We call it having a baby. But when you are Kim Kardashian, getting knocked up is a “license to print money” and an opportunity to “take your brand to the next level”.

Missing: One Clint Eastwood

Welcome to the world of the billion-dollar celebrity baby.

If you thought the hoo-haa surrounding the birth of Brangelina’s twins was completely insane, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

It’s a whole new ballgame in Kim’s case because it seems she is willing to exploit her baby to pull in the bucks – something Brad and Ange certainly wouldn’t do.

Indeed, the possibilities for cashing in on the kid are endless.

Just hours after the pregnancy announcement, she already had $100 million of endorsement offers.

New Idea tells us there would be a $25 million fee for rights to film the birth and promotional photos, $2 million for endorsement deals for baby-related products, $500,000 for a post-birth weight loss deal, and $1 billion for the baby’s potential earnings from a clothing line, cosmetics and reality show.

Yes, it’s amazing, but selling the rights to the actual delivery is being talked about in a serious fashion.

Should Kim broadcast the birth live, she will presumably do for childbirth what Demi Moore did for pregnancy when she posed naked on the cover of Vanity Fair – except there will be more use for hot towels, and much more blood.

At this stage it’s just conjecture, but Kim has an ongoing deal with the E! Network, so they’re likely to be heavily involved in any negotiations.
Kanye, Kim’s partner, has already appeared on the Kardashian reality show that also features other family youngsters, so expect to see much more of him and the bub in coming years.

Too bad that the Kardashian kids are too young to consent; before they even understand it, every thing they do is already broadcast to the world. (Hmmm sounds like a few Facebook mums I know…)

Kim has told Us Weekly that the baby will not be seen for the first six months on the reality shows. But the signs are not good: she’s already oversharing on the topic of pregnancy cravings (carrots, celery and ranch dressing) and whether she wants a boy or girl (doesn’t matter, as long as it’s healthy).

The word privacy is clearly not in the Kardashian dictionary. But Ka-ching sure is.

And there are no signs that Kim is slowing down. For New Year she received $300,000 for appearing in a look-at-me flesh and black lace peekaboo outfit, and happily posed for pics with the obligatory hand on the bump.

The way the baby news broke gives us an idea of what’s to come for this famous foetus.

While most pregnant women quietly tell a few friends and family members they’re expecting, Kanye announced it on stage in Atlantic City, surprising even Kim, who was in the audience.

I’ve written in the past that we don’t have to like Kim, but we should admire someone who makes such a tidy living out of just living her life and keeping herself tidy.

She isn’t an actor, singer or entertainer; she’s just famous for being herself.

But when you throw a baby into the mix, it does change things I think.

A baby shouldn’t be just another marketable commodity sold to the highest bidder.

Of course, there will be pressure on Kim this time around to make sure she doesn’t look like she is cashing in on the baby. Remember the fallout from her alleged $4 million windfall from her 72-day wedding?

At this stage Brangelina have taken the high moral ground, and donated the $14 million rights to the first pics of their twins Vivienne and Knox to a children’s charity.

But there are many others who were clearly happy to just pocket the cash, such as Jennifer Lopez, who received $5 million from People magazine for the first pictures of her twins.

There is a catch, though. Sure, it’s easy money, but it’s then pretty hard for the celebrities to plead privacy when they’ve sold access to their kids to the highest bidder.

Most of these performers have more money than the rest of us would ever dream of, so selling baby rights like this does seem like little more than a greedy cash grab.

You are also establishing your baby as a commodity, and a legitimate topic for public consumption.

Just look at what happened to Jessica Simpson when she signed a $3 million deal with Weight Watchers soon after she conceived. It meant that her baby bump, her weight gain and her post-baby body
became topics of immense public scrutiny. Would she lose the 25kg by the baby’s first birthday? Were there weight loss clauses built into her contract? What’s going to happen if she gets pregnant again?

Sure, she made a bagful of dollars, but the pressure Simpson put on herself, her baby and her body was enormous.

I do wish Kim and Kanye all the best for their pregnancy, but it would be nice for them to keep the bub out of the spotlight for a while.

Comments on this post close at 8pm AEDT.

Most commented

13 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Ripa says:

      06:04am | 13/01/13

      Who gives a shit, the only reason they are offered this kind of money is because they think idiots and morons like yourself Suzie, will write about it or promote it, do us all a favour and ignore promotional trash like this in future. Youre willing to write about this rubbish but not willing to hear Armstrongs side of things? what….the…..

    • nihonin says:

      07:02am | 13/01/13

      +1 Ripa

    • WADA says:

      03:43pm | 13/01/13

      I tried to comment on marley’s ridiculous position in this thread, but apparently marley is a protected species.

    • pete says:

      06:06pm | 13/01/13

      Comment of the year.

    • Peter says:

      06:12am | 13/01/13

      Having no interest in Kim Kardashian, I’m very surprised and saddened by the figures this unborn baby is worth. Right from the word go this future person has no privacy and no say in their own life.
      As a father, I am quite protective of her privacy and have no photos of her posted on Facebook. I guess that I just don’t understand the attraction of Fame.
      My only hope is that this future person keeps his/her head amount what must be a crazy life

    • SAm says:

      07:48am | 13/01/13

      How about we just ignore this media whore?

    • Gregg says:

      08:18am | 13/01/13

      You’re making me not feel all very excited now Susie, not being one who gives a FF about Kardashians whoever but it seems I must really have life passing me by or at least that bit which has not already passed me by.

      This Kardashian funky stuff must I imagine just be more spin off from all these reality TV shows that the show producers and television broadcasters must feel we really lough to watch and though I must plead guilty to the occasional survivor or great race peek ( neither for awhile ) I can honestly say Kardashians are dashed in my case.

      It certainly seems the case that all these additional digital channels mean that the barrels are really being scraped several times over when it comes to finding half decent programs, especially in the off ratings time of year.

      We need another series of Life at the Lodge and this year the theme could be preparation for the handover to the new residents though Tony might just commute from Sydney.

    • Anticitizen1 says:

      08:22am | 13/01/13

      These reality stars who are unremarkable in every way except their looks are getting far too much attention from the media. It is a sad indictment on society that they garner so much attention when people of actual worth are confined to relative obscurity, but then people of actual worth won’t use their children as a marketing tool.

    • Zack says:

      08:35am | 13/01/13

      A baby means responsibility and a big one at that. People who can’t deal with stress or have any patience or know what love means should just stick with looking after themselves. Not everyone needs to have children and not having children may be the best thing for society.

    • Neil says:

      08:44am | 13/01/13

      The population weren’t demoralised, oppressed and divided enough so they invented Kim Kardashian.

    • sunny says:

      11:26am | 13/01/13

      Well she’s obviously got financial advisers (if I was Kim Ka-ching I wouldn’t trust myself with all that loot either) and they’re telling her that 50% of the attention market will disappear over the next year (i.e. the blokes who like to look at her, but not when she’s big fat and pregnant) leaving her with only the other 50% of the attention market (the women who like to a. listen to her and b. bitch about her). With a projected diminished future market, securing some endorsements and such during the current boom times and creating a future fund will ensure the bling keeps flowing across a variety of market scenarios.

    • Luc Belrose says:

      12:33pm | 13/01/13

      Who is Kardashian anyway? Here today and gone tomorrow! All the best to the baby but please we have enough of the dreary midday soaps on TV and that trash too bores you to death! Why not do a few articles on the famous tennis champions which will give your readers a real lift not Kardashians.

    • ramases says:

      05:21pm | 13/01/13

      Legends in their own lunch time but the morons cant get enough. The more that is written about these media whores the worse they become. Why waste any effort at all on these self promoting vile people who don’t do anything unless there is a buck in it, even getting married or having a baby.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter