Jump to content
IGNORED

Jinjer 58: Going for the DMIN


Coconut Flan

Recommended Posts

That sounds like a big house! Whatever the size, in that market, it’s not going to come cheap. Their various income streams must pay well. 

I don’t see them ever leaving LA. They like the lifestyle too much. Jeremy will find some mega church or teaching position after he graduates. I also suspect they will limit their family size. I don’t see them having more than 4. Possibly only 3 if the next one is a boy. 

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ugh. I can’t with these people. Their smug holier than thou attitudes and over privilege just piss me off. 

  • Upvote 11
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, postscript said:

That sounds like a big house! Whatever the size, in that market, it’s not going to come cheap. Their various income streams must pay well. 

I don’t see them ever leaving LA. They like the lifestyle too much. Jeremy will find some mega church or teaching position after he graduates. I also suspect they will limit their family size. I don’t see them having more than 4. Possibly only 3 if the next one is a boy. 

It’s 1800 square feet.

  • Upvote 1
  • Thank You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, someone did give them money to buy the TX house, and they probably made some money with the sale. And it seems for the last 3 years they’ve had limited rent (if any) fees. But they also have added a kid and haven’t really worked. How would they secure o loan with such a spotty work history. Plus there must be tuition fees.

They should give lessons on how they pulled this off. I might be tempted to sign up my son with a Master’s and his lt GF who is a doctor. They’ve been looking at houses for a year and in our coastal CA town, a million bucks gets you a fixer upper. 
Are we sure they bought in LA county? $800,000 sounds more like Bakersfield or Victorville prices.

  • Upvote 3
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BadMurphy said:

It’s 1800 square feet.

That’s bigger than my house. And I live in the Midwest. So way cheaper.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My notes from the video:

1- They referenced how sad they were about the show ending at least twice

2- They mentioned how many of their fans want them to leave California (I'm guessing due to the evil communist regime there 🙄)

  • Upvote 4
  • Eyeroll 8
  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bluebirdbluebell said:

It's possible they saved money from their television days. 

According to D Dillard, the individual families or couples did not get paid-  guess he could have been lying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SassyPants said:

According to D Dillard, the individual families or couples did not get paid-  guess he could have been lying. 

Allegedly, most of the families were paid through a family trust controlled by JB. TLC gave the money to the trust and JB dowels it out as he sees fit. Jeremy is rumored to have asked for him and his family to be paid separately. Austin also complained about money and then he and Joy were given a house to live in that did not require fixing up.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m inclined to believe the rumors that Jeremy asked for a separate contract. My second guess would be that Jim Bob was forced to give some of the individual families a lump-sum payoff at some point. However insufferable the Duggar sons-in-law are, Derick, Jeremy and Austin all seem pretty financially savvy. 

I also don’t think they’re buying that house debt free. For all the crowing about being debt free, I think some of the younger generation have discovered that it’s possible to live with a manageable amount of debt. 

  • Upvote 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The house is in Los Angeles county.  Farther out than the "rental" was.  Think closer to the Master's University  

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Thank You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, postscript said:

I’m inclined to believe the rumors that Jeremy asked for a separate contract. My second guess would be that Jim Bob was forced to give some of the individual families a lump-sum payoff at some point. However insufferable the Duggar sons-in-law are, Derick, Jeremy and Austin all seem pretty financially savvy. 

I also don’t think they’re buying that house debt free. For all the crowing about being debt free, I think some of the younger generation have discovered that it’s possible to live with a manageable amount of debt. 

I’m guessing a combo of lump sum payout, separate contract, sale of the old house and influencer money. I believe the statements from her lawsuit put their income around $200k annually? Even without the show, if they are regularly pulling half that, and put half down, they should be comfortable.  Nice house

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/30/2022 at 10:48 AM, Mama Mia said:

I don’t know, I know it’s an extremely unpopular opinion, but I don’t have a problem with all these “slice of life” Instagram/YouTube people having their kids on. As long as it’s not so excessive it’s interfering with daily life, and it’s kept tasteful.  It’s really not the same as filming season after season after season of 20+ episode shows where they have a crew around and clearly directed storylines. There is no way that doesn’t impact regular life. Although in the specific case of the Duggar’s I think it’s why they turned from robot children in the specials to semi-normal acting little kids — had to tone down the physical abuse. 

The main issue is that there are no protections for children of influencers and content creators like there would be if they were child actors. They are used to make money and yet there are no guarantees that they will have access to that money, just like the Duggar kids on tv. 

There is also an issue of consent. Even if it is “tasteful” content, a child cannot meaningfully consent to their image being shared with millions of people or truly understand what giving up that privacy means. And once they get to an age where they start to understand what that means, there is no guarantee that they’ll be able to stop - how are they going to tell their parents they don’t want to be on camera anymore if that means their family’s income is at stake? 

  • Upvote 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, closetcagebaby said:

The main issue is that there are no protections for children of influencers and content creators like there would be if they were child actors. They are used to make money and yet there are no guarantees that they will have access to that money, just like the Duggar kids on tv. 

There is also an issue of consent. Even if it is “tasteful” content, a child cannot meaningfully consent to their image being shared with millions of people or truly understand what giving up that privacy means. And once they get to an age where they start to understand what that means, there is no guarantee that they’ll be able to stop - how are they going to tell their parents they don’t want to be on camera anymore if that means their family’s income is at stake? 

A user came across my TikTok for you page (I didn’t follow her, so I can’t remember who it is and can’t find it now… but I watched enough of the video that the algorithm brought her onto my feed a few times) who was a kid from one of those mommy blogs many years ago. The things she had to say were pretty interesting, though heartbreaking. She mentioned struggling to set boundaries as she has gotten older, because she was so used to strangers walking up to her and knowing intimate details of her life (a specific story that stuck with me was about starting her period and thousands of people knew, and several people she knew in real life made comments to her face about something that would have otherwise been completely private). 
 

From what I saw of her videos, her stance was that using kids as an income stream should not be allowed… once it’s on the internet, it’s there forever. She’ll never get that privacy back. When you Google her name, the trials and tribulations and stories of every tough parenting moment will be there. Even child actors have the slight privilege of playing characters- it’s not their lives on display. But on the reality TV/influencer side of things, those kids don’t even have that to fall back on- much less all the financial and working hour protection offered by acting jobs. 

  • Upvote 12
  • Sad 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ms. Brightside said:

A user came across my TikTok for you page (I didn’t follow her, so I can’t remember who it is and can’t find it now… but I watched enough of the video that the algorithm brought her onto my feed a few times) who was a kid from one of those mommy blogs many years ago. The things she had to say were pretty interesting, though heartbreaking. She mentioned struggling to set boundaries as she has gotten older, because she was so used to strangers walking up to her and knowing intimate details of her life (a specific story that stuck with me was about starting her period and thousands of people knew, and several people she knew in real life made comments to her face about something that would have otherwise been completely private). 
 

From what I saw of her videos, her stance was that using kids as an income stream should not be allowed… once it’s on the internet, it’s there forever. She’ll never get that privacy back. When you Google her name, the trials and tribulations and stories of every tough parenting moment will be there. Even child actors have the slight privilege of playing characters- it’s not their lives on display. But on the reality TV/influencer side of things, those kids don’t even have that to fall back on- much less all the financial and working hour protection offered by acting jobs. 

I have an former IRL friend who later became an influencer in fundamentalist homesteading world and her posts about her kids are jarring. She believes God blesses her with children as a path of her sanctification. For example, God gave her a child with a temper so she could learn to control her own temper. God gave her a lazy child so she could learn to be less lazy. I do wonder how her children will process this later because they have all been identified publicly  by one or more negative attribute.

  • Upvote 4
  • Sad 11
  • WTF 6
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeeesh the influencer children thing is disturbing now that I'm thinking about it more.

(I have no kids)

 

As for jinger it seems very reasonable to assume they have some sort of nest egg and/or influencer $. 

Influencer money is surprisingly good if you have any kind of decent #s.

It's also possible Jeremy's family gave them $ on marriage. I've known people who got house down-payments as wedding gifts and that sort of thing.

For all that they had a big wedding I wouldn't have said it was particularly fancy. Sometimes families have a fund for wedding/honeymoon/house and let the couple decide.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

That’s bigger than my house. And I live in the Midwest. So way cheaper.

Yes it’s all relative. I think if one can get 5 bedrooms out of 1800 square feet it’s a pretty efficient use of every foot.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BadMurphy said:

Yes it’s all relative. I think if one can get 5 bedrooms out of 1800 square feet it’s a pretty efficient use of every foot.

My house has 4 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms and I think it’s like 1380? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here’s a link to an article in the Sun (I know - not the best source, but it’s what popped up in my google search) which has photos of the house https://www.the-sun.com/entertainment/6383056/jinger-duggar-jeremy-vuolo-new-home-california-santa-clarita/ If this is the house, I easily found the listing on Zillow - sold for $830,000, 5 br. 1832 sq. ft. - those must be tiny bedrooms! Decent sized lot (by California standards) but the backyard in the listing pix is gravel/dirt which is different than the description of the backyard in the article.

I just drove through the area yesterday on my way home from SoCal, it’s where I usually stop to gas up before I head over the grapevine towards the north.

Edited by sndral
  • Thank You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, sndral said:

Here’s a link to an article in the Sun (I know - not the best source, but it’s what popped up in my google search) which has photos of the house https://www.the-sun.com/entertainment/6383056/jinger-duggar-jeremy-vuolo-new-home-california-santa-clarita/ If this is the house, I easily found the listing on Zillow - sold for $830,000, 5 br. 1832 sq. ft. - those must be tiny bedrooms! Decent sized lot (by California standards) but the backyard in the listing pix is gravel/dirt which is different than the description of the backyard in the article.

I just drove through the area yesterday on my way home from SoCal, it’s where I usually stop to gas up before I head over the grapevine towards the north.

Ahhhh another one I can place on official fundie spotting duties lol 

  • Haha 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jinger has a huge SM following so I imagine her influencer fees are pretty good- even her lame cooking demos attract a lot of clicks. If the Dillards managed to squeeze a payoff from JB, then I’m sure the Vuolos did as well.

I don’t think Jeremy contributes much to the pot apart from his occasional conference speeches, but I suspect he gets either a payment or fees in lieu for being the poster boy for the seminary. 
I’m sure Jeremy would love a TV show and is probably quite puzzled as to why it hasn’t happened yet- they are the ‘breakout stars’ after all.

  • Upvote 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Idlewild said:

Jinger has a huge SM following so I imagine her influencer fees are pretty good- even her lame cooking demos attract a lot of clicks. If the Dillards managed to squeeze a payoff from JB, then I’m sure the Vuolos did as well.

I don’t think Jeremy contributes much to the pot apart from his occasional conference speeches, but I suspect he gets either a payment or fees in lieu for being the poster boy for the seminary. 
I’m sure Jeremy would love a TV show and is probably quite puzzled as to why it hasn’t happened yet- they are the ‘breakout stars’ after all.

In the Sun article they reference that in the lawsuit Jeremy said Jinger was the primary wage earner — making money off social media to the tune of 100+ annually. He also stated they made 2-3k per episode of the show, but that wasn’t the bulk of their income. He estimated their total income as somewhere hovering around 200k.  Which sounds right for that mortgage, and $830k sounds right for the suburbs  of a large California city — those prices have started to come down ( it was originally listed for 1.2 million - just recently ) . I have family looking in the Bay Area, and it’s higher, but some prices on similar type homes in similar areas are dropping - finally! It’s the super bougie homes/areas that are still skyrocketing. 

Edited by Mama Mia
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't "annually." They asked how much she had made in the previous year. That was the year her book came out, so their income was higher than normal.

  • Upvote 2
  • Thank You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Coconut Flan locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.