http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2448608
$3-4 million per month
And Ron Mexico is Mike Vike. Come on, Ult, Mike D reported this six weeks ago... (http://forums.dee-nee.com/index.php?topic=12604.0)
That douche better sign soon. I got fantast points to win
$4 million per month for throwing 100 pitches every 5th day. How come no one complains about the money athletes or actors (how much is Tom Hanks getting paid for the DaVinci Code)make but people come down on CEO's and business?
I know this has no place in this thread, but just curious.
Because athletes don't set their own salary, and the don't get $200 million dollar buy outs, and we know if the athlete doesn't get that money the richer owner will get it.
But really there are many people complaining about how much athletes make. It doesn't really bother me, though I do think their tax rate should be a bit higher.
I hope Russ Springer hits Clemens.
I hope Robert Fick tries to beat his ass, too.
Quote from: Racktacular on 05/18/06, 08:48:38 AM
$4 million per month for throwing 100 pitches every 5th day. How come no one complains about the money athletes or actors (how much is Tom Hanks getting paid for the DaVinci Code)make but people come down on CEO's and business?
I know this has no place in this thread, but just curious.
Free market!!
Viva la capitalisme!
Quote from: ultimate7 on 05/18/06, 08:50:37 AM
Because athletes don't set their own salary, and the don't get $200 million dollar buy outs, and we know if the athlete doesn't get that money the richer owner will get it.
Also, if athletes don't perform well at their jobs, they likely will lose them and have trouble getting another one, whereas CEOs who suck at their jobs get multimillion dollar buyouts and high-level jobs with other companies, all of whom apparently have short memories (and other CEO types doing the hiring).
Quote from: BeefMaster on 05/18/06, 11:25:13 AM
Quote from: ultimate7 on 05/18/06, 08:50:37 AM
Because athletes don't set their own salary, and the don't get $200 million dollar buy outs, and we know if the athlete doesn't get that money the richer owner will get it.
Also, if athletes don't perform well at their jobs, they likely will lose them and have trouble getting another one, whereas CEOs who suck at their jobs get multimillion dollar buyouts and high-level jobs with other companies, all of whom apparently have short memories (and other CEO types doing the hiring).
I think it has more to do with the fact that athletes don't have tens of thousands of people working under them who make less than 0.0001% of what they make.