I'd be surprised if Ant had less. He started his show immediately after his firing, Artie had a long period of recovery and being out of show business before he got back in.
Stern's prime as far as talent goes was early 90's... But prime as far as "listeners" goes was right before he went to Sirius IMO, which Artie was a part of.
Id be surprised if Artie isn't lying about that number, hes been caught fibbing dozens of times. Artie is a likeable guy though, his podcast has that sports/betting angle to it too.
If Anthony had 2300 subscribers, do you think he would have moved into the super expensive studio in Manhattan? Do you think he would be adding all these new shows? Do you think he would have all these advertisers that he does?
If he only had that small amount of subscribers he would just stay in his house and squeak out a living. Instead of moving to Manhattan and losing over 1 million per year. He has like 5 companies that advertise on his show. I doubt if they would be very interested in doing it for only 2,300 people. I hate to break it to you people, but his network is doing quite well.
How much more expensive is "super expensive" than just expensive?
You say Ant is adding shows and that costs him a lot of money. How much do you think adding the likes of Dave to a podcast network actually costs considering all major asset expenditure is already complete?
Also, you talk about advertisers. Look at the quality of the advertisers. Is it Sony? MasterCard? Hell, is it even Bobs seconds hand car lot? No. It's grates for a grill or cock pills.
Admittedly I've only listened to two episodes, but aren't his advertisers things like the mangrate and that ripoff deal-of-the-day site? So there's that, but I also think the podcast advertising model is not exactly the same as traditional media. Which is why most podcast ads have a referral code you're asked to use.
Ant has tons of subscribers, that's why he did that dick cream infomercial and has commercials on a podcast he charges for. And doing those slimey tattoo conventions doesn't seem like an act of desperation.
Ants got big costs, and he has to be paying the other shows something, and his subscriber base is dropping rapidly. My sub ran out and I didn't even notice. I watched like three episodes.
Well the alternative is that it's growing. Have you seen any evidence to suggest this? I would assume the first month was the biggest. At that point he not only got a lot of people trying it out with a one month sub but a lot of hardcore fans who showed their support by subbing six months or a year.
After the first month there were probably a lot of one month subs that liked the show and converted to a longer term membership. But I imagine this was far outweighed by people who just didn't renew their monthly.
After the one year mark there was probably a sizeable drop off from yearly subs who realized they aren't listening anymore. And since then I imagine he's either consistently losing subs as more long term memberships come to a close, or simply stagnating. I just don't see growth, logically, as a possibility.
The evidence is that the network is still growing.
How is this evidence of growth? If anything I'd assume the opposite. Ant's appeal on his own is very narrow. Add more shows to try to attract a wider audience.
Yeah, that's what somebody with 900 subscribers does, moves into a million dollar studio in Manhattan... And that's why Anthony has so many advertisers, because of his 900 subscribers.
I'm assuming Ant is at best breaking even and likely losing money on the network but feels like you have to spend money to make money and that it'll grow into something... unlikely it will but that's my guess
I decided not to renew because I realized it's dumb to pay $7 a month for a fucking podcast when EVERY other popular show has figured out how to do it with advertisers.
Considering he goes to Atlantic city every weekend and was on a 4 million dollar salary for years I really don't see him struggling with his money problems right now
I would say that after paying all his expenses(Rent at studio, salaries, equipment, etc) Ant brings in 200,000-250,000 a year. Not the millions he used to make but not a bad living either for a single guy whose house is paid for already.
I disagree. Ant has too many salaries attached to his network and now an expensive rent.
Let's say that Ant has the same amount of subscribers as Artie (9000). That would be $62,550 per month.... That's a big number to many of us but in terms of producing several shows, it's pennies. After salaries, taxes, rent, streaming/hosting, promotion, and other miscellaneous expenses, Ant maybe gets $8000. That wouldn't cover 2/5th of his household expenses. These are with Artie's subscriber numbers --- which Ant doesn't put up. Ant is losing money on his network, but he originally figured that the network would grow and it was a gamble. Then, he beat up his drug abusing girlfriend and is now black-balled.
Ant is hemorrhaging money --- and now has court costs, fines, attorneys and Dani's eventual settlement to pay for.
I think we are just suppose to say he is losing massive amounts of money, because this is the O&A reddit, and we are suppose to be negative about everything on here. But in reality, the network appears to be doing very well. And with all the expenses he has on the network he has to have a lot more subscribers than 9,000 to be breaking even. And if he only has like 5,000 like you guys are guessing. Then that is only about 300,000 dollars per year. He probably has at least 1 million in expenses per year. Surely he will move back to his house soon if he is really loosing that much money. But instead he keeps expanding the network.
Holy shit people are actually fans of Artie's podcast here? I did not expect that negative reaction, but to be honest I shouldn't have given you guys that much credit XD
He was just over 70,000 subs from when I checked around 10/15. Now that is only from actual credit card transactions and only from VISA/MC/AMEX/DISCOVER. It does not include PayPal, Debit Cards, Bank Cards ect.. It is required by law (Credit Information Companies (Regulation) Act, 2005-2CA) that creditors (the big 4) relinquish statistics of credit card purchases paid to private and independent companies/LLCs/inc's ect... to the public.
Keep in mind, no personal/identifiable information of the consumer is obtained just %'s of purchases/charges and you have to FAX your own personal indentifiable info and then go to a notary public if you want to obtain the information from the four creditors I listed.
People who say podcasts aren't financially viable are either contrarians or losers who tried to make money off a podcast and failed because they're inept.
Joe Rogan never had his own audience, neither did Marc Maron. The internet makes it a more level playing field. If you can't succeed in the medium don't blame it on the industry, blame your lack of ability to make the most of it financially. Other people are. Clearly, having a built in audience is going to favor anyone who decides to do a podcast. That doesn't mean it isn't viable for others. Not just anyone can start a podcast and be successful, that goes for radio too.
So Artie has 9000, well that "podcast" is almost a pure pity gesture to Artie, although he is more famous. Depressing, audio only, barely interesting. Plus, Anthony has other people doing shows
Well the alternative is that it's growing. Have you seen any evidence to suggest this? I would assume the first month was the biggest. At that point he not only got a lot of people trying it out with a one month sub but a lot of hardcore fans who showed their support by subbing six months or a year.
After the first month there were probably a lot of one month subs that liked the show and converted to a longer term membership. But I imagine this was far outweighed by people who just didn't renew their monthly.
After the one year mark there was probably a sizeable drop off from yearly subs who realized they aren't listening anymore. And since then I imagine he's either consistently losing subs as more long term memberships come to a close, or simply stagnating. I just don't see growth, logically, as a possibility.
89 comments
38 jags85 2016-01-09
Put it this way: if it was a number worth bragging about, that drunk pedo would have bragged about it already
11 [deleted] 2016-01-09
Most correct reply in this post. If Ant was "putting up numbers" we'd hear about it.
4 AnudderCast 2016-01-09
This is the final answer.
19 Spokker 2016-01-09
Artie is more of an open book than Anthony. Artie has never been shy about revealing his finances. He once revealed what he made one year on Stern.
16 ImperviousSeahorse 2016-01-09
He also revealed what Gary earned once.
1 [deleted] 2016-01-09
[deleted]
1 SWIMsfriend 2016-01-09
what was it?
2 Spokker 2016-01-09
https://youtu.be/vpSo6XLUiLI?t=1m11s
13 [deleted] 2016-01-09
Artie has 9000? Then Anthony probably has 2300.
-7 cumiasroasted 2016-01-09
I'd be surprised if Ant had less. He started his show immediately after his firing, Artie had a long period of recovery and being out of show business before he got back in.
25 bigmattson 2016-01-09
Artie is significantly more popular than Ant though. He's got Stern in his prime fanbase.
1 grocery_man 2016-01-09
I think you will find that he was not with Stern in his prime fanbase.
1 bigmattson 2016-01-09
Stern's prime as far as talent goes was early 90's... But prime as far as "listeners" goes was right before he went to Sirius IMO, which Artie was a part of.
-6 VladDogbreath 2016-01-09
Id be surprised if Artie isn't lying about that number, hes been caught fibbing dozens of times. Artie is a likeable guy though, his podcast has that sports/betting angle to it too.
-9 Jenkins1080 2016-01-09
If Anthony had 2300 subscribers, do you think he would have moved into the super expensive studio in Manhattan? Do you think he would be adding all these new shows? Do you think he would have all these advertisers that he does?
25 [deleted] 2016-01-09
Yes.
He repeatedly makes poor decisions that are not in his best interest.
-11 Jenkins1080 2016-01-09
If he only had that small amount of subscribers he would just stay in his house and squeak out a living. Instead of moving to Manhattan and losing over 1 million per year. He has like 5 companies that advertise on his show. I doubt if they would be very interested in doing it for only 2,300 people. I hate to break it to you people, but his network is doing quite well.
8 [deleted] 2016-01-09
Show us the receipts.
https://49.media.tumblr.com/bcaae98724dd6e7c266c2e5b5375db96/tumblr_npanjnWD4c1tr6pz0o1_500.gif
9 Dawgsie 2016-01-09
How much more expensive is "super expensive" than just expensive?
You say Ant is adding shows and that costs him a lot of money. How much do you think adding the likes of Dave to a podcast network actually costs considering all major asset expenditure is already complete?
Also, you talk about advertisers. Look at the quality of the advertisers. Is it Sony? MasterCard? Hell, is it even Bobs seconds hand car lot? No. It's grates for a grill or cock pills.
3 wifflebb 2016-01-09
Admittedly I've only listened to two episodes, but aren't his advertisers things like the mangrate and that ripoff deal-of-the-day site? So there's that, but I also think the podcast advertising model is not exactly the same as traditional media. Which is why most podcast ads have a referral code you're asked to use.
12 PrisonRape4Ant 2016-01-09
Ant has tons of subscribers, that's why he did that dick cream infomercial and has commercials on a podcast he charges for. And doing those slimey tattoo conventions doesn't seem like an act of desperation.
4 clucker220 2016-01-09
No, that was all just keith's fault.
-11 DeafandMutePenguin 2016-01-09
Oh look a redditor for 18 days. Welcome.
9 SlappyJiggler 2016-01-09
Seven.
18 I_Hate_Knickers_2 2016-01-09
That would make a great name for a kid.
6 mrta66 2016-01-09
Lets have a baby
5 ajr9876543 2016-01-09
Cmon that's my name for a kid! What about "Soda"? You can have that one.
-1 Ronnie_Bennie 2016-01-09
I'm naming my serial killer movie Soda!
4 DaveNone 2016-01-09
"Perhaps more than that, Slappy!"
8 rockydog101 2016-01-09
Ants got big costs, and he has to be paying the other shows something, and his subscriber base is dropping rapidly. My sub ran out and I didn't even notice. I watched like three episodes.
4 Pacinos_Wig-V4 2016-01-09
LOS gets $200/show each. Keith said it on the TACS episode after Ant's arrest when Luis and Dave were in.
8 retroracer 2016-01-09
lol no wonder they couldn't get Ron or Ari.
3 SWIMsfriend 2016-01-09
jesus, that is nothing
2 rockydog101 2016-01-09
Oh wow. Are their shows daily or weekly?
2 Pacinos_Wig-V4 2016-01-09
2x/week
-1 sawxfan23 2016-01-09
Ant also has ad revenue
-4 grocery_man 2016-01-09
and his subscriber base is dropping rapidly.
And you know this how?
13 [deleted] 2016-01-09
Many here have let their subscriptions lapse and are so bored by TACS that they're not even motivated to find a stream.
-5 RearNakedGrope 2016-01-09
I subscribed this month, but only for Gavins show.
2 [deleted] 2016-01-09
You should let Gavin know. He's partners in the new studio. He'll eventually jump the Cumia ship.
0 RearNakedGrope 2016-01-09
I've told him on twitter.
7 wifflebb 2016-01-09
Well the alternative is that it's growing. Have you seen any evidence to suggest this? I would assume the first month was the biggest. At that point he not only got a lot of people trying it out with a one month sub but a lot of hardcore fans who showed their support by subbing six months or a year.
After the first month there were probably a lot of one month subs that liked the show and converted to a longer term membership. But I imagine this was far outweighed by people who just didn't renew their monthly.
After the one year mark there was probably a sizeable drop off from yearly subs who realized they aren't listening anymore. And since then I imagine he's either consistently losing subs as more long term memberships come to a close, or simply stagnating. I just don't see growth, logically, as a possibility.
-1 DeafandMutePenguin 2016-01-09
The evidence is that the network is still growing. They just added ESD and said they will add more shows who are a good fit.
4 wifflebb 2016-01-09
How is this evidence of growth? If anything I'd assume the opposite. Ant's appeal on his own is very narrow. Add more shows to try to attract a wider audience.
-4 DeafandMutePenguin 2016-01-09
The other shows, especially those who were on other platforms (LOS, NYCCR, ESDS) wouldn't join to a failing venture.
7 LightBulbExpert 2016-01-09
<2,000
6 Excavatetheinfo 2016-01-09
Anthony's audience is three figures.
14 K1bbler 2016-01-09
They used to estimate O&A's audience was about a tenth of Sterns. I'd say the same ratio applies to this and at most Ant has about 900 subscribers.
-9 Jenkins1080 2016-01-09
Yeah, that's what somebody with 900 subscribers does, moves into a million dollar studio in Manhattan... And that's why Anthony has so many advertisers, because of his 900 subscribers.
13 K1bbler 2016-01-09
The studio was a shared investment with gavin. And the fact he "has so many advertisers" on a paid subscription podcast isn't a good sign.
-7 [deleted] 2016-01-09
[deleted]
3 K1bbler 2016-01-09
It's been mentioned a few times.
0 lickandsniff 2016-01-09
I've never heard that mentioned. When?
2 ChippusMaximus 2016-01-09
Gavin also invested into The Rebel Media. He's diverse until someone gets mad and buys him out.
0 lickandsniff 2016-01-09
I agree. The people posting here are full of shit.
1 [deleted] 2016-01-09
[deleted]
-9 I_Hate_Knickers_2 2016-01-09
Not including Dani.
See because she doesn't have one.
That's why it's funny.
5 bigmattson 2016-01-09
Whoever pity upvoted this shit joke should be ashamed of themselves.
6 clauge 2016-01-09
Did he go to AC this weekend so he can make payroll?
5 runnerup82 2016-01-09
I'm assuming Ant is at best breaking even and likely losing money on the network but feels like you have to spend money to make money and that it'll grow into something... unlikely it will but that's my guess
5 TakeMeXenu 2016-01-09
One less than yesterday.
I decided not to renew because I realized it's dumb to pay $7 a month for a fucking podcast when EVERY other popular show has figured out how to do it with advertisers.
3 PrisonRape4Ant 2016-01-09
Ardee has a podcast?
-5 ajr9876543 2016-01-09
It's more like a gravecast
4 ShadowbannedKeithM 2016-01-09
Ooof!
2 JohnnyCashFan69 2016-01-09
This is why Artie wanted to do his own thing instead of join with Ant.
2 JustTheWordTheWho 2016-01-09
Prolly like 7 racists and ballwashers
1 ShadowbannedKeithM 2016-01-09
It's gotta be somewhere between 67 and a million.
1 ChippusMaximus 2016-01-09
perhaps more than that
0 TweetPoster 2016-01-09
@cheeto0:
[Mistake?] [Suggestion] [FAQ] [Code] [Issues]
0 olebillyredface28 2016-01-09
Considering he goes to Atlantic city every weekend and was on a 4 million dollar salary for years I really don't see him struggling with his money problems right now
2 SextonHardcastle11 2016-01-09
Quit being logical
-1 sawxfan23 2016-01-09
I would say that after paying all his expenses(Rent at studio, salaries, equipment, etc) Ant brings in 200,000-250,000 a year. Not the millions he used to make but not a bad living either for a single guy whose house is paid for already.
10 [deleted] 2016-01-09
I disagree. Ant has too many salaries attached to his network and now an expensive rent.
Let's say that Ant has the same amount of subscribers as Artie (9000). That would be $62,550 per month.... That's a big number to many of us but in terms of producing several shows, it's pennies. After salaries, taxes, rent, streaming/hosting, promotion, and other miscellaneous expenses, Ant maybe gets $8000. That wouldn't cover 2/5th of his household expenses. These are with Artie's subscriber numbers --- which Ant doesn't put up. Ant is losing money on his network, but he originally figured that the network would grow and it was a gamble. Then, he beat up his drug abusing girlfriend and is now black-balled.
Ant is hemorrhaging money --- and now has court costs, fines, attorneys and Dani's eventual settlement to pay for.
0 Jenkins1080 2016-01-09
I think we are just suppose to say he is losing massive amounts of money, because this is the O&A reddit, and we are suppose to be negative about everything on here. But in reality, the network appears to be doing very well. And with all the expenses he has on the network he has to have a lot more subscribers than 9,000 to be breaking even. And if he only has like 5,000 like you guys are guessing. Then that is only about 300,000 dollars per year. He probably has at least 1 million in expenses per year. Surely he will move back to his house soon if he is really loosing that much money. But instead he keeps expanding the network.
2 DeafandMutePenguin 2016-01-09
The studio rent and renovation could have easily chewed up 1 mil in expenses.
6 ceslek 2016-01-09
How did you come up with this figure?
1 DeafandMutePenguin 2016-01-09
Ant has already been on the record that he makes more in a month than he did at SXM. That was before he added LOS and Gavin.
1 mintwaltman 2016-01-09
And he wins stacks of cash every time he goes to the casino. I've seen the pics on twitter.
1 EastSideDan 2016-01-09
He's also lying.
-1 ajr9876543 2016-01-09
Holy shit people are actually fans of Artie's podcast here? I did not expect that negative reaction, but to be honest I shouldn't have given you guys that much credit XD
2 ciscohelpme 2016-01-09
xD
-3 fierysteed 2016-01-09
He was just over 70,000 subs from when I checked around 10/15. Now that is only from actual credit card transactions and only from VISA/MC/AMEX/DISCOVER. It does not include PayPal, Debit Cards, Bank Cards ect.. It is required by law (Credit Information Companies (Regulation) Act, 2005-2CA) that creditors (the big 4) relinquish statistics of credit card purchases paid to private and independent companies/LLCs/inc's ect... to the public.
Keep in mind, no personal/identifiable information of the consumer is obtained just %'s of purchases/charges and you have to FAX your own personal indentifiable info and then go to a notary public if you want to obtain the information from the four creditors I listed.
2 [deleted] 2016-01-09
Proof?
2 mintwaltman 2016-01-09
I think that comes out to more listeners O&A had on sirius
1 phlammo 2016-01-09
liar
0 Jenkins1080 2016-01-09
70,000 is quite impressive. If you are telling the truth. I know his network is doing very well, but I didn't know it would be doing that well.
-8 onemancrimespree 2016-01-09
People who say podcasts aren't financially viable are either contrarians or losers who tried to make money off a podcast and failed because they're inept.
2 Anarox 2016-01-09
They aren't, everyone is not Lange or Cumia who already had an audience.
-3 onemancrimespree 2016-01-09
Joe Rogan never had his own audience, neither did Marc Maron. The internet makes it a more level playing field. If you can't succeed in the medium don't blame it on the industry, blame your lack of ability to make the most of it financially. Other people are. Clearly, having a built in audience is going to favor anyone who decides to do a podcast. That doesn't mean it isn't viable for others. Not just anyone can start a podcast and be successful, that goes for radio too.
3 Anarox 2016-01-09
Joe had fear factor and UFC or whatever it is. Marc Maron had to work hard but he did have a.large network of comedian friends.
-11 ajr9876543 2016-01-09
My honest guess is around 15,000
So Artie has 9000, well that "podcast" is almost a pure pity gesture to Artie, although he is more famous. Depressing, audio only, barely interesting. Plus, Anthony has other people doing shows
7 bigmattson 2016-01-09
This is the dumbest post ever. Clearly never listened to Artie's show... There is a reason Ant made a hard run at him a few months back.
-5 ajr9876543 2016-01-09
It's more like a gravecast
13 [deleted] 2016-01-09
Many here have let their subscriptions lapse and are so bored by TACS that they're not even motivated to find a stream.
-7 [deleted] 2016-01-09
[deleted]
7 wifflebb 2016-01-09
Well the alternative is that it's growing. Have you seen any evidence to suggest this? I would assume the first month was the biggest. At that point he not only got a lot of people trying it out with a one month sub but a lot of hardcore fans who showed their support by subbing six months or a year.
After the first month there were probably a lot of one month subs that liked the show and converted to a longer term membership. But I imagine this was far outweighed by people who just didn't renew their monthly.
After the one year mark there was probably a sizeable drop off from yearly subs who realized they aren't listening anymore. And since then I imagine he's either consistently losing subs as more long term memberships come to a close, or simply stagnating. I just don't see growth, logically, as a possibility.
-11 DeafandMutePenguin 2016-01-09
Oh look a redditor for 18 days. Welcome.
0 lickandsniff 2016-01-09
I've never heard that mentioned. When?
1 [deleted] 2016-01-09
[deleted]
4 clucker220 2016-01-09
No, that was all just keith's fault.