Rob Shuter says Goop has never made a profit
The gossip columnist’s sharpest claim on The Megyn Kelly Show was not that Paltrow is tone-deaf, it was that her famous wellness company has never actually made money.
Listen on YouTube · Spotify · Apple Podcasts
WATCH NOW↓ The most brutal thing said about Gwyneth Paltrow here was not that she is out of touch, which is basically her second IMDb credit. It was Rob Shuter saying on The Megyn Kelly Show that Goop, the wellness brand treated for years like a money-printing shrine to bone broth and $75 candles, has never made a profit.
That is the claim with teeth. Not the ad discourse. Not the familiar Paltrow-as-elite-alien routine. Shuter’s line cuts straight through the mythology of Goop, which has always depended on the idea that ridicule is just another revenue stream. Laugh at the vagina candle, buy the face oil, keep the empire humming. But if Shuter is right, the empire is less a fortress than a very famous storefront with excellent lighting.
Goop, her business has never made a profit. She’s she’s out there talking about it. We talk about Goop as if it is um a household brand, and it’s not. It’s It’s never ever made a profit.
The necessary caveat, because someone has to be the adult in the room, is that Shuter doesn’t produce financial records here. Goop is a private company, and this segment is not exactly an earnings call with footnotes. So the verdict is not “case closed.” It is more like “a Hollywood gossip columnist just threw a grenade into the Goop gift guide.” Specific, searchable, and explosive, but not proven on tape.
The cash theory of Gwyneth
Kelly and Shuter use the profit claim to explain why Paltrow would appear in an ad for a luxury condominium development in Israel while the war in Gaza makes any glossy real estate pitch feel radioactive. Their theory is blunt: this is not ideology first. It is money first. The politics are the packaging.
It’s never enough for her. She can never get enough money. She is as greedy and mercenary more than you would think.
That’s a nasty line, but the segment’s logic is cleaner than the insult. Paltrow has built a second career on monetizing discomfort, embarrassment, aspiration, detox anxiety, sexual wellness awkwardness, all of it. The joke was always that she could turn public eye-rolling into brand heat. Shuter argues she is now trying to do the same thing with politics, which is a much dumber room to walk into wearing a cashmere blindfold.
the next frontier is not candles that smell like vaginas. It’s not um it’s it’s not shocking us by relationships. It’s jumping into politics.
This is where the Paltrow brand gets into trouble. Goop controversy is usually low-stakes absurdity, the kind of thing that makes people screenshot a product page and ask whether civilization has peaked or died. Politics does not behave like a Goop product launch. Nobody wants a “my coffee needs coffee” vibe hovering over a real-estate pitch tied to a country at war.
The Israel ad makes the profit claim hit harder
Kelly’s criticism of the ad is not just that Paltrow took a side. In fact, she argues it goes beyond whether someone is pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian. The charge is that Paltrow showed up for the luxury-condo version of politics, not the human one. Kelly also says the ad was shot in New York City, not Israel, with Paltrow running through Central Park, which gives the whole thing the strange air of crisis cosplay with better tailoring.
there is a heartlessness there. There is a deliberate like this takes her tonedeafness to another level.
The more defensible critique is not “Gwyneth Paltrow has no right to discuss politics.” Of course she does. The critique is that Gwyneth Paltrow chose the tackiest possible entry point: a paid luxury ad, with a lifestyle gloss, at a moment when every square inch of the region is politically charged. If Shuter’s Goop claim is true, it reframes the whole thing. Not as a baffling one-off. As a business model reaching for a new market.
if you want to jump into this, Gwenna, jump in. You’ve got every right to have an opinion, but don’t jump in while you’re making money selling real estate.
The next Paltrow interview has one useful question, and it is not whether she is a centrist, a Republican, or spiritually aligned with imported linen. Has Goop ever turned a profit, yes or no?
- Did Rob Shuter really say Goop has never made a profit?
- Yes. Shuter said flatly that Goop, Gwyneth Paltrow’s business, has “never made a profit” and repeated that it has “never ever made a profit.” He did not present documents or financial filings in the segment, so the claim should be treated as a pointed insider assertion rather than proven accounting.
- Why did Shuter connect Goop’s finances to Gwyneth Paltrow’s Israel condo ad?
- His argument was that Paltrow’s controversial ad fits a broader pattern of saying yes when the money is good. Megyn Kelly pushed the same line, calling Paltrow “greedy and mercenary,” while Shuter described the ad as a bad look because she was being paid to sell real estate adjacent to a war.
- Was Gwyneth Paltrow’s Israel luxury condo ad filmed in Israel?
- Kelly claimed the ad was shot in New York City, specifically saying Paltrow was running through Central Park. That detail mattered to her critique because it made the ad feel even more artificial, a luxury fantasy built at a safe distance from the conflict being invoked by the development.
The circuit, read weekly. No noise.