SOME women are snakes!!

Soldato
Joined
29 Aug 2006
Posts
4,110
Location
In a world of my own
He got his millions because he brought in profits for his team and received his share plus money from sponsorships etc. She got her money by marrying some rich dude and divorcing him. Its irrelevant that he may have cheated. Its his money which he earned. She should get enough to be able to look after her children for life and that's way less than $75 million.

+1
 
Joined
5 Aug 2006
Posts
11,312
Location
Derbyshire
Why pay her the money?
It would be FAR cheaper to pay some gangster retard $50,000 to get rid of her.

For that kind of money she should be looking over her shoulder every day for the rest of her life to ensure her ex-husband isn't trying to get her shot.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jul 2011
Posts
3,534
Location
Staffordshire
My views are so similar to yours I could have written that myself.

What scares me though is that it's all the benefit scroungers having loads of kids, and less and less of the responsible and intelligent/career focused people that prop up society.

I'm at the age now (26) where lots of my friends (I didn't go to a comp next to a council estate so most of my friends are only just starting) are starting to have kids - some of them have 2-3 year olds now. None of them are even as close to as happy as they were before kids. I hardly see some of them these days - they can't go out because they can't get baby sitters, or afford them, a couple of them the woman isn't working any more so they're poor as dirt and pretty much under house arrest.

The idea of bring a time/money/happiness parasite into my happy, content world of being able to afford/do what I want, when I want, with whom I want is unthinkable.

Tonight I think we'll go to the cinema....oh, wait, no, we can't get a baby sitter. etc.

**** that for a game of soldiers.

As for who will look after me when I'm old? well the £300k + I will save by not raising two kids should be more than adequate for a naked Filipino nurse in my golden years.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jul 2011
Posts
3,534
Location
Staffordshire
Why pay her the money?
It would be FAR cheaper to pay some gangster retard $50,000 to get rid of her.

For that kind of money she should be looking over her shoulder every day for the rest of her life to ensure her ex-husband isn't trying to get her shot.

The kids, you can't deprive them of their mother because you don't want to pay her.

If kids weren't involved then all the way - I wouldn't think twice about it. I'd pay someone a million dollars to do her in a disappear forever. I'd still be 74m up and no court case.
 
Joined
5 Aug 2006
Posts
11,312
Location
Derbyshire
The kids, you can't deprive them of their mother because you don't want to pay her.

If kids weren't involved then all the way - I wouldn't think twice about it. I'd pay someone a million dollars to do her in a disappear forever. I'd still be 74m up and no court case.

Fair point :).
Surely she realises that taking $75m might make him think about killing her though :p.
 
Associate
Joined
30 Nov 2008
Posts
1,905
Location
Solihull, West Mids
I didn't rage against anything, and also said it's fair enough that because of his natural ability and some good fortune he gets paid lots of money because of people's willingness to pay to watch, I just don't agree with it, tough for me.

Kobe is one of the hardest working athlete's i've ever witnessed, the guy lives for basketball, to put it on natural tallent is a load of rubbish tbh.

Earning millions by working hard to become one of the best > earning millions by lying on your back.
 

RDM

RDM

Soldato
Joined
1 Feb 2007
Posts
20,612
He got his millions because he brought in profits for his team and received his share plus money from sponsorships etc. She got her money by marrying some rich dude and divorcing him. Its irrelevant that he may have cheated. Its his money which he earned. She should get enough to be able to look after her children for life and that's way less than $75 million.

Except it isn't, because when you get married you agree to share everything. So effectively it was their money, not his.
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Dec 2003
Posts
8,141
Location
East Sussex
Too much money.

I can appreciate instances where people were partners at very young ages and essentially grew up together so it's easy to understand that the woman made the man that he is. That clearly isn't the case here though. He would have been successful regardless of her input. She should be rewarded a sufficient amount to raise the kids well but not a generic 50/50 split.
 

RDM

RDM

Soldato
Joined
1 Feb 2007
Posts
20,612
They did share everything. She wasn't exactly living in a small shed out the back of the mansion. Did he get half of her ****? Did he get $75 million and $7?

It is pretty much immaterial how much each brings to the partnership when they agree to marry each other then it becomes shared property. She didn't just marry him, they married each other.
 
Associate
Joined
22 Jun 2009
Posts
808
Location
Norwich
imo no athlete is worth 150mil, if fools pay him that much good for him
but if he allowed himself in a position where a departing spouse can clean him out then good for her!
A fool and his money are soon parted ;)
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Sep 2005
Posts
20,171
Location
Middlesbrough
So how do you propose the split is worked out for couples divorcing? Personally I see no problem with the 50:50 split here.

There'd be a few factors. Firstly and mainly would be the amount of cash/assets they both had going into the marriage. If one party has a large majority of the wealth then they should get the majority if it all goes **** up. I think something like 10% ($15,000,000) + a house in this case would be fair and would keep Bryant's ex living the same lifestyle she's in now.

If they both started up a venture and made their money together then there should be a 50/50 split.
 
Associate
Joined
22 Jun 2009
Posts
808
Location
Norwich
There'd be a few factors. Firstly and mainly would be the amount of cash/assets they both had going into the marriage. If one party has a large majority of the wealth then they should get the majority if it all goes **** up. I think something like 10% ($15,000,000) + a house in this case would be fair and would keep Bryant's ex living the same lifestyle she's in now.

If they both started up a venture and made their money together then there should be a 50/50 split.

should have used a pre-nup then? :confused:
 

fez

fez

Caporegime
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Posts
25,092
Location
Tunbridge Wells
should have used a pre-nup then? :confused:

Should have been older when he got married as well. The dude was 18 or something when they got together so I doubt that he was thinking like that.

I think she should get plenty but 10 million would be too much let alone 75 million.

Nothing about her is unique or bankable. Without him, she is worth next to nothing, without her he is worth..... exactly the same as he is now. She had nothing to do with his wealth and last time I checked, getting pregnant isn't a skill. Put it this way; where would she be without him and where would he be without her. Who is bringing far far far more to the relationship.
 
Back
Top Bottom