TVCH FORUMS HOME . JOIN . FAN CLUBS . DONATE . CONTACT . CHAT  
                  Quick Links   TOPICS . TREE-VIEW . SEARCH . HELP! . NEWS . PROFILE
Archive through December 10, 2009

Reality TVClubHouse Discussions: Other Reality Shows ARCHIVES: Archives for 2009 - 3: Jon & Kate ARCHIVES: Archive through December 10, 2009 users admin

Author Message
Keldogg
Member

08-12-2005

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 10:19 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Keldogg a private message Print Post    
My understanding is that the house is not paid for, it has a mortgage. In fact, until they recently sold their old house, they were paying two mortgages.

Three to four million dollars may sound like a lot of money, but it is not what they would take home. Taxes would take a large chunk, lawyers/agents would take a chunk.

Assuming that they even took half of that home, investing it is not going to provide an income that is going to keep Kate and the kids in that house, and Jon in his New York apartment.

At least one of the parents is going to have to get a paycheck. If Kate can make an income on television, good for her.

Beekindpleez
Member

07-18-2006

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 10:20 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Beekindpleez a private message Print Post    
And Kate has also said that each of the children has an account, too. So put some of that money there, as well.

That was a good post, Kel.

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 10:33 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
TNT.. by the time the attorneys are paid off.. there is likely to be significantly less money.. oh and if they remain in a high tax bracket, I believe the current admin has plans to grab even more than in the past.

And Jon likes REALLY expensive toys and trips.

And luckily Kate can have her own "O"pinion and don't think she needs to consider any of ours. And conversely I doubt if she is looking at others and micro-analyzing what they should or shouldn't do.

TNT, where have we heard that their homes are paid for? I thought they had a mortgage on the property they now occupy and Jon is paying rent or mortgage reportedly.

They just recently sold the old house but as we all know that isn't all free and clear money with fees, commissions, etc. And I imagine even IF that home was totally paid off, they had months of expenses. I had to maintain my former condo for 9 months and I still had property tax, association dues, some basic utilities, such as gas, water, electrical, insurance, some maintenance (and I didn't have yard/lawn as they did that undoubtedly had to be maintained) and I had no mortage on either property but had property tax, full utilities, association dues, insurance (flood, EQ, etc) on the current condo as well.

So I'm sure they had double expenses.. make that triple since surely Jon has some sort of maintanance or association, taxes, utilities, insurance, plus his rent/mortgage.

And he may be making payments on those vehicles too, if he didn't pay cash.


But anyway, what they "should" have and actually have, only they know. The relatively low powered attorney has already stated that his bill for the divorce was up to $43,000 and you can bet your life that the NY attorney of Jon's has the meter running full speed.

Will be interesting to see the outcome of Jon's lawsuit vs TLC.. and theirs vs Jon. he could have some rather hefty attorney's fees to pay and even court costs.

I don't think of her as poor Kate at all, just wonder why she seems to be the target of so many who feel they could manage her life better than she is. Puzzling, indeed.

Beekindpleez
Member

07-18-2006

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 10:35 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Beekindpleez a private message Print Post    
Sea...do you happen to know when the TLC vs Jon lawsuit is set for?

And good post, too.

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 10:45 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Off the top of my head, I think I read August 14 for the court date, but it could be the 12th. But I might be mixing that up with some doctor appts I have.. or even my colonoscopy

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 10:51 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
LOL! Jon is on the list to vote for "overexposed celebrity male of the year"..

oh.. and he's getting the most votes thus far too.

Who is the most overexposed guy of the year?
Jon Gosselin 56%
Levi Johnston 13%
Tiger Woods 12%
Adam Lambert 10%
Robert Pattinson 8%
Taylor Lautner 1%
Shia LaBeouf 0%

Total Votes: 27,110

Beekindpleez
Member

07-18-2006

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 10:53 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Beekindpleez a private message Print Post    
August??!!? I can't wait that long. LOL!

Thanks, Sea.

And LOL...Levi actually exposes himself, but Jon is most overexposed. Funny!

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 10:58 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Oops.. December!

LOL.. I have NO idea why my fingers typed August???

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 11:02 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Ah it seems to be tomorrow.. moved from Dec 14 to Dec 10 this is just asking for an injunction.

Then the trial was moved from sometime in 2011 to April of 2010..


Jon Gosselin outside his divorce contempt hearing
APThe David and Goliath court date between Jon Gosselin and TLC has been moved up from December 14th to December 10th. TLC is seeking a preliminary injunction to put a full stop on Jon breaching his exclusivity contract. Recently Jon has been appearing on ET and The Insider, which is a rival network. The hearing regarding the injunction will take place in a Maryland courtroom.

The breach of contract lawsuit has also been moved to April 19th, 2010 from a date in 2011, according to Radaronline. Seems someone is in a rush to get this dispute settled. This might be bad news for his soon to ex-wife Kate Gosselin as she is schedule to unveil her new TLC show this spring and his court dates could take the spotlight off of her debut.

It looks like Jon's girls of summer will have to put a rush on coordinating their outfits for the court date. All three of his liaisons, Hailey Glassman, Kate Major and Stephanie Santoro have been subpoenaed to testify against Jon, whether they will make an actual appearance on the new date is not clear. We do know they will be spilling all they know about Jon's business affairs sometime soon in front of TLC's lawyers.



http://www.examiner.com/x-30363-Canada-Celebrity-Examiner~y2009m12d1-TLC-Jon--Kate-Plus-8--Jon-Gosselins-David--Goliath-court-date-moved-up

Cricket
Member

08-05-2002

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 11:10 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Cricket a private message Print Post    
Seamonkey, isn't Jon being sued because he was paid for an interview not done by TLC? ET seems to like him somewhat and perhaps would give him a part-time job as a interviewer, but his hands are literally tied by TLC.

TLC and Kate wanted Jon out of the picture, but hey didn't want him to actually be free to do anything. It's just very controlling and odd. He had enough and fought back by stopping the filming, making Kate a truly scorned woman (said in jest)...taking her show away is not nice. Just ask her, she'll tell you over and over and over. "It's too soon; it's not right..."

To me it seems a double standard. Had TLC dumped Kate and told her to just go away and be quiet, I sincerely doubt many would think that was fair, especially Kate.

Hukdonreality
Member

09-29-2003

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 11:15 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Hukdonreality a private message Print Post    
...you guys are all sooooooooo concerned with poor little Kate, what do you guys think she'd be doing if TLC had NEVER come along?

She'd be working double shifts most likely. Jon; however, would probably be getting fired from another job because it was HIM who was going online seeking the freebies. That fact has been documented numerous times in numerous places.

I guess it's okay because Kate is doing it but if Jon was away from the kids (on his time) trying to make money to "support" them there would be an uproar on him.

Actually, the thought of that is pretty laughable. He has NOT ONE TIME mentioned that he was working or trying to find work (in the media which he reports he so despises...) in order to support his children. What he HAS been seen doing since the split, is living the high life of a rich batchelor. Kate has ALWAYS said that anything she does is for them. Call her a liar if you like, but the facts are that her haircuts, nails, and multiple bikinis don't equate with a million dollar NYC apartment, jetting to parties here and there (and overseas), and going to bars on a regular basis. There is not one shred of evidence that Kate has been trying to make money to live the high life as if she wasn't a Mom. There is a ton of proof that JON has enjoyed spending money like there's no tomorrow as if he doesn't even have children to support.

Kate has been chasing freebies and the spotlight since the day the doctor told her she was having sextuplets. It's her goal and she didn't care who she stepped on to get there. Jon went along because he was told to.

Where's a single shred of evidence to support that statement? When the tups were born, the family was searched out as being unique and offered some TV specials. From those specials, TLC smelled a cash cow and created the show. Saying that she has been "pimping" herself out since the moment she found out she was pregnant has no basis in fact.

Jon went along because he was "told to"? If he'd been a man in the first place and said that he wasn't interested in doing a TV show, or that he didn't want his children on TV, or that he would work 3 jobs if necessary to support his children, none of us would even know who they are. Either Kate or he would have been a stay at home parent (the prohibitive cost of daycare would have made this the only way) and the other parent would have had to work multiple jobs. Anyone with eyeballs can see that it's Kate who is the hard worker. Jon got tired of being a stay at home Dad when Kate was out promoting the books, so we can see how that would have worked out for them. They'd probably be divorced anyways, and Kate would have found a way to support them on her own, just like she seems to be doing right now.

Mamabatsy
Member

08-05-2005

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 11:54 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Mamabatsy a private message Print Post    
Seamonkey, isn't Jon being sued because he was paid for an interview not done by TLC? ET seems to like him somewhat and perhaps would give him a part-time job as a interviewer, but his hands are literally tied by TLC.

TLC and Kate wanted Jon out of the picture, but hey didn't want him to actually be free to do anything. It's just very controlling and odd.



Jon is being sued because he breached a contract. If he had been a man and followed the procedure set by the contract, he wouldn't have breached it and wouldn't be sued. Kate followed the letter of the contract and isn't being sued. Not at all controlling and not at all odd. He wanted to be a big shot, but in order to do that he had to figure a way out of the contract first. In television, contracts are re-negotiated all the time, but Jon doesn't think the rules of life apply to him. He wants to do whatever he feels like doing whenever he feels like doing it no matter what promises or contracts he had made.

Texannie
Member

07-16-2001

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 5:52 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Texannie a private message Print Post    
I don't see anything wrong with Kate wanting to pursue a television career. That is no different than any other person trying to pursue one. It does not mean that one has to watch it if she does have one. It also doesn't mean that she may be successful at getting one.
There are many woman in the public eye because of their jobs who are mothers, and yes, their children are photographed, but is the woman supposed to quite her job? Should no mothers pursue a career that would put them in the public eye? I guess women shouldn't be in politics too. Why not the father of the child? It seems to be a double standard.
Interestingly enough, Barbara Walters was on David Letterman the other night plugging her show. David was teasing/reprimanding her for not having him on the list but Kate. Barbara made the comment that Kate had a tremendous about of charisma in person and she thought she would get very far in television. Now she might have felt the need to defend her selection, but she could have said about her being in the news and all the controversy surrounding her as being what is fascinating instead.
If Jon wants to pursue a career, fine. It's no skin off my back. I can't imagine why anyone would not want either Jon or Kate to be successful at what they do.

Julieboo
Member

02-05-2002

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 7:46 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Julieboo a private message Print Post    
Annie, my thought is that Kate pursuing a TV career right now, IS different than any other person. Because she (and family) is all over the news and internet. I think the only way to get the paps and public away is to get off the screen and magazines.

I know it is not fair, (and if they were not so "paparazzi hot" right now I would say go ahead Kate--you go!!) but for the sake of her kids, she should lay low for many months.

Can you imagine trying to live a happy (if not normal) life and see your parents all over the internet and TV and magazines? And to see so many people "fighting" over who is worse, your mom or your dad?

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 9:15 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Well lucky for Kate that she is allowed to have her own thoughts about her own life and that of her family, hmm?

Jon was not only breaching the TLC contract but was still happy to take their money. TLC didn't want Jon out until he simply pushed the limits too much and even then they were still going to pay him the same to have a more limited role on the show. So, if supporting his children was part of his thinking, he'd have had more time off camera with them, still made the same money and frankly, had he been willing to follow the contract he signed and get permission he STILL could have made appearances and been interviewed if he needed that rush. Originally, he and Kate would go speak together at churches and other events and he was the one who said he didn't enjoy it, so she was on her own in that venture. He wasn't squeezed out; he opted out.

I'm sure there are TONS of kids who manage to find their parents' facebook pages or myspace, or even more private sites like TVCH and are or will be most chagrinned to know that mom or dad has discussed all sorts of stuff about them that they might feel squirmy about, but that's life.

Hopefully the Gosselin kids will learn that their mom isn't responsible for all the hate and vitriol being spewed about her, or her hair or her nails or her bathing suits or her tummy tuck and just judge her from their own experience with her. That could take time.. in a few years the kids will start hitting the age where parents must be wrong, but that would happen even if Kate worked as some drudge job in a basement and never saw the light of day.

I simply don't see that Kate's current situation is THAT different, so different that she must pass on the opportunities being offered and of course they may or may not pan out.. only time will tell.

Plus it is pretty clear that their dear dad isn't going to be hiding his light under a bushel basket anytime soon, so they will be discussed anyway.. meanwhile Kate might be bringing in the money which seems like a good thing to me.

Cricket
Member

08-05-2002

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 9:35 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Cricket a private message Print Post    
Jon Gosselin outside his divorce contempt hearing

APThe David and Goliath court date between Jon Gosselin and TLC has been moved up from December 14th to December 10th. TLC is seeking a preliminary injunction to put a full stop on Jon breaching his exclusivity contract. Recently Jon has been appearing on ET and The Insider, which is a rival network. The hearing regarding the injunction will take place in a Maryland courtroom.

The breach of contract lawsuit has also been moved to April 19th, 2010 from a date in 2011, according to Radaronline


Divorce contempt? What does that mean? Isn't this lawsuit a 'breach of contract' and if so, what lawsuit are they talking about taking place in April, 2010?

How would TLC be involved in Jon's divorce??

Beekindpleez
Member

07-18-2006

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 9:46 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Beekindpleez a private message Print Post    
Can you imagine trying to live a happy (if not normal) life and see your parents all over the internet and TV and magazines?

The children are 9 and 5. They should NOT be "all over the internet and TV and magazines."
I'm quite sure those children are not as aware of all this as we are. lol

Beekindpleez
Member

07-18-2006

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 9:46 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Beekindpleez a private message Print Post    
Cricket...maybe it's just a bad headline author.

Roxip
Member

01-29-2004

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 10:10 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Roxip a private message Print Post    
By the way, Kate doesn't need to "reign" in her spending...the proper spelling is "rein." As in pulling the horse's head to get it to slow down or stop.

I'm sorry, I can't help myself, even though I know I should. I ignored it the first two or three times it was improperly used but after a series of posts it drove me crazy!

Brenda1966
Member

07-03-2002

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 10:15 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Brenda1966 a private message Print Post    
It's okay Roxip. Thanks for the spell check! When people misuse their, they're, there it drives me nuts.

Kate does reign as queen around here!

Mamabatsy
Member

08-05-2005

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 10:34 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Mamabatsy a private message Print Post    
Using the wrong your or you're does it for me.

I think the divorce contempt part refers to Jon not following the rules that the judge/arbitrator placed on them in their preliminary hearing. I do think it's two separate issues and don't know why that issue would be heard at the same time as the breach of contract issue unless the arbitrator somehow connected them.

It's two separate issues in which Jon figured the rules don't apply to him.

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 10:40 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Today's hearing has nothing to do with the divorce.. which was filed in PA. This hearing is to find Jon in contempt of the rules of the contract and was filed in MD, I think, where TLC is based.

Breach of contract.. next year.. TLC vs Jon.

Then Jon filed a suite vs TLC.

And THEN there is the divorce which would involve Jon and Kate and attorneys. They've done the mediator thing and settled some issues already.

Happymom
Member

01-20-2003

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 1:47 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Happymom a private message Print Post    
Partial post: "Angelicfairies2

Wednesday, December 09, 2009 - 5:57 pm

I guess since the kids are in school all day it's okay for her to be away from all EIGHT of them. *I guess some of you don't think the kids near their mom since she is out there doing whatever she has to, too pimp herself out)I guess it's okay because Kate is doing it but if Jon was away from the kids (on his time) trying to make money to "support" them there would be an uproar on him. Interesting responses on how people see things."

*******


J&K are away from their kids while they are in school unless they happen to volunteer in the classroom or something like that. Yes, I do think it is ok for the parents to be off working away from their kids while the kids are in school.

I don't understand the second sentence up above. I don't think Kate is pimping herself out though. I think she is trying to earn a living to support herself and her kids. Most parents do not get to be with their kids while at work. (J&K and kids were lucky they all got to be together for a time while parents were earning a living.) I wouldn't begrudge Jon if he were trying to have a career doing a tv show or some other legitimate thing to make money to support himself and his kids either. I haven't read about him doing that though. He just seems to be on tv only giving paps type interviews/sound bites for the most part. I wish we would hear of Jon doing something during his time away from the kids to actually earn a living.

Re money...in San Francisco Bay area, a normal divorce averages $60K. That is for a simple divorce with no custody issues, agreement on most things and maybe some simple financial thing like one pension plan. J&K's divorce costs must be many times that amount. Divorce is tremendously expensive. Mediation isn't any cheaper even though it is marketed that way.

And aren't the kids in private school? That could cost a lot.

Ophiliasgrandma
Member

09-04-2001

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 1:48 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Ophiliasgrandma a private message Print Post    
My big bugaboo is it's vs its.

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Thursday, December 10, 2009 - 2:18 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Oh for sure.. the $43,000 was just what Jon owed already to one attorney.

That does blow my mind, though. I guess I got off scot free almost.. no kids, had to negotiate on cars (he got both cars), dogs.. I took three, he kept two, I placed two with canine companions for independence and the cats stayed in the rental house with him, since he refused to leave.

I filed in pro per and friends helped by showing me copies of their paperwork and settlements and one friend actually was in the process of a divorce himself and his soon to be ex was a paralegal and she wanted experience, so she did all my paperwork for free. The only drawback was that because the papers were filed by her with her attorney boss' letterhead, I was assigned to a courtroom where everyone else had attorneys with them, to ask the key questions.. EEEK.. I had been told that they did all the divorces like mine in one court and they had the questions you needed to answer right there for you to read.. so I had to go up to a table all by myself and the judge didn't even look up.. he was reading the documents and waved his hand and said "proceed".. which was the cue for the attorney to start.. I said I was just here to have the interlocutory (sp?) granted.. he looked up and sighed.. but he then asked the questions, and I replied.. and then he said he was concerned that I wasn't asking for spousal support.. lol.. I had carefully included that neither of us would ever ask for that because there was a very real chance my ex would try to soak me, after I worked while he got his MA and PhD.. but he wasn't too interested in actually working after a stint of teaching at Pepperdine and USIU. When he asked for the SECOND car, I said, ok, but you have to sign this..

After a friend who came along snorted that "she was supporting HIM".. I assured the judge that the settlement was worded to my satisfaction and that was that.

I paid the filing fees but that was not much at all.. so the prices thrown around.. ACK!

I thought they (Gosselin kidlets) were in a private christian schoo, but not totally sure of that.

========

Guess the hearing went off or is going off.. sans Jon.

Gosselin Skips Court Date in TLC Lawsuit
Posted Thursday 10 December 03:19 PM By: PopEater / Wire Services


Jon Gosselin was a no-show at Thursday's hearing in his legal fight with the TLC network. Gosselin's attorney, Mark Heller, had previously said the celebrity dad would attend Thursday's hearing in Maryland, but the hearing started without him. The network wants the judge to stop the 'Jon and Kate Plus 8' dad from making media appearances that it says violate his exclusive contract.

-----------------------------------------------


TLC, which is owned by Silver Spring, Md.-based Discovery Communications, says the contract remains in force.

The judge says Gosselin's lawyers don't plan to call witnesses.

Gosselin says he has a right to earn a living as a media personality. He also claims in a countersuit that TLC violated Pennsylvania's child labor laws in filming his eight children.

He is also in the midst of divorcing wife of 10 years, Kate Gosselin.

http://www.popeater.com/2009/12/10/jon-gosselin-tlc-lawsuit/