistically, no one wants to be controlled but part of having a $50M deal is the exchange of ownership. They are willing to pay you but will profit off of your content. Its the same as any job. Whether you make more than what you offer is the baseline risk. You could pay someone 1M/year and he may only earn you 500k and you lose money or he may earn you 2M and you make money. Crowder making the deal is basically mitigating the risk of high and low profit to daily wire while he gets a guarenteed 50M. He does not have to care about how much his show is going to make. There is no risk for him. He is going from owning his own business to working for someone else.
However, no one is going to be ok with the channel being terminated and still making payments. The way I see it, its less of a follow the lines of Big Tech but more of a if your platform closes and we cant make revenue off of your biggest platform, we wont pay you either. Nobody hires someone to willingly pay them even if they stopped working in the middle. They may not make the amount you pay for them but they have to atleast work.
Or does he just expects Daily Wire to accept the loss of millions if his channel ever gets banned.
Seems to me that Crowder wants to do whatever he wants and thats respectable but it also means it does not work with being under another company. He could have just said that he did not want this deal as it is restrictive for him. It does nothing but shows that ....big suprise.... Daily wire is a for profit company that wont make bad investments.
Rule #1 for an happy life: NEVER mix friendships and love relationships with work. It NEVER ends well.
I only dip my pen in company ink
@@TyroneBiggums789 you do you brother lol
Bro have you been to Asia 🤣
@@ArmandoRodriguez-pu6pr different cultures. Western culture is MUCH different than asian. Asian women are still ok to do "women things". Here in the west they tell you you're oppressing them lmao.
Steven and Jermey aren’t at odds over money. It’s about their approach to big tech. Jermey believes you gotta maneuver through big tech rules to spread influence, which is what the big ad revenue penalties are for in the opening contract. Steven says if you get demonetized, o well, you rely on fan support so as not to compromise any virtual ground gained.
Well put dude
This is a good way of putting it.
Glad to see someone understands the upset Steven is having instead of solely focusing on the numbers and positions of fame. I believe why he said he was upset was true to his beliefs in the movement just the same as he has fought being deplatformed from big tech the many times through his career. Jeremy just tries to spin it with Crowder is unhappy about the money. I like both and understand both parties, crowder a little more but their past discrepancies with big tech show the truth in the deal. Crowder refuses to play ball with ever changing rules yet somehow the Daily Wire seems to have few issues while "pushing the envelope". How does that happen unless what Crowder says is true.
I'd say I'm a little more agreeable to DW's side on this because if you really want to increase influence you have to go where the eyeballs are. Most of those eyeballs are on the major platforms of big tech.
@@terryrichardson2354 Yes, but you shouldn't bind your employees with incentives regarding that matter when it is on moral grounds. If YT demonetizes DW, clearly, the DW makes less. What the contract should say instead is, "We will give you x% of the total revenue we make." Rather than "Get ready to get your A#$hole f@$ked if you cross big tech, we are idiots, and we don't understand what it means to be complicit and incentivize people to do the wrong thing."
I hope Valuetainment thoroughly watches both or by then ALL videos posted by the two parties before the interview.
@@ProjectBlowed ... Not really, watching this it's clear they didn't watch DW's video, and maybe even Crowders video. They seem to be going off some general points found on the internet. Like, they didn't even know that Crowder rejected the "initial" proposal, didn't even try to negotiate.
It’s obviously crowder is in the wrong
@@ProjectBlowed It seemed to me that while he was prepared to touch on the topic he hadn't watched all of both videos before shooting this. Jeremy repeated several times that what he sent Crowder was just prospectus.
@@IvanGonzalez-kf4lp DW made an offer, Crowder turned it down. DW broke off negotiations and wished him well. Months later you get a call talking about you can't un-see what they did. That's some real Ex-girlfriend, "What time is it", shenanigans.
I stand with Steven 100 percent
This is all for show. Crowder is planning on starting his own production channel. This was a great way to promote it. Marketing 101
Yes it's all just drama content and nobody needs to watch it. I subscribe for 2 years to Mug club and Crowder didn't put out even half of what he promised. The dude's a piece of s***
You might want to take a look at YoungRippa59's coverage of the feud.
Crowder on Valuetainment! Im hyped
I’ll skip that episode of that squeaker
@@lukeneill1568 sounds like a beta male issue you got there
@@lukeneill1568 thank you
I'm behind Crowder 100% on this. He's not doing it about the money or "clout". He explained why he's doing it. Because these big CON's are doing the SAME as legacy media, meaning they will become beholden to the ads rather than the PEOPLE supporting them. Once the ads become the power behind the message it losses value. Crowder is talking about the message not getting watered down like FOX NEWS.
Dude...In a perfect world you would be the company Crowder calls home. You have a great podcast, a good backbone, and I am proud of the work you do. You are truly a strong, patriotic American. and a badass...
You don't get rich like PBD giving out charity contracts, Crowder wouldn't like that, he wants money even if he produces no shows.
@@NotSureIfSrs_x maybe. It’s more the advertisers. He doesn’t like kneeling to them or catering to their delicate sensibilities
He'd throw that "contract" right into the trash. Guaranteed. He just wanted a jumpstart to his own platform. That's it. It's all but scripted.
PBD is not going to pay 140 million to SC, PBD is rich, but SC is not going to generate enough revenue for PBD to get him 140 million, PBD doing shows is just side hustle, SC is not going to bring a lot of business to PBD's main business to sustain that 140 million that SC think his worth.
who would hire Crowder after what he did? Nobody wants to be paranoid that they’ll be recorded and shamed online.
If you record a conversation with your friends...you aren't friends.
If you play it in public you are an enemy.
#FACTS
This isn't a fair characterization.
@@Xeno_Solarus look around at your circle.
Ask yourself who you'd tolerate recording your private conversations and playing them publicly.
Many in this comment section are seemingly thinking that Crowder didn't negotiate for more money before declining the deal and making it public.
If it was so immoral and exploitative an offer, he would have instantly denounced it, not asked for $70 mil additional.
I saw BOTH of their vids...
I get it. BOTH sides have their point. I'd hate to think Crowder is doing this 'PUBLIC' thing for leverage, but.....?
Meanwhile, all this controversy is going down on YT, including our comments, and YT is pulling $$$ the whole time. Anyone else feeling the irony?
😂
You don't have adblock on all the time?
Clown, There’s no irony. It was never about the money for crowder…
Crowder and PBD on the same show? That’s gonna be an amazing conversation
Who is "PBD?"
@@quilope peanut 🥜 butter death ☠
@@quilope Patrick Bet-David
@Dank Buds probably sad
@Dank Buds how?
Crowder got the contract in October! And Steven countered for more $$$
Steven then acted like he had visceral reaction to it which was an act.
It's hard to listen to this with a basic understanding of the situation and knowing it has nothing to do with lawyers being too aggressive
I think that at the beginning it might have been the lawyers but after they had the "face to face" (over the phone I know don't sue me that's why I put parentheses) and then Steven did a Steven and went over the top
Actually, the contract Crowder is raging about was written by lawyers. And Jeremy Boreing explained that some of the conditions "would have obviously been removed during negotiation", as "you can't start a contract with a 40% penalty on one side's income being applied from the start", which would be the case if that draft had been signed by both sides as Crowder is already banned from 2 of the 4 distribution channels listed in the document. On the other hand, DW could have probably gotten him unbanned from RUclips if they argued he will keep his most offensive content restricted to the DW website and follow RUclips guidelines for the duration of the main show (the DW is totally right about this - even if you don't like the rules, you have to follow them as long as you can't change them if you want to get your message to as large a range of people as possible, which DW is doing very successfully while Crowder will end up preaching to the converted).
Crowder's show always was and now once again is in constant financial difficulty, and if he tries to go it alone, doing so will be a lot harder than he thinks given that he's gotten himself banned from the two biggest distribution channels.
@@AAWT Don't forget DW said that Crowder's lawyer is the one that told them they need to raise how much money they are offering significantly and start over.
@@AAWTfinally, a rational argument. No one seems to know how these types of things actually work. Which is fine, I get it, most ppl never have to deal with this. But some ppl r acting like the SJWs we complain about and just taking a side based on little more than whatever emotional connection they have with either side.
@@midnightzgamer20k Nah man, Steven already had his own media company lined up to launch.
He literally just used Ben as a way to paint himself as the anti establishment voice to paint himself as a hero, and boost the launch of his own media company.
This is why being anti establishment on everything is just as stupid as trusting the establishment. You are essentially the same thing.
Guys - DW simply provided a Term Sheet - a starting point, with the belief there would be several changes/iterations. It was far from the final draft of a deal.
Were you part of the negotiations? If not, you have no idea where they were at in the negotiation process.
Nope. Watch his video from today. He recorded what Jeremy was saying.
True
You don’t send stupid term sheets to a creator knowing full well that he’s is already in violation of many of the penalties imposed by the contract. That’s just a stupid way to go about it
@@cadebraaten687 please tell us about your 300 million dollar business and how you run it?
DW didn’t take this offer seriously. Crowder did the right thing.
Talent without consequences. That's what people want in the 21st century.
Crowder is already demonetized
People don’t want big tech controlling their paychecks over belies
Crying wolf while eating sheep. That's what Daily Wire does.
FACTS SO TRUE 👍🏿
@@jooseppielleese7156 Protecting their investment is what daily wire does. And if you don't do that, you will get eaten alive in this world.
@WhiteTowerGuard Silly whiteknight,
Read the Contract before you speculate. 🤣
I don’t think these guys have looked that deeply into the situation
Well he did say that he just heard about it
They have no clue. They just wanted to jump in immediately to catch the wave of reactions, they should listen to Jeremy’s side before talking.
I like Steven, but he seems to lack the understanding that money and technological infrastructure drives the culture war. He cannot eat his cake and have it.
If he is confident in his abilities to wage the culture war on his own, then he should go ahead and do so, there was no need to make this go public.
You are given a term sheet you don’t like negotiate it, if it works out fine, if not move on, no need to bitch about it in public.
@Encrypted628 i agree, Why don't other people understand that so easily. Maybe he is after all trying to grab a piece of the pie to grow his separate platform, unfortunately i don't think he has the skill to grow it as DW, DW hate or not has a good solid working plan and the numbers show
SO TRUE!!! Silly to release this video on minimal info, which is already available to them. Lazy.
@@Encrypted628 That is exactly what I thought and commented that on Crowder's vid. He seemed really whiny to me. If you don't like it, dont' sign it or go back to negotiations. Seems very silly to me. He keeps saying "protect the talent"......whatever. There is a bunch of that on youtube!
This contract was just to get Steven to the table and instead of negotiating he decided to soak the bridge in napalm and light it on fire.
It's was a bad contract for Crowder, Crowder wants a movement and doesn't really care for the money DW is a business
Lol nice analogy. At his core, Crowder is an activist.
Crowder didn't give too shits about that contract he cares about principal and what he stands for which is incredibly rare. They set that bridge on fire the moment they offered him a contract that empowers big tech.
If he didn't like the contract, he should talked in person, instead of blasting it out on social media. All parties involved need to put their big boy pants on, and act like ADULTS!!
Best description I've heard so far.
So the initial offer was made back in October, and Crowder said no. Then nothing happens. Then he buys "Stop Big Con" website on 12-12-22. Then he quits the blaze on 12-15-22. Then a week ago he calls Jeremy to talk, and he records the conversation. Then unleashes the drama.
This appears to be a deeper situation than what's on the surface.
Where do you get the info that the offer was made in Oct?
@@dianewise4788 from Jeremy's video discussing the initial offer.
Agree, Crowder is narcissistic. He does have a big following on paper, but given his personality I’m actually slightly skeptical as to how natural that is. Some of what he does is good work but there’s lots that operates in the ‘bully principle’ where he controls the narrative and situation, he rarely allows free debate. Those change my mind videos are the exact opposite of his willing to have his mind changed.
Although I can’t stand Sam Seder - look what happened when he turned up unannounced to that debate. Crowders arse fell out and he acted like a bully who had finally been challenged properly by someone.
Crowder is out for Crowder. Arnt we all, but I get the same feeling I get with James Corden and Ellen with Crowder. Behind the camera his attitude is horrible and they way he threw his ‘friends’ under the bus with this one highlights that to me.
If you didn’t like the initial terms fine but speak to them about it. He ranted back to them 3 months after rejecting them for 140 M dollars. Think that tells you everything about this.
I don’t think he’s a good guy at all.
@@VaderGhost124 Owen Benjamin confirmed the narcissism long ago and long before this shit came about.
@@VaderGhost124 Seder showed up because the initial debater bitched out and threw Sam in there as his stand in without even giving notice that he wasn't going to be there. Steven got blindsided and was understandably pissed because Sam was not supposed to be there.
this is crowder's power move. he wants to compete on a higher level and he decided the best way to do it is take a shot at daily wire.
💯 It amazes me how many people are talking about him having "pure motives" and all this. He's obviously trying to make a competitor to DW.
Yep ,such a snake move
He never outed the Daily Wire. The Daily Wire did it to themselves.
Despicable
@@Herv3 bro it was obvious and to leak recorded message with a friend? Crowder is a shit bag
With crowders history of being banned and not wanting to break for ads like the daily wire if this was the first draft then the daily wire presented it in bad faith. Which is why I believe Crowder is doing what he is doing.
Would you agree to pay an employee their full wage if they weren't making money for you?
@@azraeldemuirgos9518 Did you not see how they made a video Too? Even Ben shapiro made a video... And the contract to force censorship.... While at the same time those people are claiming to be for open and free speech..... That's is the disgusting part. So I'm all behind Steven crowder here. Expose the frauds. It's not all about the money... Its about being two faced as dw is
I love that everybody's instant reaction is who's he talking about instead of wait what is he saying
Programming folks comes first
Yup. We now know who it was but the point isn't who, it's why ARE we doing it the way they want us to. He wants to split from Big tech and DW wants to play within the confines of big tech. Their fighting different battles and, while I respect DW's decision and road they wanna take, I'm with Steven. Stop trying to play THEIR game and do your own thing to take power away from them. At some point we have ask what are we really doing here if we're not trying to build the parallel economy we always talk about. Is it just lip service?
Jordan Peterson heard what he said, but later learned who he was talking about 🤭
@@Sweeptheleg83 There is strength in numbers. People going their own way is what keeps the Dems in power. DW was good enough for Jordan Peterson.
@@Sweeptheleg83 No, he wants to join DW, have DW split from big tech, and get paid like DW is still getting paid by big tech. Or ... if DW doesn’t split from big tech, DW has to take the risk of Crowder getting censored. It makes no sense to negotiate with a company whose business model you don’t agree with ... unless it isn’t really a negotiation and is more of a publicity stunt to use DW to announce your new channel.
DW can’t pay you the max unless you are bringing in revenue.
He would be making them 30mil a year after paying him he would be bringing in plenty
@@Tropicoboy I also came to a similar number in my calculations, interested in your math if you don't mind sharing
@@Tropicoboy I'm assuming you are basing that off of the number of subscriptions he claims he would bring with him? He was asked to support his claim, but apparently he doesn't know the actual number as BlazeTV never shared it with him. Likely half of his viewers already have DW subscriptions. And not all would follow him over.
But he would have brought them in plenty of money, no doubt. And had he submitted a counter offer indicating that he would have legs to stand on here. He didn't.
@@joelt2002 The Blaze refused to give him the email list and the majority of us who were formerly part of that Mug Club immediately cancelled our subscriptions when Steven told us last year that he was going to be leaving.
But Crowder made a video and said it wasn't about the money. He was saying their business model revolved around kneeling for big tech. I hear both sides. Dailywire wants to maximize profits like any other business but Crowder doesn't think you should be promoting conservative views and attack big tech for censorship when you are being a slave to big tech for more money.
I love listening to you Pat! Very informative and entertaining content . You have my admiration.
Crowder is NOT with The Blaze anymore, which is why DW sent him a contract!
crowder was upset that the contract punishes for demonetization from big tech companies (youtube, apple, spotify, etc etc), becuase if your pay means you have to keep big tech companies happy you are beholden to them and their political agenda. and since crowder is specifically in the realm of politics it is that much more absurd to even consider signing such a deal. he has the luxury to walk away, but he is upset that those coming up and trying to make a name for themselves are going to get taken advantage of by the Daily Wire
Why would a company hire someone and agree to pay them even if all of their content doesn’t make money?
@Alex Ulmen you obviously weren't listening. He was mad about giving power to big tech companies who obviously have a political agenda. You can monetize in other ways, just like he does and you could put in stipulations of reducing their pay based on other criteria as well. Such as him not bringing Subscriptions to The Wire or a million other ways that doesn't give big tech the ability to shape the narrative. Plus in his particular scenario he wasn't even monetized by youtube lol so based on their reasoning they should already be docking him bc that revenue stream doesn't exist like they were counting on.
@@markstone6263 the problem is, Crowder is trying to tell the DW what the contract “should be.” Then he put DW on blast and recorded conversations to make DW to look like they only care about “money.”
Crowder is in the wrong here. He’s right about not giving the power to tech companies (right on principle, wrong on reaction).
it's a ploy fake outrage. He had the contract months ago and even appeared on the daily wire election coverage after he received the contract . He just wants to get attention to open his own platform. And crowder himself does not say anything on youtube that would get his own channel taken off so he can continue to advertise for his mug club .So basically does the same thing DW does.
@@lpslancelot05 Agreed.
I’ve got that knot in my stomach that comes when I feel like me and my friend aren’t getting along but it’s like an empathy version for crowder and Ben Shapiro
Me too😢
Why they are both millionaires lol. Quit having your beliefs shaped by people who only care about making money
@@TruStoogeDrew. Everyone cares about making money even AOC
@@TruStoogeDrew.if he only cared about making money do you think he’d be going against the grain vs with it?
2+2 does not equal 5. No matter how bad you want it to
@@RUclipsDictatorship2024 attention, no such thing as bad publicity
I feel like a kid watching my parents getting divorced.
Get out more 🤘
If you saw any of those people is like a parent to you you have much bigger problems.
So your parent is a bigot! 😅
So does that make you my “step sister” then?
DianeC is using figurative speech. We are watching two entities that are liked by most of " us" fight.
I can tell you that Steven is NOT ABOUT THE MONEY! I know him well. He is sincere about the two things he talks about. He truly cares for his fans. He does not leave an event before he signs every autograph and connects with every singe person that waits in line to get a picture and sign items.
He’s also 100% patriot and holds the constitution of the United States in the highest regard and protects it from all enemies foreign and domestic unlike the platforms that are patriotic unless it costs them a nickel, at which time they will sell their own mothers up the River.
He is also 100% sincere about helping others succeed. I personally think he will construct an alternative platform that will be an amazing success and give opportunity to up and coming comedians and podcasters.
I hope so, too ❣️He’s absolutely about the Constitution and our rights. He’s a hero for not bending the knee to censorship. He deserves our support and he definitely has mine. Can’t wait to have him back ❤
LOL...yeah sure..not about the money but counter offered a much larger sum...Both Crowder and DW are Conservative INC who are actually just controlled opposition. The truly independent conservatives called out these so-called conservative grifters for who they truly are. Mark Dice and Anomaly had just called them out.
Lol, the guy's a grifter, he's all about the money
Tell that to not gay jared.witch crowder made him sigh a NDA
BS 💩
A lawyer broke down both videos and the contract unbiased, Nick Rekieta. Best commentary on the subject I’ve seen. Bottom line, the contract is not what you give to a “friend” or “ally”. It’s what you would give to a nobody or adversarial party and then start negotiations. They know if Crowder was demonetized from a platform it would bring in More money, literally admit this, yet the contract penalized him. Watch the lawyers video, very worth the time
Isn't Rekieta like a hardcore cuckold lol
Except it's not a contract. So the lawyer talking about it as a "contract" seems to be fairly biased to even take it as such. The full offer was shown, and it makes clear that it was a non-binding list of items as a *starting point* for the two sides to discuss. As in they did not expect the actual contract to even look close to that. This was only necessary as when they reached out to Crowders team to see what he would be looking for, they were told that they just needed to submit an offer. As in not a very cordial response (as in of a friend). So they did. Then he waited 4 months to whine about it and launch a competing enterprise in a self serving fashion.
Do you offer 50 million dollar pay outs to nobodies? I'm questioning the legitimacy of this lawyer. Just those two things alone show that his take is less than good.
@@joelt2002 It still holds water. If Crowder is a blue chip you dont offer him a end of career type contract. You sign him up for a long time. Its like trying to offer Super Bowl winning QB a 1 million dollar contract for 5 years and throw all the money into performance packages...just so you can skirt the cap. Eventually another team is going to pay that QB 10 to 100 times your offer, but hey that's a non binding negotiation point right?
The terms of that deal even non-binding is insulting, its similar to what Music Talent has to face on the daily. A predatory offer built for desperation.
Also yes that's how offers are, if that was their boiler plate offer....and I was Crowder who received that...I would be insulted. Worked X years at the blaze, have close to 6 million subs...revenue outside of RUclips support being 10-20 million a month. Then get this 50 million Shug Knight offer when it should have been a hand crafted offer at the beginning...were they trying to pull a fast one. So no I think you kind of got it wrong and Nick got it fairly right.
Exactly, it was a Joo contract to be honest.
@@grygaming5519 except the story coming out of blaze is that Crowder was losing them money. So using your analogy this amazing QB has a history of getting suspended and has a decent chance of not even playing in the SB or any important qualifying games. As such he could be the best QB ever and still wouldn't warrant the payout you think he is worth.
Bryan asks a very reasonable question. "Was this the first draft?" Patrick goes on a 2 minute story about his own experience with negotiation. Which was his way of saying, "I don't know, I didn't watch even the first 30 seconds of the DW response video." Why even breach the subject and bring it up if you know so little about it?
I also can't make sense of getting into topics like these when you don't know enough about it 🤷🏻♂️
It was the first draft. If they had actually watched either video they would have known that.
only good lawyeees are under the seabed. they dont create shit, they are leechess. get riddddd of them
Nad PBD was making a bigger point, doesnt matter if its first draft or not, understand that lawyers ruin deals. This is the advice he’s giving to Crowder, saying he should of called up DW
It was the first draft
As a daily wire member I felt deceived.... Did not know that they were bowing down to Facebook RUclips Etc... This wasn't about money this was about integrity
Please watch Ben’s show today. He explains a VERY interesting timeline with how Crowder worked things.
As a dailywire subscriber, you should log in and listen to Jeremy Boering's reply to Steven's misunderstanding of the terms... it's not even a contract, its an initial offer that can be negotiated and Steven completely misconstrued the nature of the proposed agreement. I subscribe to both DW and Mug Club... both are very important voices in the conservative media space, but they can't continue to be such if they don't make money.
Crowder censors himself. He does not say anything on youtube that would get his own channel taken off so he can continue to advertise for his mug club .So basically does the same thing DW does. How is DW supposed to pay him if he gets demonetized ?
Daily Wire does a word by word breakdown of the contract, and exposes Crowder for the liar he is.
It wasn’t even a contract. It was an initial term sheet 🙄
A terrible initial term sheet*
@@lominero5 a terrible sheet noone would every agree to
Even officer tatum said he wouldn't sign
Candace herself said terms made 0 sense
Many others all agree it was bad
Yet people think "it's just a start"
Yes let's start at the lowest and dirtiest starting point lol
Funny when you say that. If he thinks he can do better he needs to make his own platform. He asked for them to start again. Thinks he's worth more then he's Worth. Go build it.
Rather then shitting on his friends
@@lominero5 you know what you do with those... YOU NEGOTIATE. LIKE AN ADULT. not make a video about it.
@@CustomSuspension Thanks for the low IQ take of the day.
Crowder said in his video that it's not about the business model or money, it's about how conservatives go about fighting big
Fighting who?? His contact said that if he didnt earn money on youtube then he didnt get paid. Is the free market a problem for you? Or are you for socialism ?
@@offgrid1356 Not what it said, but sure, go ahead and argue from ignorance.
@@offgrid1356 fighting big tech. The contract Or "terms" actually favor youtube/ big tech. It's not a level playing field for anyone on the right. The business model of DW is skewed left.
@@ultrasigmadude101 DW makes money off videos on platforms. If the videos dont make money there is no pay. What about that doesnt make sense? The business model is flawed??? Like how they cant pay out what they dont make??
@offgrid1356
This is true my friend but the daily wire knows that crowder is banned across many platforms and yet they still send him penalties for that. Crowder doesn’t care about the money he just cares about the conservative movement. This offer effectively silenced crowder’s voice for the money. Crowder believes the conservative movement is more important than money and he believes the daily wire should hold that same belief
Crowder is gonna be insane on Valuetainment. That podcast is gonna be fire and Patrick if your watching this I'm gonna keep working hard on my videos on youtube and one day I'm gonna be on your show. Love the work, keep it up!
yea Crowder is fireeeeee
Agreed! Watching Crowder will burn my eyeballs.
Crowder is a prime example of an emotional man. 99% of his content is hating on his fellow countrymen, he is all about tearing shit down instead of building it up.
@@niftyp2320 You're right about SC being emotional. It now puts me off. Patrick's panel interrupts and talks over each other too much as it is. I sort of dread to think how counterproductive having Crowder on will be, without having an adult in the room to keep the cross-talk down. It's pragmatic: no voice is louder acoustically than any other in the playback from the internet, and so the listener can decipher NOTHING.
Congrats on your channel man... I'm going to check it out now. I hope you find success🤞.
Steven wanted DW to take all the risk. Jeremy said it best "Steven is not looking for a business partner, he's looking for a benefactor."
@@6sixtysix you bought that gullible ...hook line and sinker. Find out the entire story and then rethink the premise. Nice name btw.... not. And you obviously have no clue about business. Crowder blew it on this one.... esp after recording him last week. Obvious setup to make himself look good. obvious
I’m not a business expert, but I thought if a business takes all the benefits they also take all the risks. It’s not like they offered profit and risk sharing. It was a lump sum budget offer . If crowder made them excess over the 50 million for four years he wouldn’t see a penny more, but if he was demonetized he’d lose up to 20 percent regardless of how much he profited them from ad reads, merchandising, dw subscriptions, rumble ad monetization, video backlogs they would have profits from, etc. they easily mitigate the ¨risk¨ of demonetization and banning by owning the entire brand and being able to capitalize on funneling people to their site and other more independent sites in the event of banning as well as offering new products to ‘fight the power’ so to speak.
Totally agree with that this shouldn’t have become public, it’s quite disappointing.
There could have been progress made had Crowder not been such a douche.
This is a conversation worth having but he turned what could have been a conversation into a fight where each side [supporters and the public figures/company] is going to dig in their heels and all this drama will be for nothing but destruction.
Valuetainment should hire Crowder, He will be a valuable asset for the brand🙌
I'm looking forward to your podcast with Crowder.
I hope he talks about how evil marijuana is.
all of sudden Crowder wants to be on everyones podcast from Tim Pool to now Value - smells fishy
@@knockda887 I listened to timcast tonight, not liking what I’m hearing or seeing from crowders side so far.
@@knockda887 Andrew Tate strategy is the best way to promote your brand, ask Mr. Beast😉
Steven crowder only talks to right wing content creators and college kids he can edit out when he gets exposed..
Alot of people talk a big game. A man who walks away from money and stands on principle, is a real man.
He didn’t walk. He set up a publicity stunt to get more subscribers and decided the sub money was worth his friendships
Speaking of big game... If a football player goes streaking across the field every time he scored a touchdown and gets the NFL fined millions each game by the FCC, should he still get millions of dollars from the NFL to keep playing? Should the NFL even allow him on the field? And if so, should he still get paid a multi-million dollar salary?
It's not about the money it's about the threats of the fines and being able to remain free and say what he wants and keep his true format one ad read that's entertaining not reading ads every eight minutes slipped in to the show
Watch the response from the Daily Wire that came out just a few hours after Crowder had his say. Very enlightening!
Crowder is a real G foreal. Not many tough aggressive super smart men like him left.
A real G who who refuses to name names and every year cries for more money $$$.
He ducked a debate with Sam Sedar. Not that that tough.
Right on
Not only was he afraid of a debate with despicable Sam Seder, he wanted to call cops and some dude who was painting a small picture on a wall. Crowder is coming of as a coward. Crowder Coward. That should be his name.
@@ihavescaibes685 No one really considers Sam Ceder a serious intellectual. He's more of a beta clout chaser who does nothing to better society.
Crowder did this to generate a new email list. He didn't get any mug club info from the blaze . The Blaze owns everything.
You might want to take a look at YoungRippa59's coverage of the feud.
@@SirBlackReeds
Crowder only said this him self in his videos. It is not a secret or open to any sort of special analysis.
Why should daily wire pay him if he doesn’t bring in money? Seemed fair to me.
I was hoping to get Pat’s take on things. Thanks for the upload
I wonder what Ja Rule thinks?
@@DefeatLust it’s funny you say that I was personally waiting for Tony Yayos opinion on it. I’m totally a free and complete thinker too btw. I am a patriot who is an individual but I need online personalities to justify my thoughts 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@TruStoogeDrew. It's a Dave Chappelle joke, you clown.
@@DefeatLust I know lol I was adding a little extra edge to it
@@TruStoogeDrew. lol, gotchya. my bad then, brother. I took it the wrong way
It was good to hear your take on this. Frankly, I understand why Crowder came put: it wasn’t just about ownership, it was very heavily about censorship/politics, too. I am glad if it doesn’t go full on war, but political content creators under a constant threat of censoship, so I think it is good that Crowder got laud about it.
Crowder censors himself. He does not say anything on youtube that would get his own channel taken off so he can continue to advertise for his mug club .So basically does the same thing DW does. How is DW supposed to pay him if he gets demonetized ?
It is hardly a secret that YT likes to censor people. Crowder got butthurt that nobody is willing to give him the money he thinks he deseves. Now he is trying to save face by sticking up for a hypothetical little guy that he does not even know, to "protect" them from a contract that does not even exist.
The problem is NO ONE has addressed Crowder's complaint that EVERYTHING centers around doing what Big Tech says. It appears Daily Wire is playing to favor the big tech censorship wokism extreme. Do what RUclips, Facebook, Twitter, etc says or you will pay the price. Crowder has a point, Daily Wire is more interested in money then they are the cause.
You guys aren't getting it. Daily Wire is supposed to be anti liberal establishment. The contract would force his hand to never talk about the EXTREMELY important topics that The Daily Wire is supposed to support. I love that he came out with this. Needs to be said.
It's not about censorship. Steven would still be able to say what he wanted to behind the paywall, kind of like he already does (or did? Not sure) with Mug Club. The point is reeling people in through his free RUclips content and getting them to subscribe, as Jeremy Boreing said in the DW response video.
So Crowder should get paid even if his videos dont make money? Like socialism?
Matt Walsh and Candace Owens are DW employees. They say a lot of shit that would never fly anywhere else
@@offgrid1356 Well he doesn't make money from these platforms already and he's making alot of money. Obviously, or they wouldn't want him on their network.
@@adamhamel9784 Actually he currently breaks that contract already in multiple ways. He's gotten multiple strikes and is not monetized by any of the media platforms listed in the contract. Which he would now have to be.
Timcast IRL discovered that Steven created his big con URL back on December 12th. Then the phone call he recorded of his "good friend" Jeremy at Daily Wire was recorded last week. This was all setup by Steven to get attention and start his new business. Also, Steven kept saying it wasn't about the money, yet he counter the Daily Wire and wanted 140mill and they said no so it was about the money at first and now its about him trying to start his own thing and getting as much attention as he can.
will be interesting to see monday show, candace was raging tonight lol
@@trumpwonBIGLY what was Candace saying?
Steven probably countered with that amount of money to recoup all the losses he would have from that contract
Exactly. The offer was made 4 months ago. Yet he is *now* is magically just so mad about it he has to air the dirty laundry? More like he didn't like their offer, or had no interest in ever accepting their offer and he has spent months trying to create a competing enterprise. He is using this drama to stir interest so he could then announce his new enterprise and bring in donors/content generators.
It's a malicious scheme. The phone call he made almost immediately before this video and he secretly recorded a frank conversation with a person who had considered him a friend for the last decade. Then he proceeds to context crop 3 word sound bites from said recording to try and smear the DW CEO. This is bottom of the barrel scummy.
@@JC-cv3up If he thinks he can make $140mill on his own then I am not sure why he is looking to join another company.
If I'm not mistaken Crowder didnt name drop at first. Jeremy confirmed that the beef was between Crowder and DW. I do think that Crowder could have handled this a little differently but totally understand where he is coming from on this issue. Like maybe try to negotiate before putting them on blast. This video was super enlightening to how contracts can be inflated with lawyers wanting to get the best for their clients. The contract still seemed ridiculous though.
He did try to talk to him. He played a bit of it last night. DW lied & obfusvated the truth, again.
@@iamwhatiam4075 DW didnt lie, Jeremy went word by word through the contract they offered him.
Instead of calling out DW, he called TheQuartering and spilled the beans, and TheQuartering released his Indiana Jones video of Shapiro stealing TheQuartering’s white labeled drop-shipped coffee. TheQuartering leaked this before DW confirmed.
Bro...everybody and their mama knew he was talking about the Dailywire.
@@GandRpictures haha true
All I know is whenever somebody says, "it's not about the money" it's about the money.
☝🏿🎯💯
Lol facts.
Yup I agree crowder messed this up
The only people talking about the money are the Daily Wire people. Crowder has talked entirely about principle
@@darth-hellhound6534 Er uh, no. Crowder explicitly said, "It's not about the money."
Its not about the money, he is saying the company is relying on big tech and using it to profit off talents instead of working to separate from big tech and work on making the talents obtain more and be independent better.
He wanted the company to foot the bill on strikes and such, and still pay the full amount to the artist, the company said they should share the burden, even though it was the actions of the artist, and then Crowder was like It isn't about money it's about "The country"... which is him being a baby and admitting defeat, because his argument is dumb. you don't understand math if you think you can get paid even though you make 0 revenue for 9 months... ... go back to school.
Yet all of his complaints lead back to money. The two are not separate. Seriously. If DW removed all stipulations about social media/Big tech revenue generation and reduced their offer to 15 million do you think Crowder would accept it? You know he won't. He is full of shit. "Well why can't he get 50 million and not have those stipulations". Because DW bean counters have relied upon revenues from the various streaming and social media platforms to justify the 50 million dollar pay out. As in based on their estimates Crowder would not be worth it without those sources. Now Crowder may think differently, it then behooves him to show how he can generate revenue in other ways that makes up for this loss. He doesn't though, because his intent isn't to actually work DW, it never was.
@dr.decker3623 you are missing the point...if you are threatened with loosing massive amounts of money (in which he owes his employees too) then you are very likely to give into temptation to say and do things you don't agree with, just to make sure food is on the table
@@jimbojones9118 there is rumble and DW+ to say all that he wants to say, isn't that the whole point, to be independent of YT and big tech?
Lol and how is Crowder any different?? He literally does the exact same thing
Crowder - "It's not about the millions, but if you cut my pay, I'm out"
You clearly didn't watch his video, or you didn't understand it, or you have no idea what crowder is trying to do, or a combination of those 3 things.
@@kinjunranger140 That was 100% what it was about. Tell me this, if all Big Tech revenue generation stipulation were removed from the offer, but the fee they offered Crowder was 15 million dollars. Do you think he would have been happy with it? You know the answer. And when you know that answer you also know Crowder is full of shit on it not being about money. The 50 million dollar offer by DW was based on assumed revenues from all the outlets (including big tech). If those revenue sources are shut down (fairly or not) DW doesn't want to be stuck paying the full 50 million while not getting the revenue they were depending on.
Crowder believes he is worth more. But he was unable to demonstrate that and didn't provide a counter offer. Thus he whined like a bitch and pulled this move. It's quite possible he is worth 50 million without big tech venues, but DW team has no data in which to collaborate that.
Oh and I hate you all for not giving me $140 M. 😂
@@kinjunranger140 yall fall for anything.. lol
Maybe he just has principles
The more I listen to PBD, the more I like him!
You’re right. He is the man! Love the fact that he can sit down with anyone from Sammy the Bull, Donnie Brasco, Trump or whoever and just has a normal conversation and he can pull nugget out that are pure jewels. He’s freaking awesome!
Who is "PBD?"
@@quilope Patrick Bet David knows a thing or two about bad contracts because he runs a life insurance pyramid scheme. he is a great podcast host i must agree lol
@@PhatAssObese *shrug*
Most of the people reacting to this situation with a negative slant towards Crowder are missing his main point. It's not about the money HE would get. It's about the TERMS that EVERYONE would be held to. In this era of cancel culture and censorship, a contract like that is absurd. It would hamstring anyone that signs it and keep them form speaking out on issues. If you somehow missed that in his first video, go watch the second one because it's impossible to miss it in that one.
Crowder response to Jeremy.
- Remove the penalties for fees in regards to strikes.
- Remove the ownership of content and merchandise.
That was all.
Would you pay an employee their full wages when that employee doesn't make you enough money to do so?
Where will DW find the money to pay SC in full when they are unable to make enough money from him?
The dude asked for 120 million do crying out loud
@@azraeldemuirgos9518 But he's bringing his own base?
Do we cow tow to the left for fear of a little revenue loss?
Or better yet do it a different way.
@@IntentionallyBlank996 a little revenue loss? If it is so little, why can't SC agree to it? After all, he says it isn't about the money, If he gets banned, they would have to take money from their other projects to pay him his full fee, which would affect those other projects, you are asking them to jeopardise their plans for SC, would you do that?
Pretending to be against big tech and just following the rules for money is not being against big tech.
You guys are putting so much on the money and not on the principles.
It's not about the money. It's about everyone being a part big tech
Including Crowder. His RUclips channel is an advertisement. Now he betrayed his friends for publicity.
Yes let’s swap out the big tech model for big tech + backstabbing
Does driving a car make you part of the automotive industry? Your comment was just dumb.
whatever SC did, is about money, nothing else. using big tech as a pawn, and using DW to virtual signaling, I am pretty sure he is going to keep his youtube channel and continue to bend the knee to big tech, while continue to try to get people into his own platform. let's come back 6 months later, and see if he is still on youtube.
... AND the money
Yea there's a difference when Your punishing people on behest of big tech. Learn the difference simp
Crowder was one of the few that had Callen on during his allegations and let him speak his side completely. As much as their lives seem separated, Crowder being a conservative talk show host and Callen a Hollywood actor, they both are technically entertainers. And it's cool that they give each other room to speak and never assume the worst.
Callen is not funny and is obviously perverted
He was a better friend then Rogan was
In all fairness I don’t agree on crowder with a lot of things. Callen is a literal dipshit compared to crowder though.
@@chillingguy8386 maybe rogan knew was a creep so thought the allegations could’ve been true
Ah that is why he is lying about Crowder being a funny comic....got it. That makes sense now because he is very much objectively terrible at standup.
Steven Crowder is pure talent, DW is just backed by lots of money.. and Crowder is right, predatory contracts have plagued the entertainment industry for decades and now he is calling it out..
Why would anyone negotiate with Crowder going forward, when he’s shown himself to be a bad faith negotiator?
The attorneys are billing hours. IMO Crowder was out of line. He wanted a ‘Talent’ deal and who cares if the movie makes money.
I'm Glad to see crowder stand up like this. I do get concerned when I see big conservative names feud like this. I worry it divides us when we need most to be united. But perhaps I'm over thinking it.
I over think things, too. This one seems a simple as DW saying, "Be polite in public (on the major platforms), and save your colorful comments for the family (behind the paywall)." That is reasonable. SC is reacting like a teenager, idealistic but not understanding that he still has freedom to cover his topics, just be discerning. In the end, though, it was an opening offer that all SC had to do was say "no" to if he didn't like it. I wish the best for all parties involved, because we need SC and we need the DW.
No..this is super important ! If we are going to fix &nsave this country. We NEED 100% truth & transparency. DW. Is not doing that. They haven't been for a while. With the exception of Knowles & sometimes Walsh. There are trrue "people owned & controlled" platforms out there. Hopefully this will point them out & help them grow. When the majorjty , stop using and supporting this stuff. Things will change for the better.
I am sobexcited to watch your interview with Crowder! It will be nice to hear from someone who has no previous relationship with either party. Besides you PBD are by far my fav when it comes to interviews. I love the way you talk with people!
Crowder wants it public. He’s trying to launch his own studio and is using this situation as a springboard for that. He’s basically trashing the competition and posturing as the new game in town.
If it works it’s a smart idea but his points on the contract are super skewed and cherry picked. He’s pretty much either lying, or is an idiot.
No, you really missed his burden for this whole thing.
Thank you. This is all very convenient timing.
Crowder left the Blaze evidently because the Blaze claimed he was loosing them money because he (Crowder) was demonitized
It’s less about the money or more about bending the knee to big tech. The guy is demonetized already, so him signing a contract that penalizes him for that would be a dumb idea
@johnanthony9923 lol you must not know how subscriptions work dummy
@John Anthony this is correct I think. It was telling that Jeremy said Steven has no idea how many Mug Club subscribers he even has because that information has never been disclosed to him. And Steven openly admits this by building a website and begging for Mug Club subscribers to recreate the list for him. Listen Steven is an incredible talent, but it’s clear he’s just drumming up drama to promote going out on his own and becoming a competitor to DW. Which is fine. Do it, but don’t make false claims, show us edited portions of the first draft, and now edited recordings of your phone call with Jeremy. It really stinks.
@John Anthony The fact that you're just focused on the math clearly shows that you're missing the bigger picture.
Is there any evidence that Crowder wasn’t making money for the Blaze? I’m sincerely interested in this.
It was more about ownership of his own materials and his team. Plus, he reportedly would lose 20-25% of his contracted amount per unmonetized platform. He told them he thought they should change their business model so they aren't beholden to Silicone Microdosing Valley.
He wanted the company to foot the bill on strikes and such, and still pay the full amount to the artist, the company said they should share the burden, even though it was the actions of the artist, and then Crowder was like It isn't about money it's about "The country"... which is him being a baby and admitting defeat, because his argument is dumb. you don't understand math if you think you can get paid even though you make 0 revenue for 9 months... ... go back to school.
I see where crowder is coming from, but DW is a proven and stable company, growing rapidly and strong, yet a person never running something similar has feedback that he thinks they are doing it wrong...
@@dr.decker3623it’s a bad deal all the way around. What a mess. For crowder it seems like indentured servitude for 4 years, and I don’t think that 50 million deal factors in the operating costs of running his show in addition to taxes (which can eat up your profits at that tax bracket 20-40% I’m guessing)
DW has to cover their assets and ensure the $$ invested in crowder turn a profit, hence the high penalty for being deplatformed (which can happen easily given BiG tech censorship) and not delivering at least average 4 shows per week. I can see both sides of the argument.
If it’s a bad deal (wether it’s a contract for a mortgage, military, professional fighting, pro sports, music industry, media, time share, car lease, etc.) there’s no shame in walking away in order to have a better life. If crowder is missing out but he’s better off going solo, then that’s his prerogative. DW will find ways to increase their revenue.
@@dr.decker3623 That's the issue isnt it. The Daily Wire pretty much said "Hey if this guy gets into trouble by sneezing we're going to make him pay." Knowing full well that there's a bunch of unhinged psychopaths' on Twitter who spend every day looking for that 'gotcha' to start a campaign on.
If that's the case the Daily Wire should have never entertained the notion of fielding a offer to Crowder whom by far is quite low (assume that his personal subscription brings in 20-30mil a month). Then you add on top that the Daily Wire goes out of its way to not touch subjects for the sake of not touching them, and then you have a lot of pink haired crazies who are mad that Michael Knowels is not banned off the internet for his book to this day.
@Gry Gaming I highly doubt he gets 20mil a month from mug club.
Also the idea was that most of the stuff that would get the show struck should be behind the pay wall.
Crowder strikes me of someone bitching about a problem and when a compromise is talked about, screaming louder than before.
This is 100% for views on Crowders part. He's using this to launch a competing service. You have to admire how much downside DW was covering with their initial term sheet. The gap between business and talent may get smaller but will never go away.
Yep.
You might want to take a look at YoungRippa59's coverage of the feud.
It wasn't even about how much he was getting paid. It was about being under someone else's control. I'm with crowder on this one. He should stay independent. Not many people can do it, but guys like crowder and Tom McDonald can. They have enough of a following.
But why bash the contract and record their calls? It's just an i initial talk and not even a contract? Crowder was scum recording that call for obviously publicity reasons. I get it he is riling his mob to get publicity but doing it low blow against a professional business that is engaging clearly good faith but tough bargaining is just bad.
It's like imagine you are offering a cutting your lawn service and the owner of the house low ball you. Instead of walking away or haggle you video the person and upload it in the internet. That is not how you conduct price negotiations... not only unprofessional but downright scum because anyone with common sense can see Crowder is just using it as an excuse to build his upcoming business model.
I'm also with Steven on this one but, they should not be doing this in public, it's not a good look!!!!
I can understand not liking the deal.. fair enough, you can say no thank you. I don't like the way he gave only part of the contract and then recorded a phone call on purpose so everyone could hear.
And yet Steven self censors all the time by staying on RUclips. A platform he allegedly hates and is part of the evil "big tech" empire. But why does he stay? Because he can use it to push mug club subscriptions.
If he wants to become independent (remember he was only recently a part of Blaze) fine, but don't throw half the conservative movement under the bus in the process.
you're missing the part where it wasn't about the money but the culture war
He wanted the company to foot the bill on strikes and such, and still pay the full amount to the artist, the company said they should share the burden, even though it was the actions of the artist, and then Crowder was like It isn't about money it's about "The country"... which is him being a baby and admitting defeat, because his argument is dumb. you don't understand math if you think you can get paid even though you make 0 revenue for 9 months... ... go back to school.
@@MrRhetorikill educate yourself ruclips.net/video/mWe4ZEK0j9M/видео.html
@@dr.decker3623 educate yourself please ruclips.net/video/mWe4ZEK0j9M/видео.html
Why do you believe what these grifters tell you? They're all about the money.
I came here excited to hear Patrick’s take. Realized Steven Crowder will be on here in two days so Patrick has no opinion
In my view I think Steven threw the first punch as he was friends with Jeremy at DW. It was just as PBD said, it was a first draft of a contract, common practice in contract talks. I think Steven should have realize that it is all companies intentions to make sure they come out on top, and if they are willing to spend the money they need certain things to ensure return on money spent. The only reason I feel Steven might have done this was because he felt because of their friendship it was dirty pool to have a contract with things he did not like. I think it was wrong to go public until the deal was finished and both parties agreed to sign or not.
It could be that DW and Crowder were never really friends to begin with, and that Boering & Shapiro were just currying favor with him so they could snatch his show up when his contract with TheBlaze ended.
Yep. Especially if you care about the other 200+ people that work for you. Steven clearly has no idea what it looks like to deal with that scope.
Opening negotiations with terrible negotiations is a sign of bad faith. Friends dont try to take advantage of friends. Also, using the term "wageslave" when talking about your employees makes my blood boil. I will never feel sorry for the corporation over the little guy.
Yeah, but then where would the hot takes, shitposts, and promo cutting go? This is all about views and attention.
It wasn’t only about himself , he disagreed with the creator being punished for for demonetization in a time where expressing your opinion makes you a target to be censored and them “playing ball with big tech”
He wanted to lead by example and show that everything’s not about the money. It’s about standing up for what you believe
Then why did he ask DW for more money and make sure he is guaranteed to get paid no matter if he brings in money.
@@CLBCrew96 The one's that believe this isn't about money are blind! Lol.
It’s like watching two of my best friends fight. I don’t want to pick sides
TEAM ALEX JONES !!!!
There is no joy in Republican PropagandaVille.
@@sthubbins4038 there is PLENTY of joy, let me tell you
DW is right. Crowder expects him and others to get paid even if he does bring in money.
One of your friends, is a deep fake and only loves money, not people's rights.
The friend that refers to their contracted workers as wage-slaves, is not a friend, they've been playing you for a putz.
It was a first draft. Crowder took it very hard that there would be penalties for deplatforming. He felt that would crimp his free speech. Daily Wire felt they needed to protect their investment.
Not just that, but penalized daily for his channel being demonetized. Crowder's channel hasn't been monetized since Trump took office in 2016.
He has also been banned 3 times at least his last unban was just a few months ago
This is the problem w DW... "Tired of giving your money to brands that hate you, and don't share your values?" - Jeremy's Razors.
You don't contract penalties that use the arbitrary banning or censoring of your political rivals like FB, YT. Etc.
According to Crowder, it’s not really about him. His issue is with how the “big con” business model affects up n comers. (It’s highly punitive.) It’s also about the excuse that “it’s just business”. For SC, it’s a MISSION to preserve liberties and the Constitution. A *calling*. He challenged them to change their business model to not just make a profit, but help creators succeed. When they succeed, we ALL do.
I'm not sure I believe him.
How the hell do you expect to compete with disney and and big media if you don’t make a profit. he barely negotiated, if at all, after the initial conversation starter offer that DW sent him. it’s perfectly fine to believe you’re worth more than the offer and to disagree with bits of the contract, that’s what the lawyers are for. DW were expecting to negotiate with crowder. I’m certain he could have gotten a much better deal and brought down the penalty fees. DW gotta start somewhere and given that this was a conversation starter offer, I imagine they fully expected to offer him more money and potentially bring the penalty fees down somewhat. but you’re an idiot if you think they should take a loss just to make crowder happy. it’s business.
@@hegemonycricket2182 You’re not a regular watcher of his show, obviously 😀
He wanted 140 mil
@@Teal_Seal he countered w 140 mil. Crowder is ultra greedy
The contract was ridiculous. There was NO risk on DW's part. ALL the loss seemed to be passed onto Crowder. The 50 million is over 4 years, so 12 M a year. But then if he gets demonetized he gets hit 25%, then 20%, then 10%, then another 25%. At that rate the 12M goes down to 3M. And is that just for him or for his whole crew? SC has had to deal with A LOT of demonetization over the past years...this is a nightmare for him and DW isn't giving him a good deal at all. God bless~
DW is assuming all the risk
@@garymillerjr4452 Not if they don't have to pay when any demonetization happens. There are many other platforms that pay out not on that list that would be streams of income for DW as well as the Mug Club Forever subscriptions. God bless~
Andrew Klavan is the pearl of the DW.
I see you are a man of discerning taste.
Lord Klavan is the best. I miss him being daily. The Klavanless week is rough.
@@jeffhabib6673 I die 6 days a week during the Klanvanless week
His novel 'Another Kingdom' (I think) is excellent! Deep, action packed fantasy. There's an audio version read by Michael Knowles. Also pretty stellar.
So Andrew is awesome?
The only thing that matters is that Crowder was censored and banned from RUclips for discussing topics that were off limits to society, while also being correct and telling the truth.
it wasn't a contract. It was a terms sheet.
- Registered domain 3 days before he leaves the Blaze
- counters for $120m
- records Jeremy
- uses opportunity to launch new website.
I think Crowder wants to be The Daily Wire’s direct competition, and he is using this OFFER SHEET (and calling it a contract) as a way to sign some of the younger talent moving up in the conservative world using fear of contracts most don’t understand as a weapon.
Change my mind.
I see what you did there.
It was NEVER about the MONEY...Come'on Man! It was about not bowing to RUclips and other platforms with CENSORSHIP!!!
If true why did he ask for 30M/year? If DW was willing to give him that money, he would have gladly accepted.
Independent? Crowder has literally worked FOR someone his entire professional career..
Steven never said he wanted more money he just wanted the contract to not punish people for a strike or ban from social media
Crowder censors himself. He does not say anything on youtube that would get his own channel taken off so he can continue to advertise for his mug club .So basically does the same thing DW does. How is DW supposed to pay him if he gets demonetized ?
@@thespymawsta no DW needs to change that clause completely. So that 50 mil for 4 years buys them all the rights to merch and mug club and basically any revenue from Crowder. Not to mention that they would own a percentage of Crowder's name and brand for life. Also that 50 million has to be split between all of Steven's crew that help put the show out as well as cover any expenses on studio. Seeing is how mug club alone brings in about 40 mil a year not to mention the add reads he'd have to do etc that 50 mil is a low number considering what he'd being in. But none of that matters. What is important is that we thought that these guys could say whatever they wanted without worrying about being cancelled and report on the news items that the left tries to ban and hide. This contract shows that isn't true and that they need watch what they report on and say so that Twitter or Facebook or etc. Doesn't ban or strike them. Imagine being told well just be a wage slave for five years while you guys your brand then maybe try to do this on your own but either way we still own a percentage for your whole life. It makes it impossible for a up and comer is o exceed. We are about free speech and this contract limits your speech and if you can't see that you are a fool
@@thespymawsta also they know that Crowder is already demonetized so why even add that to contract then?
Crowder asked for 30 mil a year. He's greedy and all about the money. He didn't make any changes to the terms lol and also he does the exact same thing, he censors himself on RUclips just like DW were asking
@@californiapoontappa He did though, his agent countered the 50mil with 130. Then when DW said no, Crowder waits months to "come out" with his outrage for the little guys. Ffs
It was the first draft. Crowder claims that is not for the money but according to the DW video he did ask for 30 million a year and when they said no he made the thing public. To be honest, I would be shocked if PBD does not push Crowder back on his desition to create all this drama that only divides the conservative audience.
You're a cuckservative. You'll be in your grave saying "omg imagine if the roles were reversed!"
I've done some contract negotiations in the private and public sector. None of what was in this contract surprised me.
Me neither. It was just an offer sheet to begin conversation
It's only surprising to know nothings
That's the point, it's a bad faith deal. It's a slap in the face when supposedly they are "friends" or at least fellow "warriors" in the culture war. Instead, all this demonstrates is that DW is a grift just like Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS, etc. Think for 2 seconds, is it really so difficult for them to bring forth a fair/reasonable deal off the bat? Instead the argument is that Crowder must redline the offer (that is time/money) and kick it back to DW or hire an expensive lawyer (more time/money) to redline the contract on his behalf and kick it back to DW. This is patently ridiculous to expect Crowder to bother doing so when he doesn't need the money. This is the sort of thing you bother with when you really need the money.
It's actually surprising to see that the DW says they're in it to stick it to big tech censorship yet DW has contracts that bows down to censorship.
Maybe it’s not but it’s shocking to anyone who’s been hearing these companies claim they’re fighting Big Tech and Conservative Principles while bending over for Big Tech and saying “Yes Daddy”.
no one in the comments is summing up crowders take correctly.
he said specifically many times: this has to do with the contract dinging a creator for being censored by big tech platforms like RUclips. which then makes the creator beholden to big, existing tech instead of disrupting.
i think both sides have totally fair points. definitely comes across as a lack of communication. but it had nothing to do with money and everything to do with Daily Wire seemingly tying the contract to corrupt streaming/content platforms. Crowders point is we should do away with them.