Production Staff Leave Jeon Won-joo’s YouTube Channel... “Raising Her Appearance Fee Is a Legitimate Right” vs. “It Has Become a Burden to Others”

[Financial News] Amid the departure of the production staff from Jeon Won-joo’s YouTube channel, some have argued that the channel’s structure makes it difficult for anyone involved to earn a large amount of money.
On the 14th, the channel ‘Entertainment Chief Lee Jin-ho’ released a video titled ‘“I Asked Them to Raise My Appearance Fee...” An Exclusive Look at the Unexpected Story Behind the Departure of All of Jeon Won-joo’s Production Staff.’
The production staff of Jeon Won-joo’s YouTube channel previously explained that it was “simply the end of the contract,” adding, “Because Ms. Jeon is in good health, her agency plans to reorganize the channel and relaunch it later.” However, the controversy grew after Jeon Won-joo appeared on the YouTube channel ‘Sa Mi-ja, Not Omija,’ operated by fellow veteran actress Sa Mi-ja, and said, “When I said I wanted to raise this a little—meaning the money—they said they would quit, so I told them we should just continue.”
Lee Jin-ho explained, “From the perspective of a celebrity appearing on a YouTube channel, if the channel is doing well, asking for an appearance-fee increase is also a legitimate request. YouTube is a content business, too. If the number of subscribers and views has increased, it is only natural for the performer to discuss raising the appearance fee. In that sense, viewed on its own, this was simply a negotiation that could happen quite commonly.”
However, he said, “I contacted another company that operates YouTube channels similar to ‘Jeon Won-joo-in-gong,’ and they said that with a channel of that scale, it is difficult for either side to make a large amount of money. The channel sometimes recorded more than 1.7 million views when its videos performed well, but Jeon Won-joo-in-gong generally averaged around 400,000 to 500,000 views. It was not a channel that uploaded videos frequently, either. Because the structure necessarily involved a large number of people, including writers and other production staff, there were concerns that it would be difficult to make a large profit with that level of viewership.”
Lee Jin-ho added, “In other words, the channel was barely breaking even or failing to reach the break-even point. Under those circumstances, discussing an increase in the appearance fee would inevitably create a problem with production costs.”
Lee Jin-ho also said that Jeon Won-joo’s agency owns the ‘Jeon Won-joo-in-gong’ channel. “After checking the facts, I confirmed that Ms. Jeon Won-joo’s YouTube channel is managed and operated by her agency. In other words, the agency owns the channel and has operated it by selecting an external production company. It is highly likely that the party with whom Ms. Jeon negotiated the appearance-fee increase was her agency, not the external production company,” he emphasized.
Lee Jin-ho reported, “A conflict arose during this process, and the existing production staff ultimately left the production. Later, Ms. Jeon Won-joo expressed her intention to continue on her own, so the channel’s operation was arranged to resume once again. We subsequently checked with the agency. The agency said it plans to continue her YouTube activities, and new videos could be uploaded as early as this fall.”
Finally, he said, “The public reaction to the issue of Ms. Jeon Won-joo’s appearance-fee increase was divided. The image of frugality she had built over the years shifted into an image of miserliness, leading to continued negative controversy. The issue ultimately comes down to boundaries. Saving one’s own money is frugality. Asking for one’s appearance fee to be raised on a YouTube channel where one appears is also a legitimate right. However, if one’s approach to frugality affects people around them or even causes conflict in the process, the public’s assessment is bound to change.”
He continued, “For her entire life, the two words ‘frugality’ followed Ms. Jeon Won-joo. In the past, they symbolized modest living and resourcefulness. But now, even when people see the same behavior, some are asking whether it has gone too far, saying that she has crossed the line and that it has become a burden to others. Ultimately, this controversy offers a glimpse into how the public’s view of the boundary of frugality has changed—not an issue about money itself.”
[email protected] Han Seung-gon Reporter