dulpit wrote: » 9,308 patrons right now. So that's what? $558,480 per annum if they get the full $5 from Patreon. Not too shabby... Edit: They are also listed in the top 20 across all of Patreon. Not sure if that's based on income or number of patrons though...
jhammer wrote: » The subscription service is 1 year old today. Anyone know how it is holding up or what are subscribers numbers at?
Nokotan wrote: » 9,308 It can be checked on their Patreon pagehttps://www.patreon.com/secondcaptains
Pter wrote: » Haha look at the monthly dropoffs.
corwill wrote: » Ken in fine form, 'we will all die here in this mountain pass'.
Beersmith wrote: » I had never heard of Jordan Peterson before hearing kens podcast. It seemed ken behaved very similar to cathy newman. He seemed to be making up points that Jordan hasn't made. Laura disagreed with ken constantly. Ken sort of made her become a defender of jordan when it would have been more interesting to discuss the why is he so popular angle. It really showed up kens knowledge which he admits was as a ucd student many years ago.
dominatinMC wrote: » Tbh, I'd prefer it if they focused on more "specialist" sports pieces instead of the politics podcasts. I found some of the recent "specialist" pieces on George Gibney and Jelena Dokic to be fascinating, if not slightly harrowing. Obviously not all of the "specialist" topics have to cover such dark material, but I find these topics more interesting that the politics-based podcasts. I'm hoping they cover the story of Damian Browne this week.
tomwaits48 wrote: » I found the guest on that latest problem political podcast unbearably smug.
Raisins wrote: » I completely disagree I thought she was excellent. She was very measured and kept putting Ken in a position where he had to explain his theories on Peterson which he was often unable to do but in fairness Ken seemed to enjoy it. She clearly knew what she was talking about which isn't always the case with his guests. Also, as an academic if she was unbearably smug she would not have spent a good portion of the podcast criticising some thinking in academia generally. She also mentioned she wasn't an economist etc when Ken made claims about capitalism in the rental market. Demonstrating intelligence doesn't make her smug.
tomwaits48 wrote: » True, but using academic words in conversation when simpler ones would suffice could be construed as smug behaviour
dulux99 wrote: » Is it just my device or has the quality of the audio on the last couple of pods been quite poor? Especially the one today with Sadlier
Gbear wrote: » "A garage? A garage? Well la dee da mr french man" "Well what do you call it?" "A car hold!"
Icemancometh wrote: » I haven't listened to today's football pod, but listened to the other one. Sound quality was terrible, volume kept rising and falling, particularly during the bit about the Winter Olympics.
Hunky Monster wrote: » Icemancometh wrote: » I haven't listened to today's football pod, but listened to the other one. Sound quality was terrible, volume kept rising and falling, particularly during the bit about the Winter Olympics. Not sure if it was me not particularly having an interest in the winter Olympics or was it just a plain boring pod? Short too... How many of the people here are still listening to Off The Ball? I gave it a wide berth for ages when Ken and the gang left but lately it's just gold! The lineup is great, the chemistry between Gilroy/Kilbane/Molloy and when Kenny Cunningham is around is brilliant. Really enjoying the programme lately. SC is still great but in patches, when Ken is on fire nothing comes close but those moments are becoming more infrequent, there was a time I couldn't be without SC but if I stopped my subscription in the morning I think I'd only miss the occasional Ken rant and players chair...the rest...meh.
