Katt Williams Goes In on T Haddish, K Hart, Monique, & Wanda Smith|UPDATE: WANDAS HUSBAND PULLS GUN

[Jalether]

I detect no lies.

Tiffany is the female version of kevin hart: not funny, loud, plays stereotypical roles in every movie ( haddish the loud ghetto bytch and kevin the short loud annoying black guy)

Their success is proof that those in charge i.e cacs push and promote whoever the fukk they want regardless of talent.

there are plenty of black comics way funnier and more talentes than these two who have become the face of black comedy and you can miss me with the "hard work and work ethic" talking points.

 

[Champ_KW]

Atlanta was less than a year ago.

I’m not young, and I’m also not naive enough to believe things just because someone says them, especially when I know better.

It definitely hasn’t made 24 million dollars since Atlanta. And I’d be willing to bet the special hasn’t made 24 million since it dropped in 2006.

But carry on believing things people say because you like them.

Like I said; funny guy though.

No he was literally talking about the city Atlanta. His biggest special was filmed in ATL and the city gave him so much love that people think he from there.

 

[KOohbt]

Katt was wrong about that shyt. He ain’t white, nor was he “hood” just a regular breh

He meant to say black. As in she was with a black man for 14 years then divorced said he abused her then said he didnt. Now she on Brad Pitt. Hollywood ain't dumb.

 

[mr x]

School Dance.

Spoiler

Katt's only in that one scene really and the entire movie is barely laughable movie ensemble cast trash.

Spend no effort in watching/acquiring this shyt, it's not worth it.

Nick cannon da gawd.

 

[panopticon]

wow, you created an entire criteria based on what Katt said and didn't say, while not working with/for Netflix

A lot of smart motherfukkers working there don't mean they are negotiating in good faith, which is all Monique wants to make sure

Outside of this discussion, tell me when it's ever acceptable for a person to receive checks from an entity and be viewed as unbiased while capeing for that entity?

Why are you talmbowt prices comedians charged per ticket, when all of them,especially up and coming acts have no influence on the price?

You said in-house data based on viewing habits on potential markets...so you saying that Netflix is offering comedians deals based on whether the audience, that goes to a comic's tour/open mic nights/comedy clubs, likes to watch certain genre's of films/comedy specials at specific times of day?


Bottom line is that you're doing exactly what Kat and every Netflix stan is doing, speculating, instead of requesting Netflix to explain what's their criteria to ensure no bias. That's all Monique have asked for, but for obvious reason(easier to shyt on an individual, then make sacrifices and demands against a huge company) it's been hard for Netflix supporters to make a similar request, after most will be in another thread dap fishing about white supremacy/Hollywood discrimination blah blah

Two of these articles have "Netflix had no comments", while all 3 are highlighting the opportunities Netflix gave bigger named and no-named comedians....so what happens when comedians sell out their local/tour shows but don't have a large social media following?

Appreciate the response.

Point by point:

1) What exactly do you consider to be "negotiating in good faith"? I don't know of a single publicly traded company that isn't constantly looking for ways to jam its suppliers and raise prices on its customers. In Netflix's case, that would be them looking to pay the minimum amount necessary to secure comedy content that generates the highest number of subscriber adds & the best probability of subscriber retention...That's just business 101

2) I don't view Katt, or anyone else that's cut a deal with Netflix as unbiased. Simultaneously, I don't automatically disregard any information they divulge about how their deal was structured and what they saw as the key points of leverage in their negotiations. Again, Netflix is a publicly traded company - they aren't required to disclose the details of the agreements they sign with content creators (those can be considered a trade secret) - they're only required to properly account for and report the financial consequences of those agreements. Unless Katt or Dave Chappelle or someone else is willing to leak the actual contract language of their Netflix deals, the best information we're ever likely to get is going to come from off-hand comments in interviews (that likely come close to violating NDAs they most likely signed with Netflix regarding their deals), and information leaked to reporters by anonymous sources.

3) I'm not a Netflix stan, breh. I'm just remarking on the quality & quantity of data that they're able to capture on their subscribers' viewing & browsing habits because of the nature of the Netflix application itself. If you know anyone that works in the field of app/website design, you know that they're able to capture incredible amounts of data - and I can't help but conclude that Netflix putting that data to work is a critical part of their business model. With "black boxes" like Netflix you have to start with the user experience and how it's changed over time and work backwards to try and figure out what they're doing, what they're focused on, how they're making content purchasing decisions, etc. Again, that's just the nature of dealing with publicly traded technology companies...they're never going to publish whatever monster database they have and the analytics tools they've built to turn that data into actionable business intelligence. By doing that, they'd lose whatever competitive advantage they have in the first place (it's not like streaming video is a business with exceptionally high barriers to entry).

4) I'm talking about prices charged per ticket, total ticket sales, the geographic distribution of those ticket sales, and social media following as being inputs into Netflix's decisionmaking on purchasing comedy specials because those inputs were mentioned either by Katt or in the articles I posted, and also make logical sense given Netflix's business model. Netflix is an almost purely subscription-based business. As they develop their own Netflix-produced content (House of Cards, etc.), I'd expect licensing revenue to play an increasingly significant role - but for now, subscriptions are how Netflix generates nearly all their revenue. Subscription-based businesses are all about 1) growing the number of subscribers, 2) growing the average revenue per subscriber (ARPU), 3) retaining as many existing subscribers as possible (reducing what's called "churn"), and 4) reducing the cost to acquire new subscribers & maintain existing subscribers. It doesn't matter whether you're selling cell phone plans, magazines, car washes or software - the basic building blocks of any subscription-based business are the same across the board.

You can see Netflix's 2017 10-K at the link below for more information:

https://s22.q4cdn.com/959853165/files/doc_financials/annual_reports/0001065280-18-000069.pdf


5) Netflix will never, I repeat never publicly disclose the information Monique demanded. Neither would any other publicly traded company in the streaming video business - or even the more traditional players (HBO & Showtime). Again, that information is by definition a trade secret - by disclosing it, any player in the space would be committing corporate suicide. I assume that Monique has professional representation when she looks to negotiate the sale of a comedy special to any of these companies...they're well aware of this reality.

6) This is speculation on my part - but I'd bet good money that Monique's (impossible to satisfy) demand that Netflix disclose their analytics criteria to ensure a "lack of bias" is really just a hardball negotiating tactic. Her representation knows it's an impossible demand, but also understands that the general public doesn't understand this. By calling out Netflix publicly, their hope (again, this is just my opinion) was that Netflix would blink and make Monique a better offer rather than deal with any PR fallout. Unfortunately for Monique, Netflix called her bluff...and so here we are

 

[AquaCityBoy]

The most underrated part of the whole interview:

"The day Mo'Nique said boycott Netflix they cut me a check for $2.4 million for the special we did in Jacksonville for $350,000. "

"Are you serious?! "

"Or I'm just really good at telling jokes. You tell me. "

Levels to the shyt.

 

[Isaiah Bradley]

6) This is speculation on my part

You wrote all of that and all of it is speculation, which is my original point

1) Netflix can't be trying to " jam its suppliers and raise prices on its customers" by offering up and coming acts, with no social media footprint, slots on their platform

2) Katt is a hater due to him not applying his "constructive criticism" to all comedians. I don't know or care if he got the bag from Netflix but I'm more concerned with him creating barriers for his peers just cause he got what he wanted. Why didn't Chappel/Senfield/Burr/Rock also shyt on Monique's request?
Being a private or publicly traded company doesn't excuse unequal pay any other time or within in other industry after the criteria is exposed. So why are you using that as reason to justify why they wouldn't and can't be pressured into releasing their criteria, especially during this meToo era? and after Wanda agreed with Monique

3)Again, so you saying that Netflix is offering comedians deals based on whether the audience, that goes to a comic's tour/open mic nights/comedy clubs, likes to watch certain genre's of films/comedy specials at specific times of day?

4)Since you want to keep speculating, then what happens when comedians sell out their local/tour shows but don't have a large social media following?

5) Bullshyt. This SJW era have forced both private and public companies to buckle under pressure. But again, it's easier to shyt on an individual and speculate why a huge "publicly traded" company wouldn't do something, than make sacrifices like ending your subscriptions and using social media to make demands for netflix to release their critieria

6)The links you posted were conflicting about what netflix used to offer deals and how much. So why post any of them?

 

[LordDeathwatch]

nikkas can't even roast anymore without some lames caping? :Boshfukkery:

You can tell whose Moms wouldn't let them come outside, ol sheltered in my feelings ass nikkas. :DyingLaughing:

 

[panopticon]

You wrote all of that and all of it is speculation, which is my original point

1) Netflix can't be trying to " jam its suppliers and raise prices on its customers" by offering up and coming acts, with no social media footprint, slots on their platform

2) Katt is a hater due to him not applying his "constructive criticism" to all comedians. I don't know or care if he got the bag from Netflix but I'm more concerned with him creating barriers for his peers just cause he got what he wanted. Why didn't Chappel/Senfield/Burr/Rock also shyt on Monique's request?
Being a private or publicly traded company doesn't excuse unequal pay any other time or within in other industry after the criteria is exposed. So why are you using that as reason to justify why they wouldn't and can't be pressured into releasing their criteria, especially during this meToo era? and after Wanda agreed with Monique

3)Again, so you saying that Netflix is offering comedians deals based on whether the audience, that goes to a comic's tour/open mic nights/comedy clubs, likes to watch certain genre's of films/comedy specials at specific times of day?

4)Since you want to keep speculating, then what happens when comedians sell out their local/tour shows but don't have a large social media following?

5) Bullshyt. This SJW era have forced both private and public companies to buckle under pressure. But again, it's easier to shyt on an individual and speculate why a huge "publicly traded" company wouldn't do something, than make sacrifices like ending your subscriptions and using social media to make demands for netflix to release their critieria Netflix

6)The links you posted were conflicting about what netflix used to offer deals and how much. So why post any of them?

I think we're talking past each other here, breh

Point by point

1a) Sure they can. What would be the lowest-cost supplier of content for Netflix, with whom they'd have the greatest negotiating leverage...an up and coming act with little social media following? Or an established, big-name comedian with standing offers on the table from other large players in the stand-up comedy space...

1b) Why wouldn't Netflix look to make a whole bunch of smaller bets on less-established comedians in addition to their pursuit of bigger-name comedians? That sounds like a nice way to get a shot at a whole lot of upside cheaply to me...owning the rights to what might be the best work of a new comedian and benefiting from all the hard work they're going to do touring, getting their social media presence up, etc. from now until the end of their careers...

1c) If cheap content from lesser-known comedians lets Netflix add new subscribers and retain existing ones in a way that's equally (or more) profitable on a per-subscriber basis than more expensive content from better-known comedians...why wouldn't they do that? Lowering costs while simultaneously increasing revenue is the holy grail of any business.

2) Katt can criticize or fail to criticize anyone he wants. I don't know why other comedians didn't say anything - maybe because they'd rather just stay out of it? Or maybe because they aren't as involved in their own business affairs as Katt is? It's not unusual for super-talented people in all sorts of fields to focus 100% of their energy on their craft, and outsource everything else to outside parties. But really, who knows? All I know is Katt commented on it, and the comments he made make perfect sense given the publicly available information on Netflix's business model.

3) I'm saying that if Netflix is like any of the other sophisticated tech companies out there, they're able to capture data down to the level of knowing just how many seconds it takes for you to make a decision on viewing/not viewing some content, the probability of you choosing certain content over others based on the time of day, the local weather, and even how your content choices change based on how available content is displayed to you through the app. And TBH, that's probably just 1% of what they're able to do. Again, if they're like other sophisticated tech companies, they can purchase additional data on subscribers from 3rd-party data providers (they've got enough of your personal information to be able to do that) - things like your income, whether you own or rent your property, your credit score, your race, your age, your gender, your purchasing habits, etc...and they can then incorporate that additional data into the data they're continually capturing on subscribers through the app itself to build out pretty sophisticated predictive models on what content is most likely to add / retain subscribers from different demographics.

4) Who knows? That's up to Netflix to decide. Maybe the offer they make the comedian is lower because of it. Maybe the ticket sales data is strong enough to let them ignore the lack of a social media following. Maybe the comedian targets a specific demographic that aren't usually social media users in the first place. So many potential variables here.

5) I haven't yet seen a company "buckle under pressure" that demands they reveal actual trade secrets that form the basis of the company's competitive advantage and entire business model. Again, what Monique demands is impossible for Netflix (or any streaming video provider) to satisfy - unless they want to open themselves up to multi-billion dollar shareholder lawsuits because of how much shareholder value would be destroyed.

6) I'm not sure what you mean by the links being conflicting. They were meant to give some background on Netflix's big moves in the comedy space, and whatever public comments I could find from people who'd dealt with Netflix & what they found to be Netflix's areas of focus when doing a deal for comedy content.

 

[Isaiah Bradley]

I think we're talking past each other here, breh

Point by point

1a) Sure they can. What would be the lowest-cost supplier of content for Netflix, with whom they'd have the greatest negotiating leverage...an up and coming act with little social media following? Or an established, big-name comedian with standing offers on the table from other large players in the stand-up comedy space...

1b) Why wouldn't Netflix look to make a whole bunch of smaller bets on less-established comedians in addition to their pursuit of bigger-name comedians? That sounds like a nice way to get a shot at a whole lot of upside cheaply to me...owning the rights to what might be the best work of a new comedian and benefiting from all the hard work they're going to do touring, getting their social media presence up, etc. from now until the end of their careers...

1c) If cheap content from lesser-known comedians lets Netflix add new subscribers and retain existing ones in a way that's equally (or more) profitable on a per-subscriber basis than more expensive content from better-known comedians...why wouldn't they do that? Lowering costs while simultaneously increasing revenue is the holy grail of any business.

2) Katt can criticize or fail to criticize anyone he wants. I don't know why other comedians didn't say anything - maybe because they'd rather just stay out of it? Or maybe because they aren't as involved in their own business affairs as Katt is? It's not unusual for super-talented people in all sorts of fields to focus 100% of their energy on their craft, and outsource everything else to outside parties. But really, who knows? All I know is Katt commented on it, and the comments he made make perfect sense given the publicly available information on Netflix's business model.

3) I'm saying that if Netflix is like any of the other sophisticated tech companies out there, they're able to capture data down to the level of knowing just how many seconds it takes for you to make a decision on viewing/not viewing some content, the probability of you choosing certain content over others based on the time of day, the local weather, and even how your content choices change based on how available content is displayed to you through the app. And TBH, that's probably just 1% of what they're able to do. Again, if they're like other sophisticated tech companies, they can purchase additional data on subscribers from 3rd-party data providers (they've got enough of your personal information to be able to do that) - things like your income, whether you own or rent your property, your credit score, your race, your age, your gender, your purchasing habits, etc...and they can then incorporate that additional data into the data they're continually capturing on subscribers through the app itself to build out pretty sophisticated predictive models on what content is most likely to add / retain subscribers from different demographics.

4) Who knows? That's up to Netflix to decide. Maybe the offer they make the comedian is lower because of it. Maybe the ticket sales data is strong enough to let them ignore the lack of a social media following. Maybe the comedian targets a specific demographic that aren't usually social media users in the first place. So many potential variables here.

5) I haven't yet seen a company "buckle under pressure" that demands they reveal actual trade secrets that form the basis of the company's competitive advantage and entire business model. Again, what Monique demands is impossible for Netflix (or any streaming video provider) to satisfy - unless they want to open themselves up to multi-billion dollar shareholder lawsuits because of how much shareholder value would be destroyed.

6) I'm not sure what you mean by the links being conflicting. They were meant to give some background on Netflix's big moves in the comedy space, and whatever public comments I could find from people who'd dealt with Netflix & what they found to be Netflix's areas of focus when doing a deal for comedy content.

There's no talking past each other cause I clearly see you're giving me the equivalent of wordy jazz hands mixed with juelzing to justify your speculating

1abc) By offering the platform for up and coming comics, established comics, and older comics, then there's no one criteria to apply to all three type of comics. You don't know, but are posting articles that are also speculating and are conflicting with one another. I could justify why Chappel was payed too much/less, that would be my opinion. Which is what you're giving me and trying to past it off as close to facts, while not having facts

2)The other comics didn't say anything because they are not haters. Kat commented, you agreed with him shyting on monique's request, then ran with it trying to justify yall ignorance of other people's deals, while you can't confirm whether he actually got paid by Netflix

3)Knowing what a customer watches at 3am on a thurday has nothing to do with whether a comic will get an offer. That makes no sense. So the reference to "data down to the level of knowing just how many seconds it takes for you" is just your attempt at filling gaps into your argument

4)Exactly. Who knows, so many potential variables here. But that's not stopping you from writing novels to prove that Monique's request if wrong

5)trade secrets? smh. So asking McDonalds whether they pay both male and female managers the same and if not what's the criteria, is a trade secret? Nice try, but portraying equal pay efforts as trade secrets is silly and disingenuous, when there are many sources offering salary info from companies

6) Those links weren't needed because the post you replayed to, nothing in those link address anything I said. All it did was allow you further juelz and justify your speculating

 

[ahdsend]

 

[Benefited]

Damn,hopefully her sons and husband can go beat their charges as many times as Katt beat his
Now I understand somebody disrespecting your mother and wife and you wanting to go have a conversation or beat they ass behind it.
But how is the father taking his sons to handle this?You don't bring your kids into a situation that could get them killed or ruin their life.
Prison is the one place where you might actually get some burnt brocoli

This only makes the roasting worst.Katt just does this shyt out of boredom,nothing personal.

 

[TillWeDie]

Ironic that she made fun of him for going to jail and "prison" and now her husband might do some time

Hope they don't serve him broccoli in jail

 

[General Mills]

She got what she deserved. She tried sneak dissing him right before the break so she could have the last word. He gave her that work




And what kind of fukkery is having your husband come up with a gun to confront Katt? Over jokes?

nikkas I’m here talking about how Katt is wrong for going at black people.... but her husband had a fukking GUN and could have ended that mans life over some jokes cause his wife lost a roast battle.

 

[Bolzmark]

She's talking about it on the radio now...says Katt stepped to her at the comedy club on some "I told you not to fukk with me or you'd go viral" Husband was like just chill dog...says Katt turen to him and said "I'll jump on your big ass". Then says for legal reasons she can't say no more.