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!

     

Panthers settle practice site suit for $100 million


TheSpecialJuan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Because innocent people always settle for a $100 million dollars...

That is some mental gymnastics right there. Also avoiding the fact Tepper is still under investigation for his bisiness practices in this deal is very convenient. 

We still have nothing more than a practice bubble for $175 million wasted but Teppermagic...

  • Pie 4
  • Flames 2
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"innocent"

just fuging lol

I guess people who pull out of buying houses and give up good faith money are now to be considered "guilty" by this new standard.

 

Its a business deal people.  One of those ones where no side is completely happy meaning its probably fair.  And while 100mil is a metric fug tonne of money to folks who post here, in the context of business at that scale its a nuisance fee that will be used to offset profit liability come tax day.

Edited by Cullenator
  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, KatsAzz said:

That is my question as well? How much was the total amount of money that Tepper lost on this blown project?

It’s not all “lost” money. The property is already for sale with a new interstate exit to add connectivity. The land now has infrastructure. The land is worth a lot more than he paid for it. Enough to make up for the full amount spent on the actual structure? Probably not but he isn’t just going lose everything he spent on it.  I’m sure he will sell the golf course he bought down there too. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, gofightwin said:

It’s not all “lost” money. The property is already for sale with a new interstate exit to add connectivity. The land now has infrastructure. The land is worth a lot more than he paid for it. Enough to make up for the full amount spent on the actual structure? Probably not but he isn’t just going lose everything he spent on it.  I’m sure he will sell the golf course he bought down there too. 

Thanks for clearing that up. Most reports about what happened are not as concise as yours were.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, JVic said:

For those keeping score, that's $62M on a shitty coach, $89M on shitty QBs and $100M on a shitty piece of land since Tepper has taken over.  How in the ef you see kay did he become a billionaire? 

To a multi billionaire that's like two hundred n sumthing dollars, so he basically bought a ticket to this Sunday's Game vs the Steelers...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tbe said:

These were bankruptcy proceedings. Just deciding who’s debts get paid etc. Not lawsuits where damages were awarded.

Inncocence can still apply to civil suits? Think the better terminology would be not liable i guess. Same difference but yes I understand that the court system is more than just criminal court system.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Inncocence can still apply to civil suits? Think the better terminology would be not liable i guess. Same difference but yes I understand that the court system is more than just criminal court system.

 


There’s no liability in bankruptcy court. Think divorce court for businesses. No guilt, innocence, etc. Just who gets the dog, house, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Tbe said:


There’s no liability in bankruptcy court. Think divorce court for businesses. No guilt, innocence, etc. Just who gets the dog, house, etc.

In civil court. He was being sued. This was settlement so he could peoceed with bankruptcy proceedings. The lawsuit from York county was a civil suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To put this very simply - this was a settlement to avoid liability/lawsuits. That doesn’t mean at all the premise for wrong doing wasn’t there, in fact quite the obvious for the basic reason that people in the right don’t settle.

Why would they? It would cost a poo ton less even with the best lawyers to prove you’re in the right legally. In fact, probably 5% or less.

But some here can’t read between lines and think a savvy  businessman who’s made financial decisions with otherworldly precision his whole life said fug that I will pay 95% more than I have to because ?…THE Rock Hill SC politicians and media? Lol

Y’all must live a rough and confusing life.

And he’s still under investigation for fraud which unless there is a go getter straight shooter running that (and anyone above him as well), will probably be paid off (or has in a way, already).

Edited by onmyown
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, onmyown said:

And he’s still under investigation for fraud which unless there is a go getter straight shooter running that (and anyone above him as well), will probably be paid off (or has in a way, already).

He’s actually not because I have it on good authority they have closed the investigation and just haven’t announced it yet.

@Snakehas been pretty dead on about this whole thing in general and how it’s mostly Rock Hills fault.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • LOL... Yet again proving you can't look below anything than what you see on the surface Mock drafts ARE NOT draft grades They are what people think will happen.  They are mocking teams taking QB's in the top 5 of the draft because that's just historically how drafts go regardless of the grades on the QBs.  Almost every draft expert, even those mocking QB's going high, have said time and time again that none of these QB's actually grade out as those type of picks. This is again, where I say you don't like to actually read what I have to say, because I already explained it. 2022 the exact same thing happened, mock drafts had guys like Pickett and Willis going in the Top 5 because that's just what teams usually do, but GM's listened to their prospect grades and knew they weren't worth taking that high, so they didn't. It's not to say QB's won't go that high this year, but it's to say that they aren't graded out as elite QB prospects.  Mock drafts 
    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
×
×
  • Create New...