Elin Woods gets 750 Million

There is never a humble greatest anything. Being humble sounds great in theory but let's be real we as a people love assholes they're way more entertaining.

True, most of us love a-hole coz they are great entertainers. But there are folks who are good in what they do and still humble.. David Robinson, Benjamin Carson, Maya Angelou, Julia Roberts, etc... comes to mind
 
True, most of us love a-hole coz they are great entertainers. But there are folks who are good in what they do and still humble.. David Robinson, Benjamin Carson, Maya Angelou, Julia Roberts, etc... comes to mind

Yeah but name the last time any of these people had a hit or people gave a shit about them. Again being humble is great in theory but we love when people are jerks.
 
yes, because one Swedish woman speakes for all Swedish women. They are all exactly the same?? no stereotypin there bro.

So according to your logic, I should not date brothas with a mix of Asian, because they all have 20 mistresses.
:smt043
and besides, Tiger probably let this one go as he got SILENCE for the rest of his and her life. So fighting??? He could probably gotten away WAY cheaper, but he payed for silence - good move.

Do I agree on that crazy sum of money? Heck no, but I guess that is what Silence and keeping the kids in the US was worth to him.

Also, the smarter promisse if you become rich and famous is probably to NOT cheat on any woman with 20 mistresses.
Do you seriously think nationality has anything to do with it??
If you fucked 20 mistresses, you bet your ass you will pay for it

I too, think that Tiger just let this one go, he just wanted it to be over and move on with the least public damage as possible, so that he can eventually start making those large endorsement checks.

I don't know how divorce works--never been through, don't plan too, and I'm not a divorce lawyer, but I'll be damned if let a women take more than half my money. You hear a lot that the reasoning for large settlements on behalf of a spouse-women that involves children, is usually

a) Because the wife’s job is to rise the children and she doesn't work (because they decided it should be that way.
b) She has become acclimated to that standard of living, and
c) The money obviously is for the support of the children

But the bottom line is she's not with Tiger anymore, she shouldn't be compensated so that she can still live like she did with him. She didn't put much physical effort into helping him get that money, and the last time I checked; it doesn't take 750mil to raise a child financially. Man, I would like to think that you could hide money in these cases, I would have given my money away to people before I let you just take it from me. If you could setup contracts to give people your money, then they give it back after you’re divorced would be nice, something, I would have tried all avenues, legal or not :smt011

p.s. I know he was in the wrong, but does that mean that every time you fuck up/fight/have a disagreement about stuff (possible relationship ending) with a spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend/whatever you want to call it, you should give them a payout to smooth things over:smt011
 
Someone told me to verify my sources. Its not like you cant google for yourself. Numerous sites it says 750 million or in that ballpark
 
like i said

dont get married

these jawns aint worth it

:p

definitely dont let one put pressure on you to wife her up either

that whole divorce court, take your assets shit dont work up in here
 
I too, think that Tiger just let this one go, he just wanted it to be over and move on with the least public damage as possible, so that he can eventually start making those large endorsement checks.

I don't know how divorce works--never been through, don't plan too, and I'm not a divorce lawyer, but I'll be damned if let a women take more than half my money. You hear a lot that the reasoning for large settlements on behalf of a spouse-women that involves children, is usually

a) Because the wife’s job is to rise the children and she doesn't work (because they decided it should be that way.
b) She has become acclimated to that standard of living, and
c) The money obviously is for the support of the children


But the bottom line is she's not with Tiger anymore, she shouldn't be compensated so that she can still live like she did with him. She didn't put much physical effort into helping him get that money, and the last time I checked; it doesn't take 750mil to raise a child financially. Man, I would like to think that you could hide money in these cases, I would have given my money away to people before I let you just take it from me. If you could setup contracts to give people your money, then they give it back after you’re divorced would be nice, something, I would have tried all avenues, legal or not :smt011

p.s. I know he was in the wrong, but does that mean that every time you fuck up/fight/have a disagreement about stuff (possible relationship ending) with a spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend/whatever you want to call it, you should give them a payout to smooth things over:smt011

I agree with you FRESH, and I honestly think those are BS reasons to support someone for the rest of their life. So they had a higher standard of living when they were together, that's probably the case for all couples even if they aren't wealthy. Does that make it one person's responsibility to pay for the other for life? I don't think so, I think that's the point of divorce. You go your way, I'll go mine. I don't want your money, what entitles you to mine? I understand child support, and the whole point of that is to ensure your kid's needs are met. But spousal support, I just am not in favor of period. As Chi mentioned, if one spouse wants to make sure the other isn't destitute, that's fine, but court mandated alimony for anyone is just wrong IMO. Whoever earns the money should get to keep their money, if you want a higher standard of living, go out and work for it.
 
Whoever earns the money should get to keep their money, if you want a higher standard of living, go out and work for it.

^^^
THIS times a 1000.
 
I agree with you FRESH, and I honestly think those are BS reasons to support someone for the rest of their life. So they had a higher standard of living when they were together, that's probably the case for all couples even if they aren't wealthy. Does that make it one person's responsibility to pay for the other for life? I don't think so, I think that's the point of divorce. You go your way, I'll go mine. I don't want your money, what entitles you to mine? I understand child support, and the whole point of that is to ensure your kid's needs are met. But spousal support, I just am not in favor of period. As Chi mentioned, if one spouse wants to make sure the other isn't destitute, that's fine, but court mandated alimony for anyone is just wrong IMO. Whoever earns the money should get to keep their money, if you want a higher standard of living, go out and work for it.

Exactly! With this said, I'm fair though, if Elin had been working behind the scenes on Tigers endorsements/business/golf tour/whatever, since day one, I would say she deserves that money. That’s not the reality though. And I guess Tiger didn’t care very much since he was so brazen with his dirty laundry, & didn't really fight. But I'm thinking Elin already knew what he was up to long ago, but because she was publicly humiliated, she wanted to air his shit out, family-wise, media-wise & most of all financially.
 
Even if they didn't have kids, she still would've made out with like 70+ mil.

i.e. Paul McCartney vs. Heather Mills.
 
Exactly! With this said, I'm fair though, if Elin had been working behind the scenes on Tigers endorsements/business/golf tour/whatever, since day one, I would say she deserves that money. That’s not the reality though. And I guess Tiger didn’t care very much since he was so brazen with his dirty laundry, & didn't really fight. But I'm thinking Elin already knew what he was up to long ago, but because she was publicly humiliated, she wanted to air his shit out, family-wise, media-wise & most of all financially.

I think that is plausible. However it's ridiculous to me, as no sum of money will remove the sting of the humiliation. I understand the concept of a woman scorned, but at the end of the day, she's still humiliated and betrayed, she's just wealthy. Money doesn't make something that like better for me, there is no amount of compensation that will erase what happened. So it's merely about hitting somewhere where it hurts, inflicting pain to repay them for the pain they caused you, and I don't do vindictive. It's useless, a completely hollow victory, it changes nothing and only makes matters worse. I just couldn't spend someone else's money, regardless of how I got it.
 
I think that is plausible. However it's ridiculous to me, as no sum of money will remove the sting of the humiliation. I understand the concept of a woman scorned, but at the end of the day, she's still humiliated and betrayed, she's just wealthy. Money doesn't make something that like better for me, there is no amount of compensation that will erase what happened. So it's merely about hitting somewhere where it hurts, inflicting pain to repay them for the pain they caused you, and I don't do vindictive. It's useless, a completely hollow victory, it changes nothing and only makes matters worse. I just couldn't spend someone else's money, regardless of how I got it.

I could at least in this case. I will wear a shirt saying "Im spending tigers money....the son of a bitch"

or a shirt saying..." i got the sons of a bitch's money and im getting fresh dick to help me spend it"
 
I think that is plausible. However it's ridiculous to me, as no sum of money will remove the sting of the humiliation. I understand the concept of a woman scorned, but at the end of the day, she's still humiliated and betrayed, she's just wealthy. Money doesn't make something that like better for me, there is no amount of compensation that will erase what happened. So it's merely about hitting somewhere where it hurts, inflicting pain to repay them for the pain they caused you, and I don't do vindictive. It's useless, a completely hollow victory, it changes nothing and only makes matters worse. I just couldn't spend someone else's money, regardless of how I got it.

Very well said Esp
 
I think that is plausible. However it's ridiculous to me, as no sum of money will remove the sting of the humiliation. I understand the concept of a woman scorned, but at the end of the day, she's still humiliated and betrayed, she's just wealthy. Money doesn't make something that like better for me, there is no amount of compensation that will erase what happened. So it's merely about hitting somewhere where it hurts, inflicting pain to repay them for the pain they caused you, and I don't do vindictive. It's useless, a completely hollow victory, it changes nothing and only makes matters worse. I just couldn't spend someone else's money, regardless of how I got it.

I'm hard pressed for marriage, but If I ever change my mind, it will be with a lovely lady of our caliber, you speak my language. You would think this would be common sense and or rational, unfortunately what you have said is not the more popular female outlook.

I could at least in this case. I will wear a shirt saying "Im spending tigers money....the son of a bitch"

or a shirt saying..." i got the sons of a bitch's money and im getting fresh dick to help me spend it"

:smt081
 
Back
Top Bottom