Red Letter Media

Favorite recurring character? (Select 4)

  • Jack / AIDSMobdy

    Votes: 227 23.8%
  • Josh / the Wizard

    Votes: 66 6.9%
  • Colin (Canadian #1)

    Votes: 417 43.7%
  • Jim (Canadian #2)

    Votes: 204 21.4%
  • Tim

    Votes: 355 37.2%
  • Len Kabasinski

    Votes: 190 19.9%
  • Freddie Williams

    Votes: 246 25.8%
  • Patton Oswalt

    Votes: 23 2.4%
  • Macaulay Culkin

    Votes: 478 50.1%
  • Max Landis

    Votes: 53 5.6%

  • Total voters
    954
I don't know about $15 million but I would be genuinely surprised if Mike wasn't a millionaire by now with 10.5k people on Patreon and a channel that gets 12 million views per month.
Just the Patreon is probably making $2 million per year, probably more.
I would guess that Mike, Rich and Jay are all millionaires.
 
I don't know about $15 million but I would be genuinely surprised if Mike wasn't a millionaire by now with 10.5k people on Patreon and a channel that gets 12 million views per month.
Just the Patreon is probably making $2 million per year, probably more.
I would guess that Mike, Rich and Jay are all millionaires.
Taxes, patreons cut, the cost of making the shows and likely also paying the others who sit in on Best of the Worst and RE:View also got normal living costs on top that, I would say doubtful they are millionaires yet even if the company is bring in that much income as you have stated, also we have no idea how they are even are with handling money.
 
Just the Patreon is probably making $2 million per year, probably more.
I doubt it. Say they make 100k a month off Patreon, after Patreon and payment processor fees and taxes, you're left with something like 40k. Now subtract studio rent, cameras, props, etc. and it's something like 30k.
Divide by 3 and it's 10k a head + YouTube ad revenue which is likely less than the Patreon earnings.
Pretty good but not millionaire tier.
 
Yeah, there's no way they're that rich even if they make 3 mill on Patreon. Taxes for this sort of thing can be a minefield, and that's not counting studio rent, production costs, etc. They don't do sponsorships either. With money split between Mike, Jay, and Rich, they're probably comfortable. But I also don't think they have kids. So unless they all have obscene stock portfolios or something, it's unlikely they're loaded.

Ugh, I just feel creepy talking about this. This Shatner thing is getting truly troubling. This isn't even the first time he's brought up their money. I half expect Mike to find some PI Shatner hired rifling through his garbage soon.

Edit to add that the site Shatner is using as a source LITERALLY HAS A TYPO.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20210518-162348_Twitter.jpg
    Screenshot_20210518-162348_Twitter.jpg
    198.4 KB · Views: 108
Last edited:
Shatner's either lost control over his Twitter account and / or lost his marbles.

People on this thread and elsewhere have convincingly argued it's some asshole PR person who's running Shatner's twitter, and I mostly agree with it, but the one thing that gives me pause is that Shatner has always been an egotistical asshole who gets on weird hobbyhorses.
 
People on this thread and elsewhere have convincingly argued it's some asshole PR person who's running Shatner's twitter, and I mostly agree with it, but the one thing that gives me pause is that Shatner has always been an egotistical asshole who gets on weird hobbyhorses.
If it is a PR person, they suck at their job. Not simply because they are feuding with a YouTube channel who isn't even talking back (mostly because they know not to get involved with such bullshit but also because they are blocked), but because their twitter engagement sucks outside of RLM shenanigan's.

Shatner's Twitter has 13 times the follower count of RLM but gets likes in the 50-100 range most of the time with the occasional 1000+ like post. RLM on average clears 2000+ with almost every post with a lot going over 4000+.
 
Shatner's Twitter has 13 times the follower count of RLM but gets likes in the 50-100 range most of the time with the occasional 1000+ like post. RLM on average clears 2000+ with almost every post with a lot going over 4000+.
That's to be expected.
People don't sub to Shatner to read his hot takes on whatever the fuck a 90-year old man (or his temp) is into, they sub to him because he's Captain Kirk.
People sub to RLM because they're constantly creating content that's relevant to their audience.

Still, Shatner isn't as bad on Twitter as Stewart.
That man is truly a great actor because he can fool people into thinking that he's actually smart.
 
If it is a PR person, they suck at their job. Not simply because they are feuding with a YouTube channel who isn't even talking back (mostly because they know not to get involved with such bullshit but also because they are blocked), but because their twitter engagement sucks outside of RLM shenanigan's.

Shatner's Twitter has 13 times the follower count of RLM but gets likes in the 50-100 range most of the time with the occasional 1000+ like post. RLM on average clears 2000+ with almost every post with a lot going over 4000+.

They're just a few more outrage-provoking Twitter feuds away from harnessing that raw anger and turning it into social media success. You'll see!
 
Because this isn't embarrassing and Boomer-y enough, someone pointed out another thing about the "source" Shatner uses about Mike's net worth. The second image of him is literally a face merge of his face with Jay's.
View attachment 2184532

Congratulations to Jake Stokman on his 15 million dollars.
Don't forget Rich Evans won millions on the UK lottery but still lives with his parents!

s2djz1inqxnx.png
 
Patreon update.

"Hey everyone! Over the weekend, we shot a new Best of the Worst! The episode features a new "favorite" as well as the triumphant return of both Cameron Mitchell and Frank Stallone in the same movie again (last time was years ago when we covered Terror in Beverly Hills). We're also planning to film a new Half in the Bag soon for Zack Snyder's Army of the Dead. We may throw in a brief discussion of some other recent "direct to Netflix" movies as well. And lastly, we're planning a re:View for Bram Stoker's Dracula from 1992. Coming soon!"
 
Back