- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
Yea, Jim would have to fuck up really hard, on the magnitude of buying/starting his own wresting org, to end up actually facing bankruptcy.
Jim Sterling / James "Stephanie" Sterling / James Stanton/Sexton & in memoriam TotalBiscuit (John Bain) - One Gaming Lolcow Thread
- Thread starter José Mourinho
- Start date
With the amount of money he's been earning for years now, he could have paid off a home already. Even if he still ends up with a mortgage payment, and thinks he won't live to pay it off, so what? He dies, doesn't have anyone to inherit shit, the bank ends up with it but he'll be dead so who cares.
At the end of the day, even having a mortgage payment is better than renting, which he has bitched about repeatedly over the years, with one exception. Because he's a lazy idiot, any maintenance that needs to be done would be up to him to deal with instead of just whining to the landlord about it. Yard work? He's got to do it or hire someone. Plumbing issue? He's got to get quotes and find a plumber to do it. Roof leak? Again, it's up to him to get quotes and find a contractor to deal with it. And it's probably a safe assumption that he would have to pay property taxes as well where he's at. It's possible he may be aware of these things, and just wants to avoid having to deal with it.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2022
If he is still in bongistan then they have to pay what's called "council tax" which is their version of property tax. He has to pay it regardless of if he is renting or has his own house or a mortgage.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2024
See I told you he reminds me of idubz
I stand on the side of Jim doesn't do either, he either lives with someone else who pays the council tax or some other shit idk lives in a tiny flat with fuck all tax on because there is no way he could still be a leftie if he actually paid that shit. Sure do love paying thousands a year literally just for the binmen that's real cool
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2022
He's more likely to financially screw himself over by trying to turn "The Gays Can Do Whatever They Want" into a more mainstream thing and then getting railed by the law when someone sues him for putting that on their business property.
Rudolf's Friend
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2022
Dunno if its been posted yet, but the full version of a wrestling match Jim Sterling participated in back in 2022 has been uploaded by the indie who held it. Notably fellow wrestling lolcow Kidd Bandit was also involved. Jim is last in the ring at 20:50 where he starts out by cutting a promo about being a tranny before the match and he ends up getting eliminated a few minutes after, with Kidd Bandit emerging as the winner of the match.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2023
Maybe an odd take but it’s nice to see people make their own thing and put passion and love into it. Sure, it’s gay because it’s wrestling and it’s probably a cringe fest because Jim Sterling is involved but….man, I dunno, it takes a lot of heart and work to do your own shit.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2019
Man I watched the Jim parts and it's a special kind of cringe because he's obviously really not good at this while also obviously really trying. Like obviously he's a dumpy fat blob dressed as a condom, but there's some love of the craft in there climbing his morbidly obese ass up some ropes and then falling down at someone.
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2021
Not disagreeing, but it's worth noting that bankruptcy works very differently in the US vs the UK*. In the US, declaring bankruptcy is basically a get out of jail free card, absolving you of fault (albeit fucking your credit score in the process), whereas in the UK declaring bankruptcy opens you up to get absolutely annihilated by your creditors.
If Jim ends up in a bad position financially, and he's been using credit cards, the bailiffs will not hesitate to turn up and start seizing all his Boglins and shitty pinball machines, and they will have the full weight of the British courts behind them (there's a great UK TV show called 'Can't Pay? We'll Take It Away' if you ever want some 'white'-trash-in-trouble entertainment).
Having said all that, you're right in that even if there is any hope of this admittedly far-fetched arc occurring, we're talking years and years down the line, and there's every chance Jim will be dead before it happens.
(*Source, which I only skimmed so feel free to tell me I am retarded)
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2024
Realistically they probably wouldn't even touch his toy collection. Bailiffs only care about things with actual value. They don't care if something is worth £50 to one single person in the country only the things that are worth £500 to everyone. They also have to pay a fairly substantial fee for the bailiffs and the courts and the auctionhouses or whatever take their cut too. So the £500 he paid for a pinball machine when new is now worth £250 because it's used that will sell for £200 at auction and then the bailiffs take £20 and the auctionhouse takes £40 and now the £500 you put yourself in debt only got you £140 out of debt. Also by the time it's taken for it to sell the interest has put on another £140 anyway lol.
If Jim gets in debt it won't just be haha no more toys lol, it's taking everything of any value from his house, computer's gone, so's the car and your TV and all that shit. Even if he dies that means jack shit. You die with debt and your creditors are getting first pick of your estate before your family does anyway. That could potentially include his house if he owns it. I don't think Jim is even remotely in that position, if he was he would probably be trying to milk that tranny lovebombing to drag him out of it. But if he is then it's fucked. Also worth saying can't pay is hammed up for the camera, it's a good show but if you do watch it then it's not exactly perfectly realistic.
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
Not so sure about that these days - there's a lot more general awareness of the value of 'collectibles' in the average person, and that includes bailiffs. They might just box the whole thing up and lot it out as one bulk auction, as I doubt they'd really care to take the time to research each item. Maybe bundle them by similarity, but I wouldn't expect a lot of effort. Still, there's probably a few speculators who'd buy a box of boglins and crap on the off chance that there's some actual valuables stuffed in there too that they could flip and make a net profit on.
If he's set up displays and shit for them rather than leaving them in random boxes, that'll probably get them got. But I expect he'd end up liquidating the toys before getting to the bankruptcy point of losing them, he doesn't seem to be attached to his stuff like some other lolcows have been in the past.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2024
I just hope they don't get dumped on some poor kid that ends up playing with toys Jim has breastfed
Diesel Boogaloo
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2017
In one of the episodes of Can't Pay? We'll Take It Away, the bailiffs were taking things from an unemployed geek. He had an xbox, which was obviously sellable, but also an almost life-size statue of Darth Vader. The bailiffs were confused and had no idea how much worth it would be. And since I was watching it on Youtube, the comment section was filled with random people estimating the value of the statue in thousands of pounds.
So yeah, a random bailiff won't be able to recognize a valuable collectible.
Anyhow, I don't think boglins are actually valuable, and I don't think a bailiff will make a mistake of thinking they are. So in the unlikely case of total bankruptcy, Jim will end up with nothing but his boglins.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2024
Yea anything of any relevance and value will be instantly taken. He won't just have his bonglins though, he'll have his channel too.
Moneymaker Degen
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 31, 2024
Depending on the structuring of his business (I havent gone back to the OP to see if those details are in there but that could of changed in that time) and say there is recognised goodwill/cash value associated with the youtube channel it could be up for grabs as well in the case of asset liquidation.
I could definitely be wrong here as it could be something that gets written off with nil value (then allowed to be retained by Jim) as said youtube channel and any value generated from it relies on mostly the underlying assets which would have been sold and jim himself as the primary contributor to the show.
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2021
We'll put to the side for the moment the idea that there is any value to Jim's channel, but is there any legal precedent anywhere in the world of an e-celeb losing their channels in a bankruptcy? I did a quick search and the best I could find was this article from earlier in the year about Alex Jones attempting to block his social media accounts from being auctioned off.
Like you said, I couldn't see this happening even if it was legal, because without Jim all you could do is turn it into a pajeet content farm and I'm pretty sure Google would gas the channel when it noticed the rapid change in behaviour.
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
It probably wouldn't be a clearable asset, as its basically a digital him, not a brand or identity. James is Inseparable from Jim Sterling, this isn't like the PCGamer or IGN Channels where the social media is the possession of a clear brand and corporate personhood situation. The Alex Jones situation was a case of extreme political lawfare and they did a lot of shit that's not actually legally grounded in any way for that case.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2024
Honestly I'm not an expert at all but I'm fairly sure that they would just liquidate the actual assets (computer microphone headset etc), I don't think a bailiff would take control of the actual channel. I mean sometimes you hear of people in debt who essentially sign agreements where a bailiff will look at your business and make themselves a pseudoemployee where they will get paid a certain amount from the profits every x period of time, just because it's obviously better to keep people in business and making money so you can pay off the debt. Theoretically something like that could happen with Jim. I mean what would they even seize from his business? He makes enough money in one month to rebuy all of the computer equipment anyway, would you rather have £1000 once or £500 a month? He might even be able to argue that his computer and such is not a business asset if it's only JimCO LLC that is in debt, if it's Jim himself though that won't matter. They also might be able to sell off the domain for Jim's website. But I highly doubt they would actually take control of the channel. A bailiff would much rather sign an agreement to get half of the money rather than trying to sell off the channel for a one time sum.
Ignore me because I cannot find anything concrete on this as it was a while ago and I didn't exactly care when it happened but I think the Alex Jones shit was something similar where they wanted him to keep making content but obviously didn't want him to keep making conspiracy content. They basically wanted to keep him working for them but doing shit he didn't want to. That's something I remember hearing but definitely not solid by any means. The move for sure was about wanting to censor him though. They don't want to sell off his social media because they want the money from the sale, realistically they're not worth much without the personality behind them. They want to sell them off so that the new owner can simply just shut the site down. I had a look to try verify everything and found this recent article saying that it will be auctioned off next month, so will definitely sell and it probably won't have a reserve.
The main difference is that Jim isn't a billion dollars in debt. I highly doubt he is in debt at all. Financially retarded and maybe still renting? Maybe. But I don't think he's fully in debt at all. I think the probability of his channel being sold off is almost 0, there's a small chance his website might though. Even if his patreon shuts down completely tomorrow he still has a lot of experience and work experience. He might stuggle to get a new job with how outspoken and retarded he is politically but he could certainly find other work. I think we'll see a 600k special before a debt arc.
Ignore me because I cannot find anything concrete on this as it was a while ago and I didn't exactly care when it happened but I think the Alex Jones shit was something similar where they wanted him to keep making content but obviously didn't want him to keep making conspiracy content. They basically wanted to keep him working for them but doing shit he didn't want to. That's something I remember hearing but definitely not solid by any means. The move for sure was about wanting to censor him though. They don't want to sell off his social media because they want the money from the sale, realistically they're not worth much without the personality behind them. They want to sell them off so that the new owner can simply just shut the site down. I had a look to try verify everything and found this recent article saying that it will be auctioned off next month, so will definitely sell and it probably won't have a reserve.
I think that the Alex Jones case might set the precident. Alex is about as inseperable from infowars as Jim the jimquisition.
The main difference is that Jim isn't a billion dollars in debt. I highly doubt he is in debt at all. Financially retarded and maybe still renting? Maybe. But I don't think he's fully in debt at all. I think the probability of his channel being sold off is almost 0, there's a small chance his website might though. Even if his patreon shuts down completely tomorrow he still has a lot of experience and work experience. He might stuggle to get a new job with how outspoken and retarded he is politically but he could certainly find other work. I think we'll see a 600k special before a debt arc.
Moneymaker Degen
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 31, 2024
It's definitely more commonly seen among more corporatized groups where there is less emphasis placed on the talent of a single individual, I'll have to do some more research into it to pull some solid examples but I think your right that its not possible for a e celeb channel like Jim's.
My theory behind the loss of Jims youtube channel had a lot more to do with the fact that if he was operating under a company business format, much like any large corporate youtube group. He may have much of the ip and copyrights to his content and channel controlled by the company (this is done for most assets physical or not a lot of the time to help put a layer of protection between the individual and a third party in case of any sort of legal liability or debt claim against them)
In this scenario if the copyright is held by the company for Jim's content and the company defaults on whatever debt Jim has stupidly gotten it into and creditors come knocking, from my understanding it could be quite a simple process to argue even if the trademark and copyright value for his old videos is low. The creditors would be in their right to take that as part of the recovey process. Since all the content is being hosted on Jim's channel I would say there is a good argument to be made that they would need the channel key reliquished to them in order to have full control of this content and continue to manage it how they see fit.
As you've pointed out however I have failed to account for 1. At least on its surface a lackage of case law to back this in the likely event that i'm mistaken about the business structure Jim is set up in. 2. That any of his shit holds any value beyond the scrap value of his tech that he uses to produce the content and... 3. That my understanding of british corporate and business law is similar to Australian law as much of australian standard legal concepts and legislation is imported straight from England and only varys after Australias federation as a soveriegn nation (sortof)
In any case it's probably wishful thinking that Jim will "lose" his channel considering the circumstances and lack of value they have.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2024