The exclusive cohabitation pact between the podcast host and the country-rap star has been officially terminated, but both parties will retain co-creator credit on their upcoming joint venture.
In a move that surprised industry observers expecting a complete divestment of shared assets, Bunnie XO revealed on her podcast that her divorce from Jelly Roll will not halt production on their planned child. While the marriage itself has officially been placed into turnaround after failing to secure a back-end renewal, the highly anticipated baby remains fully greenlit and is expected to hit its initial delivery window as an independent co-production.
Representatives for both camps confirmed that the dissolution of the marriage—effectively an exclusive first-look overall deal that ran for nearly a decade—was mutual. However, shelving the baby project entirely was deemed a non-starter given the extensive pre-production costs already sunk into the development phase. The pair will now transition from an exclusive output deal to an unscripted co-financing model, evenly splitting all future P&A (pediatrics and apparel) expenses.
It makes perfect sense to sever the romantic partnership while keeping the biological intellectual property in active development. The marriage was a mature asset with declining international revenues, but a new baby is a four-quadrant franchise with an eighteen-year merchandising tail.
Jelly Roll, currently repped by CAA, is expected to fulfill all promotional duties and scheduled hospital appearances when the child ultimately wraps principal photography. Insiders note that while the couple will no longer share a primary production hub, neither party wanted to cede their underlying rights to the child's life story.
Custody windows are still being fiercely negotiated by legal teams, but sources familiar with the matter suggest the pair is aiming for a standard theatrical release model, wherein the infant will rotate between primary residences based on quarterly geographic availability. Representatives for the unborn child declined to comment, citing ongoing non-disclosure agreements.