Here is a link to a chat session that +Leo Laporte participated in where he discuss the reasons w...

[G+_Alan “Brosuess” Wade]

Here is a link to a chat session that +Leo Laporte participated in where he discuss the reasons why they didn't renew Tom's contract : http://pastebin.com/ckGCZce5 (link courtesy of +Jake Sunsted)

Though I may understand the rationale behind their decision, I don't think I agree with the direction they are taking. I will of course "try out" the new TNT with +Mike Elgan and give it a fair shake but I don't know how they are going to make up for that intangible plus that Tom brings to a show that elevates it from just being an ordinary news show.

http://pastebin.com/ckGCZce5

[G+_Donald Raymond]

Substantial loss for TWIT, Tom's value was huge

[G+_Jonathan R]

Thanks!

[G+_Michael Chang]

The chat explains a lot... Still not ok with it, but at least it gives context to a controversial and unpopular business decision.

[G+_Yonas A (eriman)]

Very good transcript. I think Leo Laporte mentioned that it was not because TNT was bad, they want to break more news and they can't afford tom and mike at the same time.

[G+_Andriana Gutierrez]

Thank you for posting this, it makes more sense now, but Tom leaving still stings.

[G+_David Powell]

After reading the the transcript and reading between the lines. It seems there is something else going on here. Leo says that Tom turned down equity in the the company.

 

That's strange. Plus Leo keeps trying to tell Tom's business. To be honest who cares if he hired a lawyer. It's a contract, he should have a lawyer for that. Maybe Tom needed to cover his butt. It's not like he could go to the CEO of Twit. That's a messed up situation there. I have seen at one company I work for in 2001.

 

Good luck to you Tom

[G+_Alan Rodriguez]

One word: weird

[G+_Tor Iver Wilhelmsen]

If this leads to a daily or weekly show with Tom and Molly on a different network I will welcome that. Make it happen!?

[G+_Brian Barcus]

Looks to me like the offer was to be full time exclusive to TWiT or give up the full time management job he had. Tom choose the later. Neither position is weird, the two parties were simply no longer compatible. That is always an issue when contacts come up for renewal in any business.

[G+_George Sabbi]

Thanks for posting... Good insights into the background... Thanks to Leo Laporte for being so open and forthright

[G+_Dirk Snyder]

After reading the chat with Leo, I wonder if Tom may not want to be an employee. Perhaps he has something bigger in mind.

[G+_Alan Rodriguez]

I said this chat is weird because first coming in with a lawyer to discuss your contract seems a little too extreme I know he has the right to do it but it seems there's something behind that none of them are gonna talk about in public and that mention of offering him shares of the company is even weirder because how many times we have heard Leo said that he doesn't want to take money from investors because he don't want to give up he's hard earn company do you guys really think he would offer shares to an "employee" just to think about it , do you guys think that if this chat conversation was true more than one of us would had done that of pasting the chat to g+ this is the only post I have seen so far of that conversation?

[G+_Glen Kawano]

Sad that Tom is leaving, but I really respect Leo's transparent communication that he has always maintained.

[G+_Brian Barcus]

Alan Rodriguez Asking a lawyer to participate in a contract negotiation is just good business and, as Leo mentioned, negotiating through lawyers is not unusual in the entertainment business.  Leo's equity offer was likely an attempt to offer Tom fair value for being a full-time on site part of the business but that is just my speculation.  In the end, the important details are simple, they were unable to work out a arrangement where both parties felt like they were getting what they needed so they are parting ways.  There's no reason to read anything bad into that, it is part of all employment negotiations.

[G+_Alan Rodriguez]

Brian Barcus I understand that bringing in a lawyer to negotiate or to check a contract in any industry is legit and understandable but using one to communicate with your employer instead of you showing up there with him in person and say eyy we are here for our yearly contract signing, is kinda difficult to swallow and to get to my point is that not everything that is publish on g+ is to be believe, is clear they couldn't get to any arrangement and that's why they're parting ways, as public persons we all would like to know every little detail of to why the separation but there's just somethings that we'll get to know in the future I'm sure, we all know Leo right?

[G+_Kevin Webb]

I found it interesting that Leo answered all the questions I felt he could and then threw in the note about Tom lawyering up. Seemed like an attempt to deflect.

[G+_David Landry]

I think Leo just wanted to hire one of the Internet's biggest click whores ... good business sense I suppose, but personally I won't be paying any attention to any show he has a part in ... just too hard to tell if it's real news or link bait.

[G+_Vance McAlister]

All I have to say is that this was Leo's version of the story.

[G+_Stephen MacDougall]

I am sure that Eileen Rivera working at YouTube in LA was a big part of the reason Tom Merritt couldn't work in Petaluma. As much as I will miss him on TNT, it would not be fair for her to quit her job, just so they could move back to Petaluma and TWiT. Tom Merritt has a good reputation, and a faithful following, so he will either do some great things on his own, or get snapped up by some entity pretty quickly. TWiT's loss is someone else's gain.