Like honestly, that is a good idea. You know how much better it'd be to be out there when it's raining or crappier weather with some kind of roof structure? Of course, the homeless would move in so maybe not.
I wouldn't pick you up for being naked Lanny...I wouldn't pick you up for being fully clothed either!
Just because someone says something unequivocally doesn't make it true. See Lance Armstrong and countless other examples.
Agreed - but if the goal is to make a sale, why would you tell potential buyers to not bother making an offer because the item isn't for sale? Wouldn't you want to encourage bidders, rather than chase them away?
The forbidden fruit always receives the most attention. To buy a house from someone who "wasn't selling" often requires a much richer offer than one that had been on the market for months. My read on this is that the Vulcan's want this narrative on their terms.
If they are hanging out with a known pedo procurer like Ghisaline Maxwell was post-Epstein's conviction, then absolutely yes. I mean if you're saying would I be mad if someone ran a red light, no. Being multiyear friends with the world's biggest elite pedophile child procurer then absolutely yes. If you call that a "qualifier" I'm not sure what to say to you. I'm pretty roundly against pedophilia and trafficking and I don't feel like that's something you're ignorant of for years and years even post Epstien conviction like Laureen is in the minds of her apologists. Also, even if you are, it's kind of a bad look to write a pedo apology piece in your magazine when your friend is 100% crystal clear exactly that and under Grand Jury trial as was the case here, now isn't it?
As I said: If your response requires a qualifier, I'll take it as a "no" you wouldn't want to be held to the same standard.
Yes, I appreciate your attempt to frame things in a way to get the result you desire. It's a really poor way to communicate and shows you're trying to box me in with BS. I will take any response you might have to mean "Idog1976 is smarter, better looking and an all around better person than me.". I do appreciate you saying that in advance Tince! (See how that BS works?). P.S. If I was hanging out with a pedo procurer my ass should absolutely be investigated by the authorities as should anyone! So yeah, I do think all people who are very close to convicted pedophiles should 100% be held to that standard and in a just world, they would be. I doubt anyone on this board has hung out with a convicted pedo's well-known procurer of children, so I wonder why some folks are rushing to defend these sorts of people? The reason I can say that with a fair degree of confidence is who in their right mind would do that? I'm pretty sure the answer is, nobody would even associate with someone like that unless they themselves had something...off. The fact not ONE of Epstein's clients has been arrested would cause a thinking man to ask why?
Phil Knight is now being compared to George Soros, teachers & public employees union. lol Phil Knight Reported $1.75 Million in Gifts to Oregon ... https://www.wweek.com › news › state › 2022/04/29 › ph... scroll down and read comment section! lol someone said we are in an Arms Race now that Phil wants to buy our team!
I don't spend time digging in or obsessing with celebrity crime cases mainly because I don't feel like dedicating the time it would take to come up with an informed opinion. Repeating what is said in the media or reading a few pages of a police report would probably make me more ignorant than knowing nothing at all. If I had people I trusted involved in both sides of the cases sharing their opinion, then maybe I would listen to a third party, but I don't know anyone releated to the case either. I'm not comfortable jumping to the conclusions you appears to have high confidence in. Back to my general point: I personally don't love the guilt by association theory for a lot of reasons and I find it amusing that it is so popular depsite people never wanting it applied to them. I know I'm in the minority on this and you are certainly more of the norm, which is why media/tabloids are such big business. Regardless, I appreciate the civil sharing of opposite opinions, even though we don't agree. That's cool in my book!
that statement was for the masses and the media. It has no bearing, at all, on the extremely limited market of potential buyers. The members of that market don't spend time thinking about what john canzano says. Those people know for certain if the Blazers are for sale or not do you really think that Phil Knight spent the effort, and money (because for damn certain lawyers were involved), to set up the structure of a partnership with a real estate mogul, and then submit an offer for the Blazers if they weren't for sale? Knight wouldn't do all that for speculation, especially considering owning the Blazers has never been a high priority for him
I kinda wonder if maybe the NBA, who has historically not liked distractions during the NBA finals, told the Blazers to act mum about things in this regard.
Wasn't phil working with silver, or consulting with him? Surely silver would have told him to wait on his offer if that were the case.
I think there was a leak that wasn't supposed to be there, and the NBA wanted to nip it in the bud. Everyone knows the team is effectively for sale, but the Vulcans might want to milk it for all they can. Whatever the case, it's kind of boring now.
And those people don't worry about if something is publicly "for sale" anyway. If they want something they do what it takes to get it. And they have an army of professionals to help them.
I have no doubt the Vulcans were going to reject any $2 billion offer. They want $3 billion. As they should... that's their job, and they have no reason to be in a rush. As long as the deal is complete by the deadline in the trust, for the maximum amount of benefit to the trust they have done their job.
