|
Baby Driver is a secret musical, and it's pretty good, but it kinda goes off the rails at the end. Poor Jon Hamm tho, destined forever to play Don Draper lol.
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
Happy July 1st guys! https://twitter.com/antwanstaley/status/881134115105460225
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
weird Asian candy posted:Happy July 1st guys! quote:The Mets have never really talked about the deal, but it is well known that their owners, the Wilpons, had many accounts with investor Bernie Madoff. Madoff was returning 12 to 15 percent a year in what we now know were fictional returns. So deferring deals wasn't a problem because the payout would occur years later and the interest rate would be lower than the money they were (fictionally) getting back from Madoff. To see the deal as the Mets would have seen it, let's say the Wilpons put $5.9 million into a Madoff account in 2000 and got a conservative (by Madoff standards) 10 percent annual return. By 2011, when they would have to pay Bonilla for the first time, they would have already grown their pot to $16.83 million. Even with paying off Bonilla every year, they would wind up with a $49 million profit on the deal. Of course, the Madoff returns weren't real, which complicates this hindsight. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
So dumb lol Is this the worst contract in sports history? And holy poo poo, the extension that Steph just got 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
I remember jeffersonlives explaining how it was actually a smart deal but then again he was low key the biggest homer on the board.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
weird Asian candy posted:So dumb lol Jamarcus' was worse imo, and I'm sure there are worse baseball ones in pure numbers terms, this one is just a slow burn with a dose of fraud.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:i think it will be a very boring fight that mayweather will be in complete control of the entire time. I've never seen anyone actually catch Mayweather with a square punch. With how slow McGregor is, it's gonna be one-sided
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
MY NIGGA D-LINK posted:I've never seen anyone actually catch Mayweather with a square punch. With how slow McGregor is, it's gonna be one-sided Moseley caught him really well with a right hand early in their fight that forced Floyd to clinch. Demarcus Corley hurt him with a right hook, though that was a long time ago. And Judah gave him his only knockdown of his career, though the ref missed the glove touch and didn't score it. But no, Conor isn't going to land anything and it's going to look like a more one sided Mayweather Gatti.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
MY NIGGA D-LINK posted:I've never seen anyone actually catch Mayweather with a square punch. With how slow McGregor is, it's gonna be one-sided https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ofeqQ_ljCk He's been able to take a few good shots Jota fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Jul 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 15:29
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:I remember jeffersonlives explaining how it was actually a smart deal but then again he was low key the biggest homer on the board. Let me explain to you why the Jets signing Tebow is a good thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:Let me explain to you why the Jets signing Tebow is a good thing. Mark Sanchez's early career compares favorably to John elway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Jiminy Christmas! Shoes! posted:
Au contraire! I present: the range of Jon Hamm. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-J-TyqAk4I
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:Mark Sanchez's early career compares favorably to John elway. Marshawn Lynch was not worth his contract
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
Smoking tri tips and making cauliflower mashed potatoes (summer bod compromise)
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
I'll have a buzz until Wednesday morning I'm sure of it
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:I remember jeffersonlives explaining how it was actually a smart deal but then again he was low key the biggest homer on the board. I've seen the argument that if Bonilla had taken the lump sum and invested half of it in an index fund, he'd have made just as much money, and the Mets, aside from the Madoff meltdown, would've made more by delaying the payment like this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Because it's true. Simple as googling it
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/mets-bobby-bonilla-deal-smart-2015-7
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
That's completely ignoring both inflation and opportunity cost, but yeah it's still actually a good deal for the Mets.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:That's completely ignoring both inflation and opportunity cost, but yeah it's still actually a good deal for the Mets. Go salute a pigeon this is America's weekend!!!
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:That's completely ignoring both inflation and opportunity cost, but yeah it's still actually a good deal for the Mets. Wait, help me here, why does inflation affect one and not the other? And if so, why wouldn't it favor an upfront payment this solidifying it's a good decision?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:Wait, help me here, why does inflation affect one and not the other? And if so, why wouldn't it favor an upfront payment this solidifying it's a good decision? The article describes how much money he'd have made with 8% annual returns (they say "interest" but that's nonsense, you can't earn 8% risk-free, it's investment returns which are subject to risk) on the lump sum up front. This ignores that inflation eats up around 2% annually of that: it's showing a chart with his eventual earnings described in, I guess, 2001 dollars. In other words, it looks like more money than it actually is. Any honest chart of some amount of money plotted over time should indicate what years' dollars it's in, and/or adjust the line for inflation. quote:But more importantly for the Mets, if they invested the $5.9 million at 8% interest in 2000, that money would have grown to more than $14 million before they had to make a single payment to Bonilla. That money would continue to draw interest even while they are making payments. The mets are benefiting by getting to do whatever they want with the money they'd have given Bonilla up front. The article assumes they invest it at 8% returns, but that's not the only option. For example, they could use it to hire more expensive baseball players. So they benefit from both the gained financial flexibility (to do whatever they want with their $5.9M beginning in 2001) and from the presumably lower future costs if they chose to invest some or all of it to fund the future payments. Similarly, by waiting for annual payouts this long, Bonilla has had to go without any of that money for all this time. So he has had an opportunity cost. If his only option was to invest it himself, then yes, this is a good deal for him in one respect - because it's a guaranteed return instead of a return subject to risk - but he could have used that money in other ways too... an opportunity cost. Meanwhile, his annual payments going forward are shrinking every year in real dollar terms. My point here is that the article is correct that this was a good deal for the Mets, but it fails in Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Jul 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
I have been trying to explain opportunity cost to this sub forum for a long time re: draft and salary cap. Good luck Leper.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:The article describes how much money he'd have made with 8% annual returns (they say "interest" but that's nonsense, you can't earn 8% risk-free, it's investment returns which are subject to risk) on the lump sum up front. This ignores that inflation eats up around 2% annually of that: it's showing a chart with his eventual earnings described in, I guess, 2001 dollars. In other words, it looks like more money than it actually is. Any honest chart of some amount of money plotted over time should indicate what years' dollars it's in, and/or adjust the line for inflation. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
Its Rinaldo posted:Marshawn Lynch was not worth his contract Get cancer
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
Just in case you don't think Conor is gonna get wrecked https://twitter.com/BSO/status/880570391973945344
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
JIZZ DENOUEMENT posted:I have been trying to explain opportunity cost to this sub forum for a long time re: draft and salary cap. Good luck Leper. It's not a difficult concept? If you choose Choice A, and Choice A was good, that doesn't mean you picked the best possible choice. You have to see if Choices B or C would have been better. When discussing finances, opportunity cost is sometimes calculable. Even when it isn't, it must be at least recognized to exist. Otherwise, anyone who made a positive return on an investment can do things like ignore how much risk they took, or comparative benchmarks, etc. and unequivocally claim to be an investment genius.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
Intruder posted:Just in case you don't think Conor is gonna get wrecked lmao McGregor gonna get crushed
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
JIZZ DENOUEMENT posted:I have been trying to explain opportunity cost to this sub forum for a long time re: draft and salary cap. Good luck Leper. Opportunity cost is not at all what I was asking. And his reasoning is flawed. You have to take the hypothetical as just that. The 2% is counted when you count net present value of money vs the payments. It's like losing a drag race to someone then complaining the road was wet. It's a variable that effects both, and thus, it still shows that Bonilla is getting less, hypothetically, than he would've with the lump sum payment. The lottery is a great example of why. Everyone knows take the lump sum
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:The lottery is a great example of why. Everyone knows take the lump sum I would take the annuity simply because I don't have the self control or discipline to handle the lump sum, even though it the former is less from a discounted cash flow point of view
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
SHOAH NUFF posted:I would take the annuity simply because I don't have the self control or discipline to handle the lump sum, even though it the former is less from a discounted cash flow point of view You could take the lump sum and buy yourself an annuity, though. Amy Pole Her posted:Opportunity cost is not at all what I was asking. And his reasoning is flawed. You have to take the hypothetical as just that. I've agreed twice now that Bonilla is getting a bad deal/the Mets got a good deal. My only arguments are with the way the article presents its information; it uses numbers that ignore inflation, refers to a non-risk-free return as "interest," and does not mention the opportunity cost.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Get cancer Am I being whooshed? Did jeffersononline say that too?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
And I've said twice that the inflation is in both. It's a constant not a variable. Theres zero reason to mention it. 30 million in 2025 is worth the same amount whether you collect it a piece at a time or a lump sum with earnings
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:You could take the lump sum and buy yourself an annuity, though. There is a small window between receiving the lump sum and buying the annuity in which I would overdose on 6-7 different things
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
if i didn't have a loving final on monday, i could be getting lit on labatt blue and eating what my girlfriend just sent me a picture of
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:And I've said twice that the inflation is in both. It's a constant not a variable. Theres zero reason to mention it. You're suggesting the article assumes 8% growth after inflation?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
I just started listening to Crimetown. This owns. "He never hurt...............he helped more people than he hurt"
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:if i didn't have a loving final on monday, i could be getting lit on labatt blue and eating what my girlfriend just sent me a picture of Canada day done somewhat right thank you
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
what the gently caress is all that poo poo underneath that good lookin meat
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
Spoeank posted:what the gently caress is all that poo poo underneath that good lookin meat Some loving tasty looking poutine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 22:02
|
|