

John Gruber: A Few Words About The Talk Show - guan
http://daringfireball.net/2012/05/about_the_talk_show

======
saltcod
I continue to be surprised at the slack people are cutting Gruber here. He
doesn't owe anyone anything, and we'll likely never know what truly happened
(or didn't happen) between him and Dan, but he should still be accountable to
his audience.

He waited a week to say anything about it, and in the end didn't really say
much of anything at all. Maybe he was 100% justified in what he did—we'll
never know, and it doesn't really matter.

What jumps out to me through all this is that if the roles had been reversed,
Gruber would have very quickly and publicly called Dan a 'dicknose'.

His lack of regard for listeners, the people who pay his mortgage, is very,
very surprising and ultimately disappointing.

~~~
slantyyz
>> Gruber would have very quickly and publicly called Dan a 'dicknose'.

He probably would have made Dan the "jackass of the week".

------
BigCanOfTuna
I wish I didn't give a shit about this whole situation. It really doesn't
affect me in anyway. However, when I do think about it, this is what comes to
mind:

1\. John and Dan started the podcast together

2\. John came up with the name

3\. Something happend between the two of them

4\. John leaves, taking the show with him.

From a business perspective, I'm shocked at both John and Dan. John took the
whole brand and said it was his and started monitizing it right away,
presumably cutting Dan out of any revenue. Dan, is just letting that slide.
Doesn't he have a right to half?

Johnny Ive can't simply walk away and use the iPhone design because he came up
with the idea.

...anyway, like I said, I really shouldn't give a shit about this whole
situations. I just think it stinks.

------
nicholassmith
I'm surprised he doesn't mention why they split as he did in the podcast
anyway. Might have cleared it up if he'd just said 'I thought I should get
more take, I was lead host, it's a job', we can all relate. Skipping round the
topic makes it seem like he doesn't want to come out and say it.

~~~
slantyyz
I'm curious to know what percentage of the audience listened to the show
because of Dan.

I listened to the original Talk Show (pre 5x5) and I could not stand Gruber's
constant "y'knows" and stopped after 2 episodes.

After 5by5 started and I was listening to his other podcasts, I gave the Talk
Show a second chance because I like Dan, and thankfully Gruber worked on his
verbal tics. In the end, however, the Gruber part of the show wasn't
interesting enough to me, and I stopped listening.

~~~
nicholassmith
I've tried all the shows on 5by5 and with few exceptions if Dan doesn't cohost
I'm not as interested. He dumbs himself down at times and acts as a foil, it
works and extracts more from the cohost. From his writing he is a really smart
guy but he plays the role that he has too.

------
slantyyz
If he had just done this right after the break-up, I'm sure a lot of people
would have cut him more slack.

~~~
moron
Yeah, this is what he should have said in the first place. I don't see what's
so hard, just be a big boy about it.

------
runjake
I've had a frantic last week, but am I confused? Didn't Gruber spit it out and
say it was about the income on his last The Talk Show podcast (#2, I think?)

As an aside, I love Dan and the work he does a whole heck of a lot, but I
listened to the new The Talk Show episodes, expecting them to be rambling
trainwrecks, but I'm starting to think these new shows are better. Gruber
seems much more engaged. It's a little more entertaining. It really
illustrated how wrong I was that Dan and John had this great "odd couple"
chemistry.

The only issue I have (and had on the 5by5 version) is that the time vs.
information value ratio is (for me) really weak. I could spend that hour on
something else that has more value to me.

------
protomyth
"I’m selling sponsorships for the show directly. Two spots per episode, $2500
per spot."

Wonder how that compares to other podcasts. Strange the network is not selling
the spots.

~~~
bjplink
My guess is that this was the crux of the breakup with 5by5. I have no idea
what sponsors pay to be on 5by5 but I would be surprised if Gruber's cut of
that was anywhere near $5,000 an episode.

EDIT: Just for the sake of comparison here are the ad rates on
daringfireball.net: <http://daringfireball.net/feeds/sponsors/>

~~~
thisisblurry
5by5 sponsorship costs can be seen on this page: <http://5by5.tv/advertise>

There doesn't seem to be a pricelist for a particular show's sponsorship
though.

------
jeffehobbs
Good move. As a listener, I appreciate the note and I think this will go a
long way towards easing people into the new format. Also, the second episode
was much improved, IMHO.

~~~
slantyyz
I stopped listening to the 5by5 version a long time ago. I listened to the
second Mule episode just to hear the explanation, and wow, was it all over the
place.

They introduced the 'controversy' right at the beginning of the show and then
you had to sit through 30 minutes of meandering back and forth before Gruber
finally decided to get to the point and say it was a business disagreement.

~~~
Codhisattva
If only the podcast was as short and too the point as most of the DF posts. As
it stands it like eavesdropping on bar talk.

------
chucknelson
It's good to see Gruber trying to be a bit more classy in his handling of the
talk show situation. Now if only we knew what "business reasons" him and Dan
disagreed on. I'm assuming Gruber wanted a larger cut of sponsor money or
something, but who knows...

~~~
martingordon
I have a feeling the "business reasons" had to do with non-sponsorship revenue
shares. In particular, rev share from t-shirts may have been the last straw
for Gruber, especially based on the t-shirt talk on the last 5by5 episode and
Dan's blog post regarding t-shirts (<http://blog.5by5.tv/2012/5/22/t-shirt-
status-update>) where he explicitly mentions that hosts will get 50% of the
profits from their show's shirts.

~~~
slantyyz
In the end, I don't think the "business reasons" really matter. Gruber was
well within his rights to end the podcasting relationship if he was unhappy.
It just would have been polite to the audience to give them a head's up.

