5 ms·
as long as peter thiel's on the board you generally have to assume they're doing at least this level of scummy shit.
by cagenut 8y ago
as long as peter thiel's on the board you generally have to assume they're doing at least this level of scummy shit.
- saltedonion 8y agoAny stories to back this up? Sounds interesting. Personally have a lot of respect for PT’s investment views
- jstankewicz 8y agoThe one that jumps out at me is his association with James O'Keefe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel#Support_for_political_activism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel#Support_for_politi...). That seems most salient to this story. I won't deny that he seems to be a very skilled investor though.
- dospunk 8y agoSkilled investor != Good person
- jstankewicz 8y agoOh, for sure. Just agreeing with the above comment on that front.
- sodosopa 8y agoNice, new account. Welcome.
- luckydata 8y agoThis is like saying you like Stalin for his pragmatic approach to population control.
- foolzcrow 8y agoSoros admitted he worked for Hitler as a paid Jewish snitch. He sent other Jewish families to the oven for money and said he had no regrets. it's on video I've seen it and it's not hard to find.
- misiti3780 8y agothis comment is ridiculous - what could you possibly have to back that up ? just because you do not agree with his political view doesn't mean everything he does is with bad intentions and "scummy".
- lucretian 8y agothe entire saga with gawker media, for one thing.
- misiti3780 8y agojust so we are clear, you do not like that fact that he paid hogans legal costs ?
- jhowell 8y agoI think that's taking the teeth out of it a little bit. I believe that he began working for Hogan in secret seeking revenge for being outed.
- xienze 8y agoSure, but that doesn't change the fact that Hogan's case was a legitimate one, he just lacked the funding to see it through. AND you're forgetting that Gawker could've avoided the whole thing if they had obeyed the earlier court order to take the video down.
- FireBeyond 8y agoHogan had agreed with Gawker to take part ownership of Gawker including revenues, and then that was reneged upon after meeting with Thiel's (his) lawyers again, and similar after multiple points of near settlement. The damages were then upped to ridiculous amounts. Financial / economic (not emotional) damages were listed at $50M. Bollea's net worth, at it's peak, was $30-40M (edit: from $25M), and is now estimated at $8M - though most of that has been stripped by divorce, before any of this happened. I am not sure how someone whose likely career income didn't reach $50M can now, in retirement, state that he suffered $50M in purely economic damages from this (remember, the emotional damage is separate, as is the punitive) - from what? Not from residuals on old WWF repeats - he would still be entitled to these. The occasional celebrity endorsement? I can't see any realistic justification that his earning power for the rest of his life would total $50M, let alone that $50M only covers the fraction of his income that he _lost_ because of this.