Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Jill, Derick & the Kids: Moving On!!


  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

From what I remember the "fired narrative" came from Derick himself. He's said he was fired, he's said he quit and he's said he did neither because he was "never hired". It seems in the book they picked the quit lane, but they can pick any lane they want because no one is going to speak out against them on this.

The only other entity that knows the real truth is TLC, and I doubt they care enough to speak on an incident that happened over 6 years ago. 

  • Like 10

As I recall, the Derick was fired narrative arose because Jill and Derick initially did nothing to refute that belief after TLC's tweets that they hadn't worked with him in months, which i think suited his religious persecution narrative-he changed his twitter headline to something about not compromising his values to keep his voice around the time of the TLC statements. I tend to believe the "quit" narrative for the following reasons.

1) Jill and Derick were not part of the end of season interview episode that aired after Joy's wedding. It was filmed in June 2017, just after Joy and Austin returned from their honeymoon. Jill and Derick were on a "babymoon" before Sam's birth (Sew Sumi, former contributer to this forum, sleuthed this out.) If Jill and Derick were still under a contract at this time, they would have been obligated to participate in that episode. 

2) Sam's birth wasn't filmed because they were no longer under a contract for the show at the time of his birth.

3) On or about Joy's first anniversary in May 2018, Derick posted about his 1 year anniversary of being free from his contract to film the show. The tweet has since been deleted, but at the time, many people assumed he was talking about a contract with TLC. Now we know he meant the contract with MAD Studios. 

 I remember that many people assumed that Sam's birth was filmed but not shown because of the traumatic events, and then Derick started tweeting about hospital bills being covered when TLC. We now know that his statements were about Israel's birth, but Derick's tweets about Jazz and Nate were also made around this time, followed by TLC's statement about not working with him, which reinforced the Derick was fired narrative.

The issue of contracts has been murky for years because as someone else pointed out, Derick had said he did not have a contract with TLC (which turned out to be true, as he had a contract with MAD Studios, not TLC), but part of the reason they returned to the States is that TLC did not want to continue to film them in Central America, and Derick said they had to return because of the TLC contract. I think that TLC may have said they weren't going to continue to film them, as TLC was not obligated to do so under their contract with MAD Studios, and Jim Bob didn't like that so he said they had to return due to Jill and Derick's contract with MAD Studios. (I haven't read Jill's book, so I'm making an assumption here.)

Not to give Derick too much credit here, but I think he carefully worded his statements about contracts for the show so that he was not lying, but he was not transparent about his contract with MAD Studios vs the MAD Studios contract with TLC, and he did not clarify assumptions that he was under contract with TLC, as opposed to a production studio. 

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Useful 11

I don't think we really know the whole story behind the quitting/not quitting/ firing/contract stuff.  JB and Derrick are not honest people, and Jill is dumb and seemingly without any intellectual curiosity.  I wouldn't be surprised if Jill and Derrick would have been willing to sign their own contract with TLC to continue the show (but get paid a large amount) the way Jinger and Jeremy supposedly did, but then his tweets ended the chances of that... making it very "you're not dumping me, I'm dumping you."

Not defending TLC - I just think this is a case of all unreliable narrators telling a story.

In 2020 they got an estimate on repairs that were needed. They didn’t have them done. The estimate at the time was $4,500. They included the estimate in the ad.

In the ad she says, “The harp is beautiful and I love the style and sound, but I just don't have the time or ability to keep it up right now.”.

Edited by ginger90
  • Like 7
  • Sad 2
  • Useful 6
58 minutes ago, ginger90 said:

In 2020 they got an estimate on repairs that were needed. They didn’t have them done. The estimate at the time was $4,500. They included the estimate in the ad.

In the ad she says, “The harp is beautiful and I love the style and sound, but I just don't have the time or ability to keep it up right now.”.

She should have tried billing JB! 

  • Like 5
  • LOL 10
4 hours ago, ginger90 said:

In the ad she says, “The harp is beautiful and I love the style and sound, but I just don't have the time or ability to keep it up right now.”.

You'd think with 2 kids in school and plenty of cash, she'd be able to take the time if she really liked it.  

And Dillwad is selling it, not Jill.  You'd think he'd anticipate a better price with the name "Jill Duggar" plastered on the listing.  

Edited by SnapHappy
  • Useful 3
6 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

So harps cost big bucks, huh? Selling in for it for $10,000 when it needs $4,500 of work done on it. Is the harp itself worth $15,000?

I can't speak for this particular harp, but I have a couple of acquaintances who have paid $75,000 to $95,000 for concert grand pedal harps, meant for professional orchestra and/or Broadway/off-Broadway shows, and $20,000 to $35,000 for lower quality and/or used grand pedal harps. I just did a very quick Google search, and found several grand pedal harps selling for $14,000 to $45,000; though I imagine if your goal is to play in a professional orchestra (as with my acquaintances above), you might end up paying more.

The smaller Celtic harps often cost considerably less - I think I paid about $500 for mine, though that was years ago. I'm not sure what they cost now. 

So the price is probably reasonable - maybe not great, but reasonable. Whether or not they'll find a buyer for it is of course another question entirely.

  • Like 7
  • Useful 17

Here’s the listing, it’s long so I’m putting it in a spoiler.

Spoiler

Gold Lyon and Healy, 46 String, Semi-Grand Pedal Harp

-Price: $10,995

-Style 17, Gold-plated

-46 string, Semi-Grand Lyon and Healy pedal harp

-Wide, “graduated” string spacing

-Soundboard 19.2” wide

-Harp made between 1944-1950 (Model No. 4754-17)

-Gold plated harps generally cost 60-70% more than their natural wood counterparts. Lyon and Healy doesn’t make this Style 17 harp in gold anymore, but their new, natural wood Style 17 harp is currently priced at $38,700.

-Comes with soft harp cover, tuning key and hard wooden harp shipping case

-Created in 1918, the Style 17 is a traditionally-designed harp which features the elements and style reminiscent of the French Renaissance. As a concertino, it is slightly smaller than a concert grand harp, which is ideal for a more petite harpist.

 

Disclosure:

-gold paint has flaked off in some places

-2 strings missing

-Wooden harp shipping case is missing the key, but a key might be able to be made or you could break key lock latch off if need be (there are multiple other working, non-key latches).

-Harp condition is fair and playable, but it will need some repairs (some of the lower strings have cut through the string dots) and it needs regulated.

I played the harp up until 2020 when I lowered the string tension to extend the timeline on needed repairs. (See email screenshot from Lyon and Healy in 2020 outlining recommended repairs and estimated timeline for completing repairs at their shop.)

The harp is beautiful and I love the style and sound, but I just don’t have the time or ability to keep it up right now.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
  • Useful 8

A "vintage" Lyon and Healey should bring the price they are asking.  This is a "top brand" in the harp world.  I seem to recall that JB bought an expensive harp at some auction or something like that.  At least one harp, and maybe two,  I don't remember the particulars, I just remember them bringing the harp off the truck and into the house.  But even needing repairs, this harp is not "junk".  This is a concert pedal harp, not a Celtic harp.

  • Like 6
  • Useful 11
10 hours ago, Salacious Kitty said:

I thought the harp was part of the moving in package the Duggars received when TLC finished construction of the Big House. I know for sure they got a grand piano. I want to say they got two harps. 

They did. I think it was donated to them by the Campbell's soup company which always seemed weird to me.

  • Like 2
  • Useful 4
  • LOL 1

So Derick is now sitting next to his wife, who has said she loves her parents and wants a relationship with them, and calling her father a pimp? Derick has to be the most classless, selfish husband around.

And does he not remember having his kids on TV? And stating he'd be open to another reality series, just not on TLC? Or posting a 10 part vacation reel? What does he call their monthly shills for swimming lessons - pimp-lite?

I guess it doesn't matter to him because he's repaired his public persona and now has a plunge tub in his garage.

  • Like 5

I wonder what is up with Jill posting daily. To increase traffic and possibly books sales? Or for the likes she seems to thrive on? I don't think she's missed a day, starting back to the lead up to her book coming out. I don't think she posted this often back when social media was "her job".

Is SM privacy for kids, just not showing their faces, or does it include not featuring them in posts? I mean I get it, the kids are the primary part of Jill's life and she's proud of them, so she likely wants to share - but where is the line? 

What complicated times we live in.

  • Like 7
16 hours ago, jcbrown said:

And Monopoly is an objectively terrible game, no matter the variant. My spouse and I agreed more than a decade ago that we will no longer play it because we would like to stay married and one of us is hyper-competetive, which that game really rewards.

My family refuses to play too. The last time we played, also probably about a decade ago, they all got mad at me for having good strategies and accused me of being a slum lord. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Make It Rain Money GIF

On a side note, I find it hilarious that Rogers has its own version of Monopoly. I never knew that, and I'd have thought Bentonville with all its Walton money would have been a more likely candidate.

  • Like 3
  • LOL 10
18 hours ago, jcbrown said:

They prepped the potatoes on the floor? So odd, these people.

And Monopoly is an objectively terrible game, no matter the variant. My spouse and I agreed more than a decade ago that we will no longer play it because we would like to stay married and one of us is hyper-competetive, which that game really rewards.

I do think if the kids are playing it, there is a benefit when it comes to math and understanding banking terms. 

  • Like 11

Monopoly was the go to board game  when I was a kid ( a long time ago). I loved it when I was winning and hated it when I was losing. We did not think of it in terms of the capitalistic message. I have not played in so many years and have no desire to to play it now just because I don't like losing.  I think having a city specific version would be fun. Though as a kid my small town version I am not sure we would have had a Park Place. Every community would be middle and less than middle class.

Edited by auntieminem
  • Like 6

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...