Jon and Kate Plus 8 Official Thread - Part 8

[Dee77]

First of all, we don't know if TLC would be paying or Kate. Or perhaps TLC will pay now and Kate later. Once they are trained and not puppies the caring may be much easier.


So are the kids stuck caring for the dogs or not? I thought that was a concern. And even if someone is hired for their care, it doesn't mean the G's would do no care.Back to having someone else clean my house..I would still have to do some of it myself, unless they lived in and worked 24/7.
I thought she said her kids deserved everything on a silver platter, not that they expect it. Mine deserved everything on a silver platter too (they were great kids)..they just didn't get it LOL. I don't think her's did either. I just took that as I would if anyone said it, to mean she really loved them and wanted the best for them. But I guess it couldn't mean that if Kate said it


Well, that's in your perfect world. Other people have divorces, deaths, allergies, lack of funds, a move to a nursing home...lots of reasons a pet may have to be rehomed. LIke I said, it's not like she tossed the dogs out.

And so far I haven't heard they are back.

I am fully aware that there are legitimate conditions where people have to reluctantly give their pets up. The difference is that the Gosselins are thinking of getting their pets back again and who knows under what pretenses. It was a hypothetical comment that I disagreed with made by another poster based on it's assumption that everyone else should make up for the bad choices that Kate makes.

 

[mousey]

My friend is a breeder and I don't remember it being a revolving door as to I want the dogs today but not tomorrow, etc...... Any pet involves extra work and when you don't want that pet its even more miserable. Sad to say but those dogs were probably so happy to leave that house that they never looked back. Mishandled by the kids, hated by their mother, the list goes on. I don't remember Kate ever cleaning up poo after them. I know some people on this thread memorize every episode, but that moment would of been shown and reshown 1,000 times (not to be confused with the 15 retakes)!

 

[DMRick]

You are right, we have no idea why, other than Kate saying she shouldn't have done it (you can google where she said that). For the G's, this very well may have been a legitimate condition. How would we know otherwise? One person's reasons may not make sense to us, but unless we are living their life, how the heck can we decide that? It's possible that she felt the pups were better off back with their previous owner while she sorted out their lives. Jon said they have visited them and that they were paying for their upkeep. So they weren't abandoned (assuming Jon wasn't lying).

I have no idea what your last sentence says, since I missed any post where someone said everyone else should make up for bad choices Kate makes.

I am fully aware that there are legitimate conditions where people have to reluctantly give their pets up. The difference is that the Gosselins are thinking of getting their pets back again and who knows under what pretenses. It was a hypothetical comment that I disagreed with made by another poster based on it's assumption that everyone else should make up for the bad choices that Kate makes.

 

[DMRick]

Really? Breeders in this area usually have a clause in the contract that they get first turndown if the dog is no longer wanted. I've worked with a lot of breeders in my job, and they are usually very understanding. Jon said they paid the breeder to keep them. I guess your breeder friend doesn't have facilities to board or no interest in getting her dogs back.

I don't lie. You said you watch the show, and it doesn't take memorizing it to remember something that happened, especially since it was discussed. You may have missed it but it doesn't mean it didn't happen. She cleaned up so the kids wouldn't step in it in the yard. At the time, people thought it was a jab at Jon. Why would they have reshown it over and over? People that intensely dislike Kate believe she does nothing of any value, so they wouldn't want it shown again. She'd made it clear that it wasn't something she liked doing and I doubt she would if she got them back. Which is prob why some of us think they may have hired someone for that duty.

Dogs seemed to really love the kids. Mishandled? These were not toy poodles. Kids liked them, and they seemed to like the kids. Hated by their mother? I do think the kids were sort of young for the puppies, but I'm pretty sure the GS's could handle themselves.

My friend is a breeder and I don't remember it being a revolving door as to I want the dogs today but not tomorrow, etc...... Any pet involves extra work and when you don't want that pet its even more miserable. Sad to say but those dogs were probably so happy to leave that house that they never looked back. Mishandled by the kids, hated by their mother, the list goes on. I don't remember Kate ever cleaning up poo after them. I know some people on this thread memorize every episode, but that moment would of been shown and reshown 1,000 times (not to be confused with the 15 retakes)!

 

[Dee77]

I am moving past the whole "dogs returning" aspect that the thread has been focused on because as DMRick says, I live in a "perfect world" and I don't have the time, energy or interest in re-hashing the same thought over and over. Besides, I am too focused on making sure that all the single men I know are warned not to answer the phone if ABC calls.

 

[DMRick]

Besides, I am too focused on making sure that all the single men I know are warned not to answer the phone if ABC calls.

LOL..OK, that was pretty funny.

 

[whitneyNC]

I think you & C Ann are so cute...like 2 peas in a pod. You both have so much in common what is not to like

You always sound so bitter in your post. I know you have had a very hard life but let it go sometimes. Life is to short.

. Not.

 

[whitneyNC]

The dogs were a prop for the show, and unfortunately the kids had to attempt to take care of them (which grossed me out; I can only imagine mine at that age cleaning up poo and pee!). The kids didn't get to name them, or pick them out, which was obviously a big deal to the older two. Kate never beat around the bush about not liking them. Kate was not open to the breeder's advice or suggestions. Instead there was high heels, eye rolling and her quoting him on TV like Charlie Brown's teacher. I think the kids got attached to them and like people in their lives, when the dogs no longer served a purpose, they were taken away. Yes, reputable breeders will take dogs back without question. No, that doesn't make it a better example of responsibility for the kids.

 

[kidshop]

I am moving past the whole "dogs returning" aspect that the thread has been focused on because as DMRick says, I live in a "perfect world" and I don't have the time, energy or interest in re-hashing the same thought over and over. Besides, I am too focused on making sure that all the single men I know are warned not to answer the phone if ABC calls.

Hmmm, I've heard the rumors, and while I do believe kate would do anything to be on tv, I can't see it being anything other than a colossal embarrassing failure.

How would that be different or better than Jon dating one young woman at a time? I'll let the Jon 'haters' sort that one out.

 

[C.Ann]

I think the idea of Kate starting to date is a great one! Hopefully it would lead to a long-term relationship and eventually marriage..

Think about it.. If she married a man with a decent job, the kids wouldn't have to work to support mom's lifestyle anymore.. Win-win..

 

[MAKmom]

http://www.popeater.com/2010/06/16/kate-gosselin-kids-money/
Kate Gosselin and her eight children get used to their new world on 'Kate Plus Eight,' the new TLC show sans Jon following the couple's brutal public split, all eyes are on Kate and the kids. All eyes and a whole lot of money, it seems. While Jon is being paid by the network simply to not be involved in the show, the kids are bringing in a whopping amount, in addition to what Kate makes. How much does the Gosselin kid army make? The answer, after the jump!
Kate's Kids Bringing Home the Bacon

Kate Gosselin's new TV show, 'Kate Plus Eight,' is another huge hit for TLC, and for their participation, mother and children stand to earn over $700,000. Though Jon is no longer part of the show, he is still under contract with TLC, earning just over $70,000 to disappear.

"The reason you don't see Jon looking for a job or doing embarrassing interviews is that he is still on the TLC payroll," a TV insider tells me. "Jon is basically getting paid to keep his mouth shut and go away. Although it must sting him to know his kids are earning more money than he is."

How much more, you ask? My sources tell me that of the $700K that Kate and the tots bring home, $200,000 of that is pay given directly to the kids, while mama bear brings in $500,000 for the 'Kate Plus Eight' tapings. Add that to the $500K she took in for five weeks of work on 'Dancing With the Stars,' and 2010 is turning out to be quite lucrative for the octomom.

Kate, has always said every dollar the kids earn is put away so that they have the money when they are older. Good, because eight sets of college tuition is expensive!

 

[madge]

moving on from the dogs

http://www.popeater.com/2010/06/16/kate-gosselin-kids-money/?ncid=webmail

edited to add: I see someone else has already posted this. sorry!

 

[madge]

How much more, you ask? My sources tell me that of the $700K that Kate and the tots bring home, $200,000 of that is pay given directly to the kids, while mama bear brings in $500,000 for the 'Kate Plus Eight' tapings. Add that to the $500K she took in for five weeks of work on 'Dancing With the Stars,' and 2010 is turning out to be quite lucrative for the octomom.

$25,000 per child. How many episodes of K+8 are there going to be? 12? That ends up being a little more than $2K per show. I can't help but think that's not a lot. Maybe it is, I don't know ... I'd have to compare it with a child actor pay scale.

 

[MAKmom]

$25,000 per child. How many episodes of K+8 are there going to be? 12? That ends up being a little more than $2K per show. I can't help but think that's not a lot. Maybe it is, I don't know ... I'd have to compare it with a child actor pay scale.

I found this on Pop Eater..but the kids are really not in this leauge yet.

. Angus T. Jones, 16
$250,000 an episode to spar with Charlie Sheen
'Two and a Half Men'
CBS

2. Miranda Cosgrove, 16
$180,000 per show
'iCarly'
Nickelodeon

3. Selena Gomez, 17
$25,000 per episode
'Wizards of Waverly Place'
Disney Channel

4. Dylan and Cole Sprouse, 17
$20,000 each per episode
'The Suite Life'
Disney Channel

4. Keke Palmer, 16
$20,000 an episode
'True Jackson, VP'
Nickelodeon

6. Miley Cyrus, 17
$15,000 per show but don't forget about her tours, movies, etc...
'Hannah Montana'
Disney Channel

7. Rico Rodriguez, 11
$15,000 a show and worth every penny!
'Modern Family'
ABC

8. Demi Lovato, 17
$12,000 per show
'Sonny With a Chance'
Disney Channel

9. Victoria Justice, 17
$12,000 an episode
'Victorious'
Nickelodeon

10. Atticus Shaffer, 11
$12,000 a show
'The Middle'
ABC

 

[Promomx2]

Wasn't there a post awhile pack that said that Kate was dating a local soccer coach?

 

[C.Ann]

I didn't think my opinion of how Kate earns her living could get any lower, but if the figures stated here are correct, it just did.. $500,000 for Kate and $200,000 for the kids?? Without those kids, Kate would be worth nothing (in terms of being a celebrity who can pull in that kind of money) - so again, it points to the fact that the kids are working to support Kate's lifestyle - and to a certain degree, Jon's as well..

Ironically, just this morning I was watching a show that had a rerun of the interview she gave on the Today Show when Jon took that money out of their account.. She very specifically stated that she had no concerns in regards to the childrens financial security - now or in the future - as she had set up a separate trust for them that could not be touched by anyone.. She also indicated that it was a substantial amount of money.. With that money sitting there until the kids are old enough to attend college, it sounds like their future education is not an issue she needs to be terribly concerned about.. (Money for therapy maybe, but not college..) Still - as recently as a few weeks ago - she continued to make statements that she needed to do these shows in order to "put food on the table"..

Good grief! How much food can those kids possibly eat???? Do they need the chickens too - so the kids don't have to go without eggs??

She really is a piece of work..

 

[southernbohemian]

I didn't think my opinion of how Kate earns her living could get any lower, but if the figures stated here are correct, it just did.. $500,000 for Kate and $200,000 for the kids?? Without those kids, Kate would be worth nothing (in terms of being a celebrity who can pull in that kind of money) - so again, it points to the fact that the kids are working to support Kate's lifestyle - and to a certain degree, Jon's as well..

Ironically, just this morning I was watching a show that had a rerun of the interview she gave on the Today Show when Jon took that money out of their account.. She very specifically stated that she had no concerns in regards to the childrens financial security - now or in the future - as she had set up a separate trust for them that could not be touched by anyone.. She also indicated that it was a substantial amount of money.. With that money sitting there until the kids are old enough to attend college, it sounds like their future education is not an issue she needs to be terribly concerned about.. (Money for therapy maybe, but not college..) Still - as recently as a few weeks ago - she continued to make statements that she needed to do these shows in order to "put food on the table"..

Good grief! How much food can those kids possibly eat???? Do they need the chickens too - so the kids don't have to go without eggs??

She really is a piece of work..

I think in Kate's twisted logic she does see the money that she earns as buying food for the table. The kids' futures are set up with trusts and the like. What she brings home is used for their current lives. Which may be true - but it leaves out the nice chunk of change that Kate earns from interest. She should definitely be rich enough now that her money is working for her instead of the other way around - which I think should mean she could happily retire and live off of the interest instead of working. Even with 8 kids. But she chooses to work and want to make things seem much more dire than they are. This really upsets me because at one point in her life - things were much more dire. She should remember that when she uses words like "put food on the table." She should just say, "I like working. I like being on TV. I like earning lots of money," instead of talking about bills.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I don't have a problem with Kate making more. It happens across the board. I mean, Bill Cosby is great, but the Cosby Show would have been nothing without the children. And I'm sure he made several hundred percent more than they did per episode.

The "there would be no show without the kids" argument simply does ot hold water.

As for equity rates....I *think* two thousand is within equity.

The above posted list for the top paid child actors are exceptions rather than the rule. Most are "the" star of the show and those rates were negotiated by their agents. The rates are way above equity and not the industry standard for all performers.

Kate is a "lead" in this show and contributes to it's content significantly.

I'm sure this will be seen as a defense of Kate...but it isn't. If we are going to compare treatment if the kids in Kate + 8....it makes better sense to compare it to the whole industry and not a select few of starlet children who make a killing on the series inwhich they appear. Even the kid on the "men" show making a quarter of a million an episode is only making a fraction of what t
Charlie Sheen does. I believe his rate tops 1 million an episode.

 

[C.Ann]

I think in Kate's twisted logic she does see the money that she earns as buying food for the table. The kids' futures are set up with trusts and the like. What she brings home is used for their current lives. Which may be true - but it leaves out the nice chunk of change that Kate earns from interest. She should definitely be rich enough now that her money is working for her instead of the other way around - which I think should mean she could happily retire and live off of the interest instead of working. Even with 8 kids. But she chooses to work and want to make things seem much more dire than they are. This really upsets me because at one point in her life - things were much more dire. She should remember that when she uses words like "put food on the table." She should just say, "I like working. I like being on TV. I like earning lots of money," instead of talking about bills.

I agree.. And believe me, I have no problem with her working.. My problem is with the kids working to support the parents - and with Kate, to the lifestyle she has become accustomed to.. If she can make it on her own - whether that be a tv show; writing books; dancing; starting a singing career; whatever - I truly wish her all the success in the world.. Just don't do it off the backs of those children..

Her whining about "putting food on the table" is an insult to all of the families in this country who really do struggle with that on a daily basis.. If her life goal is to be a celebrity, that's fine - but she needs to own it - make it on her own - and stop making such ridiculous statements about how "rough" she has it..

 

[C.Ann]

I don't have a problem with Kate making more. It happens across the board. I mean, Bill Cosby is great, but the Cosby Show would have been nothing without the children. And I'm sure he made several hundred percent more than they did per episode.

The "there would be no show without the kids" argument simply does ot hold water.

As for equity rates....I *think* two thousand is within equity.

The above posted list for the top paid child actors are exceptions rather than the rule. Most are "the" star of the show and those rates were negotiated by their agents. The rates are way above equity and not the industry standard for all performers.

Kate is a "lead" in this show and contributes to it's content significantly.

I'm sure this will be seen as a defense of Kate...but it isn't. If we are going to compare treatment if the kids in Kate + 8....it makes better sense to compare it to the whole industry and not a select few of starlet children who make a killing on the series inwhich they appear. Even the kid on the "men" show making a quarter of a million an episode is only making a fraction of what t
Charlie Sheen does. I believe his rate tops 1 million an episode.

Difference being, if Jon and Kate didn't have these 8 kids there wouldn't be a show.. What talent does either of them have that would make them that sort of money without the kids?

Kate may be considered the "lead" (although I don't really see it that way as most people on this thread claim they watch the show just to "see the kids"), but take away the kids and she wouldn't have a show to work on..