Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Scott Eyre has $13


pitchcs
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Community Moderator

I love that Madoff steals billions in a Ponzi scheme, but is out on bail and under house arrest. Then you've got poor people in jail after stealing because they can't afford [expletive] because of this economy. Gotta love it.

 

I feel bad for Eyre. I couldn't imagine having you accounts frozen because some jackass decided he'd screw over everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know they are harder to get now, but I would think it would be fairly easy for Eyre to get a loan to cover expenses for a month or two while his assets are frozen. He has a guaranteed contract from a MLB team to use as collateral and a bank should jump at an opportunity to give out a loan they know will get payed back and make 5%+ on. That's probably worst case scenario I am sure the Phillies can advance him a few checks or a couple guys on the team could pool together a few thousand for the guy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know they are harder to get now, but I would think it would be fairly easy for Eyre to get a loan to cover expenses for a month or two while his assets are frozen. He has a guaranteed contract from a MLB team to use as collateral and a bank should jump at an opportunity to give out a loan they know will get payed back and make 5%+ on. That's probably worst case scenario I am sure the Phillies can advance him a few checks or a couple guys on the team could pool together a few thousand for the guy.

Yeah, you gotta figure with all the money in that clubhouse, someone would be willing to help him out.

 

Saw that Xavier Nady is trying to find an apartment in New York for the season, but he can't get one because he can't put a credit card down because the accounts were all frozen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one thing all these stories make me wonder is, why were these rich people putting all their eggs in one basket? i know it's great to have an investment that is making you oodles of cash (supposedly) but if you're worth $5m or $10m why would you put all that money in one uninsured place? at least keep a few hundred grand in CDs or a money market or whatever.

 

i think part of it is naivety and part of it is greed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one thing all these stories make me wonder is, why were these rich people putting all their eggs in one basket? i know it's great to have an investment that is making you oodles of cash (supposedly) but if you're worth $5m or $10m why would you put all that money in one uninsured place? at least keep a few hundred grand in CDs or a money market or whatever.

 

i think part of it is naivety and part of it is greed.

 

Being good with money is an acquired skill, and there's nothing about pro athletes that makes them more likely to have that skill than the general population. That's why so many of them end up legitimately broke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one thing all these stories make me wonder is, why were these rich people putting all their eggs in one basket? i know it's great to have an investment that is making you oodles of cash (supposedly) but if you're worth $5m or $10m why would you put all that money in one uninsured place? at least keep a few hundred grand in CDs or a money market or whatever.

 

i think part of it is naivety and part of it is greed.

 

Being good with money is an acquired skill, and there's nothing about pro athletes that makes them more likely to have that skill than the general population. That's why so many of them end up legitimately broke.

 

There's actually something about them that makes them far less likely to have that skill than the general population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one thing all these stories make me wonder is, why were these rich people putting all their eggs in one basket? i know it's great to have an investment that is making you oodles of cash (supposedly) but if you're worth $5m or $10m why would you put all that money in one uninsured place? at least keep a few hundred grand in CDs or a money market or whatever.

 

i think part of it is naivety and part of it is greed.

 

Being good with money is an acquired skill, and there's nothing about pro athletes that makes them more likely to have that skill than the general population. That's why so many of them end up legitimately broke.

 

There's actually something about them that makes them far less likely to have that skill than the general population.

 

exactly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one thing all these stories make me wonder is, why were these rich people putting all their eggs in one basket? i know it's great to have an investment that is making you oodles of cash (supposedly) but if you're worth $5m or $10m why would you put all that money in one uninsured place? at least keep a few hundred grand in CDs or a money market or whatever.

 

i think part of it is naivety and part of it is greed.

 

Being good with money is an acquired skill, and there's nothing about pro athletes that makes them more likely to have that skill than the general population. That's why so many of them end up legitimately broke.

 

right but i didn't say anything about pro athletes. this also happened to a hell of a lot of successful business people, enterpreneurs, etc. a lot of smart people lost a ton of money because of the ponzi schemes too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one thing all these stories make me wonder is, why were these rich people putting all their eggs in one basket? i know it's great to have an investment that is making you oodles of cash (supposedly) but if you're worth $5m or $10m why would you put all that money in one uninsured place? at least keep a few hundred grand in CDs or a money market or whatever.

 

i think part of it is naivety and part of it is greed.

 

Being good with money is an acquired skill, and there's nothing about pro athletes that makes them more likely to have that skill than the general population. That's why so many of them end up legitimately broke.

 

right but i didn't say anything about pro athletes. this also happened to a hell of a lot of successful business people, enterpreneurs, etc. a lot of smart people lost a ton of money because of the ponzi schemes too.

 

The actual smart ones didn't lose it all though, they lost a portion of their money. And just because people made or had money (many via inheritance) doesn't mean they were smart. After all, the Bluth family wasn't completely unrealistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one thing all these stories make me wonder is, why were these rich people putting all their eggs in one basket? i know it's great to have an investment that is making you oodles of cash (supposedly) but if you're worth $5m or $10m why would you put all that money in one uninsured place? at least keep a few hundred grand in CDs or a money market or whatever.

 

i think part of it is naivety and part of it is greed.

 

Being good with money is an acquired skill, and there's nothing about pro athletes that makes them more likely to have that skill than the general population. That's why so many of them end up legitimately broke.

 

right but i didn't say anything about pro athletes. this also happened to a hell of a lot of successful business people, enterpreneurs, etc. a lot of smart people lost a ton of money because of the ponzi schemes too.

 

The actual smart ones didn't lose it all though, they lost a portion of their money. And just because people made or had money (many via inheritance) doesn't mean they were smart. After all, the Bluth family wasn't completely unrealistic.

 

 

Right, diversification would protect them from losing it all. I guess Eyre must have really put his eggs in that one basket. It's unfortunate -- probably a good lesson for people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The actual smart ones didn't lose it all though, they lost a portion of their money. And just because people made or had money (many via inheritance) doesn't mean they were smart. After all, the Bluth family wasn't completely unrealistic.

 

there was a woman on suze orman (i don't really watch her show, it was on at work and i was facing the tv as i worked) who was being interviewed. the audio wasn't on but according the captions they were putting on, she and her husband were out $5 million, she had to go back to work and they were living paycheck to paycheck. it certainly didn't sound like madoff only took a portion of their money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The actual smart ones didn't lose it all though, they lost a portion of their money. And just because people made or had money (many via inheritance) doesn't mean they were smart. After all, the Bluth family wasn't completely unrealistic.

 

there was a woman on suze orman (i don't really watch her show, it was on at work and i was facing the tv as i worked) who was being interviewed. the audio wasn't on but according the captions they were putting on, she and her husband were out $5 million, she had to go back to work and they were living paycheck to paycheck. it certainly didn't sound like madoff only took a portion of their money.

 

Okay, but where is the evidence that she's smart?

 

She's talking to Suze Orman about her finances, which is a joke in and of itself. The only people her advice is good for is middle aged lesbians who already have a couple million in the bank and only want to keep it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The actual smart ones didn't lose it all though, they lost a portion of their money. And just because people made or had money (many via inheritance) doesn't mean they were smart. After all, the Bluth family wasn't completely unrealistic.

 

there was a woman on suze orman (i don't really watch her show, it was on at work and i was facing the tv as i worked) who was being interviewed. the audio wasn't on but according the captions they were putting on, she and her husband were out $5 million, she had to go back to work and they were living paycheck to paycheck. it certainly didn't sound like madoff only took a portion of their money.

 

Okay, but where is the evidence that she's smart?

 

i believe that she and her husband were successful businesspeople. i don't know what they go on their SATs though so you're right, they could be 5th grade dropouts who fell into a successful business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The actual smart ones didn't lose it all though, they lost a portion of their money. And just because people made or had money (many via inheritance) doesn't mean they were smart. After all, the Bluth family wasn't completely unrealistic.

 

there was a woman on suze orman (i don't really watch her show, it was on at work and i was facing the tv as i worked) who was being interviewed. the audio wasn't on but according the captions they were putting on, she and her husband were out $5 million, she had to go back to work and they were living paycheck to paycheck. it certainly didn't sound like madoff only took a portion of their money.

 

Okay, but where is the evidence that she's smart?

 

i believe that she and her husband were successful businesspeople. i don't know what they go on their SATs though so you're right, they could be 5th grade dropouts who fell into a successful business.

 

So they let our country down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The actual smart ones didn't lose it all though, they lost a portion of their money. And just because people made or had money (many via inheritance) doesn't mean they were smart. After all, the Bluth family wasn't completely unrealistic.

 

there was a woman on suze orman (i don't really watch her show, it was on at work and i was facing the tv as i worked) was being interviewed. the audio wasn't on but according the captions they were putting on, she and her husband were out $5 million, she had to go back to work and they were living paycheck to paycheck. it certainly didn't sound like madoff only took a portion of their money.

 

I don't believe you. I think you watch her show religiously and of your own volition. I believe it will be a freeing experience if you come clean about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's bad money management for me to listen to Suze Orman. You see, upon hearing her voice I get a sudden and overwhelming urge to throw something heavy at the TV. This would cost me approximately $2000, so changing the channel quickly is imperative.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you are stupid enough to get involved in this crap, you have to eat it

 

it is called...don't do that

 

Either I'm missing something, or you don't know how a Ponzi scheme works.

Maybe he thinks it's stupid to invest your money in anything. Maybe he's a coffee can in the back 40 kind of guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

×
×
  • Create New...