Comments by "Debany Doombringer" (@debanydoombringer1385) on "Steven Crowder LIES On TimCast IRL" video.

The claim that Crowder didn't send a counter offer was from Jeremy's video. He said Steven said that he couldn't accept any of it and to send a new. Jeremy said they never did. Crowder never said he didn't send a counter offer. He said it's not about the money and got offered more from another place to make his point. Crowder never said anything about how many offers were sent, how long he'd talked with DW or anything. His first video was general and didn't get into specifics except the terms and penalties. Said he'd received several offers like the one he showed in his first 30 minute video. Jeremy's hour long video is where Crowder made no counter came from and that DW didn't send another offer. Crowder's second video was short and didn't say anything about how many offers. So if Crowder did send a counter offer, Jeremy's lying too.
12
@rahn45 I know Jeremy said the first offer was returned because Crowder said it was terrible and to come back with something better. Jeremy said they made no other offer. I'm not understanding this "gotcha". They both said the same thing. Steven's agent sent a number, DW sent the term sheet, Crowder said no these terms aren't acceptable, Jeremy said they waited 3 months and said that's the only offer. People have been watching so many different videos of other people they don't remember what was said by who I guess. I've only watched DW and Steven's video, part of Shad's, Lauren's, and Crowder on Timcast.
4
@martasorangeberry The agents crazy high number was the one Jeremy referred to. In Jeremy's own video he said Crowder said the offer was too bad and to rework it and send a new one. Jeremy said they didn't. If Crowder had asked a second time (Jeremy said the first amount the agent sent was $30 a year) for more Jeremy would have definitely said so because for him it is all about the money. That's all he focused on. He knew it wasn't enough, but OMG it's so much and really fair, but it's not what he's worth and we were prepared to pay a lot more, but it was a fair offer and really good. Crowder said on Timcast his agent sent in a high number and that would be the one Jeremy referred to in his video which was before the term sheet sent. So I guess they are both lying then for some strange reason.
3
@zachspool No they really aren't. How do you know they renegotiate? Because one person said so who's content has to preapproved? Lawyers are saying those clauses are there because the investors want them there. Jeremy doesn't own DW. He's at the mercy of the same kind of billionaires he criticized Crowder for. They try to hide that fact, but they absolutely are. Lawyers are also saying that term sheet was written up to be insulting because that's the only reason those terms would have been sent to someone like Crowder with his well known history of being demonitized, banned permanently off FB, and already has a warning and 2 strikes. So either they knew nothing about their good "friend" or it was intentional to claim they made an offer and give some excuse why he didn't join. That's the only logical explanation for that offer to someone you spend an hour long video claiming they're you're friend.
2
Lawyers have said it will be interpreted in the best light possible for the company by the company and they will take you to court. The wording is the wording for a reason. I highly doubt DW has a staff of crap lawyers that don't know how to write correctly. This is a lot of the problem. People are trying to interpret things as it really meant this or I'm sure they meant that. If it doesn't say that, they didn't mean that because that's how term sheets work (and would have been contract immediately had Crowder said ok). When the greatest grifter of all Rekieta Law says he wouldn't have taken it even though it was that much money, it's really bad. Edit: Steven has seen these contracts since he was a child. He left Hollywood in 2007. Contracts aren't something he's never seen before. They also said since those terms weren't removable by DW, it was most likely from the investors. Not just for Crowder, but all.
1