Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

New Star Wars Trailer...


Jeremy Igo

Recommended Posts

I really hope they haven't overhyped this movie. It is a LucasFilm production, but this just reeks of overhype. I will still be there for the release but I will be supremely disappointed if it doesn't do justice to the original series.

Hopefully it will be as successful as 343 Industries was when they took Halo over from Bungie. Haven't played Halo 5 yet but Halo 4 was just as good as the original series, if not better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, UpstatePanther said:

I really hope they haven't overhyped this movie. It is a LucasFilm production, but this just reeks of overhype. I will still be there for the release but I will be supremely disappointed if it doesn't do justice to the original series.

Hopefully it will be as successful as 343 Industries was when they took Halo over from Bungie. Haven't played Halo 5 yet but Halo 4 was just as good as the original series, if not better. 

Halo 5 bruh it's a whole new level of awesome with the physics of the game being better.  Jet pack + sniper = ftw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, chris999 said:

You will not find a bigger star wars fan that me.

 

But I am boycotting this movie do to disney's practices of firing American workers and replacing them with cheaper foreign labor.

If I have to boycott the new star wars to bring attention to the plight of the American worker, than so be it.

I'll stream it when it comes availible.

Shall I provide you with a list of companies that do the same thing for you to boycott as well? 

 

If so, be prepared to grow your own food and live like a hobo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, chris999 said:

Yea, if you know other companies that fired their workers and lobbied Congress to allow them to hire forieners, I wouls like a list, they should be boycotted too.

 

 

All the big internet service providers, all US based tablet, cell phone and computer makers, all US based automakers, etc...

 

Of course, they do it in a politically correct manner, in that they allow people to leave, or downsize, and then they outsource to another nation.  They don't call it firing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, chris999 said:

Yea, if you know other companies that fired their workers and lobbied Congress to allow them to hire forieners, I wouls like a list, they should be boycotted too.

 

 

You can start with every american car manufacturer ever besides Tesla. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, chris999 said:

I dont mean moving the company overseas... I am talking about here on American soil.

Disney fired their American workers, broght workers from other countries to America to pay them less money thanAmericans, then had the Americans train them.

That is bullshit, and is what is wrong with this country.

I am not really sure that Disney pays them less than their American equivalent.  I have worked for a couple of companies that brought in a lot of foreign workers, and they generally made the same as their american counterparts.   But regardless, its better for the US as a whole to bring them here and pay them than to move the company's work overseas.  That way, at least some of the money gets funneled back into the US economy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...