jkitty

They definitely were not $50 for an 8 pack at the store 😂. I would never have bought them. They were priced in line with other beverages. Maybe the cosmos are more? That’s 6.25 a can, which is not great but also not insane if it’s true cosmo (i.e. mostly vodka). A six pack of the teas is $12 at Jewel. I can definitely see people buying Loverboy who are not aware of the show. I buy new drinks all the time without knowing who runs the beverage company or who created it. I look at the packaging, read the description, and take a chance if it seems appealing. Loverboy has cute packaging, good ingredients, and interesting descriptions. Depending on a person’s flavor preferences I could see them repurchasing Loverboy. I might still try the wine spritz as I enjoy spritz more in general than hard teas. I think Kyle timed the market right and had good branding. Amanda has been part of the company since nearly the beginning. I am surprised she has no ownership interest at all. She should have negotiated that when she left her job for Loverboy. I can also see why Kyle (and his investors) would want to protect his majority ownership in the event of his divorce. If he has 51% ownership interest and she gets half, he no longer has control over the company. That’s not what investors signed up for.

I’ll be over here at my table for one because I enjoy watching these people and this show 😂. While they can all have their annoying moments, I find them generally entertaining and funny. I also usually see both side of any argument they are having, which I appreciate (unlike a lot of housewives shows). I actually wish they would turn this into an NYC show with vignettes and overlaps of their real lives instead of trying to make Winter House happen. I have bought them (in Illinois at Jewel). They are just ok. Not the worst but the sweetener (monk fruit I think) leaves too strong of an after taste for me, at least in the ones I tried (the teas not the spritz).

Yes, this sums up how I was feeling about it. It’s not about her body type for me. It’s that they treat her like she is half as old as she is. My four-year-old and I have more direct conversations (and she is more independent) than Bill and Jen’s daughter seems to be. (She also doesn’t have training wheels, but I realize she’s on the early end.) It seems to me like Jen and Bill do not encourage their children to do anything outside of the home, athletic or otherwise. I will admit, I flit in and out of NJ, so I might be wrong, but do we ever see or hear about their kids’ activities the way we do about Tre, Melissa, or Jackie’s kids? I understand that families with less resources might not be able to provide the time or money for sports, arts, academic clubs, or other extra curriculars. But in higher income families, especially with a SAHM, the children are usually involved in something. Jen’s children do not seem to have that, and she seems to treat them like they are all babies. Maybe she fosters their dependence and time at home to maintain her position in the family?

No one else was a little taken aback by Jennifer’s 8-year-old daughter needing training wheels and looking like she has never ridden a bike before? Isn’t 8 REALLY late to still need training wheels?

Exactly. God forbid her face not be tweaked to blasé “perfection.” She must be a hideous troll beast. 🙄 I am not 100% team Heather but I also am giving Fraser the side eye. He seems overly salty to very low-key feedback. Heather was also taking responsibility (at least to his face). I generally find him amusing though so I’ll withhold judgment. I hope he and Heather find a groove.

I agree with you. I think a Kyle does the job she was hired to do. A producer pulls her aside and says, “we need a final Sutton/Erika confrontation. We can’t leave it in limbo.” So Kyle (clumsily) stokes that fire. I appreciate Kyle on the show. I am not a “fan” but I appreciate that she does the job she needs to do. She doesn’t seem evil or inherently shady to me like Erika or Rinna, respectively. I am also fine with Dorit. She didn’t come hard for Erika but she seemEd to try more that other women to me. PK has turned a corner for me and amuses me.

What’s wrong with vaginas lol? I’ve been hearing about men’s limp penises basically my whole TV-watching life!

A. Fucking. Men.

Yikes. If my husband tried to have a talk with me about what to wear to appropriately “manage” someone else’s sexual urges there would be …words. To say the least. It’s not a woman’s job to manage someone else’s thoughts. Even a burqa won’t solve that problem.

I was rooting for her. We were all rooting for her 😂! But really…such a disappointment.

Also sometimes depositions and subpoenas are much for litigation strategy as they are for discovering actual information. If you start subpoenaing Erika’s castmates, bravo execs, business partners, etc., people are going to start asking if she is worth the trouble of being associated with. It might put her income stream in jeopardy. Seeing those subpoenas go out and the issues they may cause for her creates settlement pressure and leverage.

I only got through half the thread, but we’re any other litigators reflexively shouting “don’t answer that!” when Sutton was asking Erika questions about conversations with her attorneys? Girl almost got Erika to waive attorney-client privilege on national TV! Kathy Hilton saying “they will get to it,” and then saying “It’s good practice,” while everyone laughs, but sitting there serious and stone faced are easily top 10 housewives moments for me.

I agree as a moral human re: her complaints and overall lack of humility I do find it interesting that everything she has shared seems to directly follow her narrative and defenses. She doesn’t confirm or deny the scheme, she simply repeats as nauseam that she had no information about or access to the finances and tells stories creating valid reasons for her divorce. It all seems very lawyer-approved to me. (Although if she was my client I would want her off the show ASAP…but again, how would she pay me? They are working within the constraints they have.) She has not gone so far as to say she has no knowledge of the doings of her LLC, so it will be interesting to see how next week goes.

Agreed. It would make zero sense to do this without a negotiated, court-approved settlement. If she showed up at opposing counsel’s office with a u-haul they wouldn’t even talk to her. This has to be done through lawyers and the court. Settlement negotiations are confidential under rule 408. We wouldn’t know if they were happening or what was being offered. Part of me hopes her silence as to the victims and expressing any empathy is her following advice from her attorneys (e.g. not to implicitly admit liability or that wrongdoing occurred because acknowledging the victims you acknowledge the crime). But it is morally questionable and, frankly, terrible PR.

I haven’t read the whole thread but am I the only one who thinks Erika may really not have known? I have worked with plenty of high-powered, highly-sought after, extremely wealthy equity partners and (in my opinion) most of them are assholes at best and sociopaths at worst. The way they talk about and to their wives - like they are idiots who are here just for show…but in a playful “joking” “little woman” kind of way - tracks with Erika’s description of Tom. I have seen these men “playfully” hold money over their wives head, discuss giving their wives money like it was a favor, and refer to their money exclusively as “my money.” It also makes sense to me that she would not bad mouth her gravy train until she decided to leave. Don’t burn a bridge until you cross it. It is entirely plausible to me that a wife of a world-famous plaintiff’s attorney would not have a full picture of their family’s finances, understand the implications or legality of various transfers, or would take her husbands word on their financial health. I’m not saying it’s right, just that it is plausible. She didn’t care about the money as long as it was there when she needed it. I am more interested in what his partners did or did not know. Was he the only person with access to the firm’s financials and trust accounts? Did they not notice him personally taking huge distributions and not making payments to clients? Did they not question the propriety of the alleged investments of the clients’ settlements or judgments? Did they not notice his alleged mental deterioration? Why did they not refuse to let him practice and/or report him to the california bar? They seem far better positioned to discover these crimes than Erica to me. if she was involved I hope she suffers the fullest extent of repercussions, but I see how she could actually be innocent.