no dumb shit, none of what he said really matters bc Arte is still a billionaire who can pay his employees. his issue is semantical about wrongly using ‘networth’ to refer to liquid assets, but sorry that’s groundbreaking information to you
Actually, every word of what I said matters when speaking on topics such as this. Someone’s networth doesn’t equate to cash in the bank, which is what’s needed to pay employees. I’m sure he could move money around and pay people for another month, or two, or three. But that’s...
We got Raymond today!
It was a very anti-climactic and safe trade for Judy, but at least we didn't reduce his self-worth to Nook Miles Tickets.
Now he joins the ranks of Eugene and Ken as my third smug type villager. pic.twitter.com/b87lZ51jOc
So what about those owners that don’t have a networth of 3.3 billion (the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of owners)? What about those who aren’t sitting on hundreds of millions in liquid cash (the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY)? Should they default? Should only certain teams play?
that people get so blinded by their hatred of any person with more money than they do that they lose track of actual common sense and throw around someone’s personal networth as if it’s a direct correlation to business payroll. That’s just not the case.
Go back and re-read my tweet. Never once did I say that so stop being hyperbolic. But if you know anything about networth of those people, you’d know that the vast majority of it is tied up into assets, the largest of those assets being the actual team. Assets aren’t liquid...
just pay for everything. And I’ve never once defended him. And if you actually read my tweets you would see that I’ve agreed that he probably could afford to pay employees for another month, two, etc. I don’t know the team’s finances. But what I do know is that his “networth”..