PDA

View Full Version : Tennis player's shouldn't get married


Cesc Fabregas
08-10-2009, 10:26 AM
If I were a rich successful tennis player I would never get married, think about it she turns out to be a gold digger and wants a divorce and all of a sudden you lose 75% of you're wealth and left with virtually nothing not a risk worth taking.

Mick
08-10-2009, 10:32 AM
not if your spouse is richer than you are as it was in the case of agassi and graf :)

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-10-2009, 10:33 AM
not if your spouse is richer than you are as it was in the case of agassi and graf :)
Graf was not richer than Andre when they married. Far from it

GameSampras
08-10-2009, 10:33 AM
If I were a rich successful tennis player I would never get married, think about it she turns out to be a gold digger and wants a divorce and all of a sudden you lose 75% of you're wealth and left with virtually nothing not a risk worth taking.

Not to mention tennis players are hardly the highest paid athletes out there. A divorce can whipe someone out quick.. And these guys arent getting paid 20-30 mil a year either,


I think Roger has grossed around 40 mil in his whole career? Hell guys like A Rod, shaq, Kobe, Lebron, can make that in around 2 years

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-10-2009, 10:35 AM
If I were a rich successful tennis player I would never get married, think about it she turns out to be a gold digger and wants a divorce and all of a sudden you lose 75% of you're wealth and left with virtually nothing not a risk worth taking.
You have to be very careful about who you married, Roger and Mirka for example i could see growing old together since they met when Roger was a promising teenager and now they have 2 daughters, but its a good point, id say that someone like Safin has probably blown a couple of millions on girls...

Cesc Fabregas
08-10-2009, 10:36 AM
Not to mention tennis players are hardly the highest paid athletes out there. A divorce can whipe someone out quick.. And these guys arent getting paid 20-30 mil a year either

Roddick was crazy to marry Brooklyn Decker, she is a 22 year old swim suit model, she'll get bored in no time and want a divorce which means Roddick will have to shell out most of his fortune.

Mick
08-10-2009, 10:36 AM
Graf was not richer than Andre when they married. Far from it

really? i thought she was because she had won nearly everything. female tennis players probably did not get paid as much as they do today.

jonnythan
08-10-2009, 10:37 AM
Roddick was crazy to marry Brooklyn Decker, she is a 22 year old swim suit model, she'll get bored in no time and want a divorce which means Roddick will have to shell out most of his fortune.

Wow, misogynist much?

VivalaVida
08-10-2009, 10:38 AM
Not to mention tennis players are hardly the highest paid athletes out there. A divorce can whipe someone out quick.. And these guys arent getting paid 20-30 mil a year either,


I think Roger has grossed around 40 mil in his whole career? Hell guys like A Rod, shaq, Kobe, Lebron, can make that in around 2 years
That is only with prize money. Federer is one of the richest athletes on earth. I think some list said he earns 35 million a year.

jonnythan
08-10-2009, 10:38 AM
really? i thought she was because she won nearly everything. female tennis players probably did not get paid as much as they do today.

Female tennis players certainly made less money per win than the guys did... plus, Agassi was on every other commercial on TV. He's probably made more money from endorsements than he ever made actually winning tournaments.

GameSampras
08-10-2009, 10:42 AM
And thats where I think Roger was smart and in the right.. He didnt get himself a hot looking freakin supermodel that could get any damn guy she wants.. Or a some Rich and famous Britney Spears either..


But of course we dont know how high maintenance Mirka is either. I expect she isnt cheap. Some women (hell most) get accustomed to that way of living and they just want MORE MORE MORE!!!


But you marry yourself a swimsuit model getting eyes planted at her at every turn of every street corner... Boy oh boy,, you're on the highway to hell

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-10-2009, 10:44 AM
really? i thought she was because she had won nearly everything. female tennis players probably did not get paid as much as they do today.
Yes she did, but they didnt get paid as much back then as you mentioned, and Agassis contract with Nike were outta this world, Agsssi was paid more from Nike during his entire career than Sampras, gimme 10 minutes and ill dig out the source.

Terr
08-10-2009, 10:44 AM
If I were a rich successful tennis player I would never get married, think about it she turns out to be a gold digger and wants a divorce and all of a sudden you lose 75% of you're wealth and left with virtually nothing not a risk worth taking.

I think most people would take the risk for a chance of having a family and someone they love to grow old with. Not everyone is Elizabeth Taylor, you know. And if they're worried about the money, one word:

PRE-NUP

jamesblakefan#1
08-10-2009, 10:44 AM
And we can see which people in this thread will NEVER find a wife. (GS, CF)

akv89
08-10-2009, 10:44 AM
Not to mention tennis players are hardly the highest paid athletes out there. A divorce can whipe someone out quick.. And these guys arent getting paid 20-30 mil a year either,


I think Roger has grossed around 40 mil in his whole career? Hell guys like A Rod, shaq, Kobe, Lebron, can make that in around 2 years

I think Federer makes roughly 30 million a year with prize money and endorsements.

Cesc Fabregas
08-10-2009, 10:45 AM
And thats where I think Roger was smart and in the right.. He didnt get himself a hot looking freakin supermodel that could get any damn guy she wants.. Or a some Rich and famous Britney Spears either..


But of course we dont know how high maintenance Mirka is either. I expect she isnt cheap. Some women (hell most) get accustomed to that way of living and they just want MORE MORE MORE!!!


But you marry yourself a swimsuit model getting eyes planted at her at every turn of every street corner... Boy oh boy,, you're on the highway to hell

Well if Mirka ever decides she wants a divorce she'll take Roger to the cleaners because they have kids now.

maximo
08-10-2009, 10:45 AM
If I were a rich successful tennis player I would never get married, think about it she turns out to be a gold digger and wants a divorce and all of a sudden you lose 75% of you're wealth and left with virtually nothing not a risk worth taking.

Go tell Mirka this. LOL

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-10-2009, 10:45 AM
Female tennis players certainly made less money per win than the guys did... plus, Agassi was on every other commercial on TV. He's probably made more money from endorsements than he ever made actually winning tournaments.
Yes, he made alot more on endorsements than prize-money. Hes American , Nike is an American company, he wore Nike from 1986-2005 (when he switched to Adidas to salute his wife)

Ambivalent
08-10-2009, 10:46 AM
Not to mention tennis players are hardly the highest paid athletes out there. A divorce can whipe someone out quick.. And these guys arent getting paid 20-30 mil a year either,


I think Roger has grossed around 40 mil in his whole career? Hell guys like A Rod, shaq, Kobe, Lebron, can make that in around 2 years

He's made 50m in prize money. That's a small portion of his wealth, considering it doesn't include appearance fees, NIKE SPONSORSHIP, WILSON SPONSORSHIP, Netjet appearance, gilette, etc.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-10-2009, 10:46 AM
And we can see which people in this thread will NEVER find a wife. (GS, CF)
Lol:twisted:

10 char

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-10-2009, 10:47 AM
He's made 50m in prize money. That's a small portion of his wealth, considering it doesn't include appearance fees, NIKE SPONSORSHIP, WILSON SPONSORSHIP, Netjet appearance, gilette, etc.
You are absolutely right, but GameSampras is even trying to make Roger look poor.

jonnythan
08-10-2009, 10:47 AM
I seriously think some people make themselves feel better by assuming that the guys with the really hot wives or girlfriends are going to be miserable in the end.

There's really no other reason. So many guys think "hot babe" = "no attention-span, only interested in money, will dump your *** and take your money," and I think it's just because they can't get those hot babes.

NamRanger
08-10-2009, 10:48 AM
Federer has a life time sponsorship with Wilson for about a million a year. I highly doubt that he'll ever go poor.

Cesc Fabregas
08-10-2009, 10:49 AM
Federer has a life time sponsorship with Wilson for about a million a year. I highly doubt that he'll ever go poor.

True but Im sure he wouldn't want 75% of his fortune taken away.

VivalaVida
08-10-2009, 10:50 AM
True but Im sure he wouldn't want 75% of his fortune taken away.
Is that really how much you lose after divorce?

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-10-2009, 10:50 AM
That is only with prize money. Federer is one of the richest athletes on earth. I think some list said he earns 35 million a year.
Yes, Forbes Magazine, he makes 35 millions a year. His prize-money is pocket-change compared to the rest.

NamRanger
08-10-2009, 10:51 AM
Is that really how much you lose after divorce?



No, because Federer would lose very little in fact. Because he is the one making most of the money, and Mirka for only a short time was managing his money, she would only take anywhere from 10-15% at most. Then there's child support. But still, it wouldn't be 75%.

jonnythan
08-10-2009, 10:53 AM
No, because Federer would lose very little in fact. Because he is the one making most of the money, and Mirka for only a short time was managing his money, she would only take anywhere from 10-15% at most. Then there's child support. But still, it wouldn't be 75%.

That depends entirely on the pre-nup. If there is no pre-nup, then Mirka gets half of everything. Well, that's how it goes in the US anyway.

VivalaVida
08-10-2009, 10:53 AM
No, because Federer would lose very little in fact. Because he is the one making most of the money, and Mirka for only a short time was managing his money, she would only take anywhere from 10-15% at most. Then there's child support. But still, it wouldn't be 75%.
Thanks for that. I was wondering why people get married if they might lose 75 percent of their fortune :lol:

Cesc Fabregas
08-10-2009, 10:53 AM
No, because Federer would lose very little in fact. Because he is the one making most of the money, and Mirka for only a short time was managing his money, she would only take anywhere from 10-15% at most. Then there's child support. But still, it wouldn't be 75%.

It could be up to that much, she has supported him and travelled with him all these years and now they have children, if she found a real hard nosed dirty lawyer she could take him to the cleaners.

JRstriker12
08-10-2009, 10:54 AM
If I were a rich successful tennis player I would never get married, think about it she turns out to be a gold digger and wants a divorce and all of a sudden you lose 75% of you're wealth and left with virtually nothing not a risk worth taking.

You must be 10 yrs old. Do girls have cooties too?

jones101
08-10-2009, 11:11 AM
really? i thought she was because she had won nearly everything. female tennis players probably did not get paid as much as they do today.

Steffi won $21,891,306 USD in her career from prize money, not incuding endorsements and adidas etc. She definitley does not need to rely on Andre for $$$

Frodo Baggins
08-10-2009, 11:17 AM
Wants to Marry A Pro Tennis player here;) Heck Wants to Do A Pro Tennis Player ;) Is That Allowed?? Namely Tommy Or Davide.. ;) Oh Ya!!! Hint Hint!!! :)

VivalaVida
08-10-2009, 11:20 AM
Steffi won $21,891,306 USD in her career from prize money, not incuding endorsements and adidas etc. She definitley does not need to rely on Andre for $$$
While that maybe true that she doesnt need to rely on Andre. Andre indeed made much much more money than her with endorsements.

raiden031
08-10-2009, 11:21 AM
That depends entirely on the pre-nup. If there is no pre-nup, then Mirka gets half of everything. Well, that's how it goes in the US anyway.

Wrong. It is completely up to each state.

---

But only a fool wouldn't get a pre-nup if they have alot of money.

flyinghippos101
08-10-2009, 11:22 AM
Yikes man, how paranoid could you get?

Lifted
08-10-2009, 11:34 AM
I cannot roll my eyes hard enough at the topic under discussion. Really guys?

Serendipitous
08-10-2009, 11:38 AM
That is only with prize money. Federer is one of the richest athletes on earth. I think some list said he earns 35 million a year.

:arrow::shock::arrow::shock:

BreakPoint
08-10-2009, 11:39 AM
If I were a rich successful tennis player I would never get married, think about it she turns out to be a gold digger and wants a divorce and all of a sudden you lose 75% of you're wealth and left with virtually nothing not a risk worth taking.
Isn't that true for anyone with any degree of wealth and not just exclusively for tennis players?

On the flip side, look at Federer. Mirka became his girlfriend well before he was rich and famous and before he won anything. He was also much uglier back then, so you know that she loves him for who he is deep inside and not for his money, fame, and success nor for his looks. :)

GameSampras
08-10-2009, 11:41 AM
You are absolutely right, but GameSampras is even trying to make Roger look poor.

ROger doesnt get a pre-nup and Mirka calls it quite especially now, he wont have a whole lot of money left.


Jordan made a hell of a lot more money in his career than Federer, and his wife almost bleeded him dry. Somewhere in the neighorhood of 300 million

And alot of depends on your lifestyle too.. You would be amazed at how fast money can go. Michael Jackson, Mike Tyson ring a bell?

BreakPoint
08-10-2009, 11:43 AM
I seriously think some people make themselves feel better by assuming that the guys with the really hot wives or girlfriends are going to be miserable in the end.

There's really no other reason. So many guys think "hot babe" = "no attention-span, only interested in money, will dump your *** and take your money," and I think it's just because they can't get those hot babes.
I think you just nailed it! :)

GameSampras
08-10-2009, 11:45 AM
What guys with hot chicks for wives usually DONT end up miserable in then? Unless they get another hot chick that is.


And spare me the "We dont get hot babes" routine. Obviously your chances of getting maintenance girls which are usually better looking increase when you have fame and fortune.. So does affairs.. It kind of goes with the territory there daddy

BreakPoint
08-10-2009, 11:46 AM
Federer has a life time sponsorship with Wilson for about a million a year. I highly doubt that he'll ever go poor.
Federer's lifetime contract with Wilson is for two million a year. Not a bad pension. Sure beats social security. He'll be 80 years old and still getting $2 million a year from Wilson.

Cesc Fabregas
08-10-2009, 11:47 AM
Look at Paul McCartney's ex wife she took him to the cleaners and Roger is more attached to Mirka than she was.

GameSampras
08-10-2009, 11:48 AM
Federer's lifetime contract with Wilson is for two million a year. Not a bad pension. Sure beats social security. He'll be 80 years old and still getting $2 million a year from Wilson.

It all depends on your lifestyle..

GameSampras
08-10-2009, 11:48 AM
Look at Paul McCartney's ex wife she took him to the cleaners and Roger is more attached to Mirka than she was.

And paul McCartney was more wealthy than Roger is

BreakPoint
08-10-2009, 11:52 AM
What guys with hot chicks for wives usually DONT end up miserable in then? Unless they get another hot chick that is.

I don't think guys like Dan Ackroyd and Ric Ocasek are "miserable". If you don't know who their wives are, look it up.

BreakPoint
08-10-2009, 11:53 AM
It all depends on your lifestyle..
If you're spending more than $2 million a year, you're not poor.

settolove
08-10-2009, 11:55 AM
Look at Paul McCartney's ex wife she took him to the cleaners and Roger is more attached to Mirka than she was.
Heather Mills McCartney got in the region of 24million. Considering Paul McCartney was worth in the region of 825million I hardly think 24million is taking someone to the cleaners.

Cesc Fabregas
08-10-2009, 11:56 AM
I think you just nailed it! :)

Would you be willing to expose your vast wealth to a potential gold digger if you were rich?

JRstriker12
08-10-2009, 12:08 PM
Look at Paul McCartney's ex wife she took him to the cleaners and Roger is more attached to Mirka than she was.

Look at Paul McCartney's ex wife she took him to the cleaners and Roger is more attached to Mirka than she was.

McCartney was a dumb-azz and didn't have a pre-nup.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-07-29-mccartney_x.htm?POE=LIFISVA

McCartney, who does not have a prenuptial agreement to protect his estimated $1.5 billion fortune, has hired lawyer Fiona Shackleton, who represented Prince Charles in his divorce from Princess Diana.

Would you be willing to expose your vast wealth to a potential gold digger if you were rich?

Would you walk across the street and take the chance that your family may inherit your money if you get hit by a bus????

sureshs
08-10-2009, 12:08 PM
Sure beats social security.

Anything will be greater than 0 at that time

sureshs
08-10-2009, 12:09 PM
He was also much uglier back then, so you know that she loves him for who he is deep inside and not for his money, fame, and success nor for his looks. :)

Has he become better-looking with age?

jonnythan
08-10-2009, 12:12 PM
This thread is basically "rich men should not marry attractive women because they are gold-diggers who will rob them blind after they get bored."

DownTheLine
08-10-2009, 12:15 PM
ROger doesnt get a pre-nup and Mirka calls it quite especially now, he wont have a whole lot of money left.


Jordan made a hell of a lot more money in his career than Federer, and his wife almost bleeded him dry. Somewhere in the neighorhood of 300 million

And alot of depends on your lifestyle too.. You would be amazed at how fast money can go. Michael Jackson, Mike Tyson ring a bell?

Mirka was with roger in 2000 and 2001 before he started winning tons of slams and getting the BIG bucks.

ubermeyer
08-10-2009, 12:30 PM
If I were a rich successful tennis player I would never get married, think about it she turns out to be a gold digger and wants a divorce and all of a sudden you lose 75% of you're wealth and left with virtually nothing not a risk worth taking.

I don't understand. Wouldn't you get all your money back since it was YOURS and YOU earned it and your wife would have no grounds for divorce at all?

sureshs
08-10-2009, 12:33 PM
I don't understand. Wouldn't you get all your money back since it was YOURS and YOU earned it and your wife would have no grounds for divorce at all?

No, you will have to maintain her current lifestyle till she earns comparably, or gets remarried. If it was not so, men could just dump any wife who doesn't work outside the home. The laws exist to prevent that, and also to protect the sanctity of marriage.

Mick
08-10-2009, 12:35 PM
paul mccartney did not lose as much money as neil diamond did ($150 mil :shock:)

http://bennyhollywood.com/blog/2-neil-diamond-and-marcia-murphey-150-million.html

jonnythan
08-10-2009, 12:37 PM
No, you will have to maintain her current lifestyle till she earns comparably, or gets remarried. If it was not so, men could just dump any wife who doesn't work outside the home. The laws exist to prevent that, and also to protect the sanctity of marriage.

Yup. The idea is that if the woman stayed at home to raise kids, etc, while the man made money, she should not be faced with the prospect of staying in an unhappy marriage or being penniless on the street.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-10-2009, 12:40 PM
ROger doesnt get a pre-nup and Mirka calls it quite especially now, he wont have a whole lot of money left.


Jordan made a hell of a lot more money in his career than Federer, and his wife almost bleeded him dry. Somewhere in the neighorhood of 300 million

And alot of depends on your lifestyle too.. You would be amazed at how fast money can go. Michael Jackson, Mike Tyson ring a bell?
Im not sure why you are writing me this, what i wrote to you was based on another statement you made, i think you are posting to much to know who is who and what is what.
And no, Juanita Vanoy got close to 600 million USD.
I do know how fast money can go,yes there is a bell ringing here, but obviously not over there.

sureshs
08-10-2009, 12:46 PM
Yup. The idea is that if the woman stayed at home to raise kids, etc, while the man made money, she should not be faced with the prospect of staying in an unhappy marriage or being penniless on the street.

That is why there is a movement which asks to compensate women who stay at home. Right now, there is a modest increase in social security and medicare benefits for a retired couple where only the man worked. It is like less than 1.5 times compared to single man, not 2.0. It is not the same at all as if the woman had also worked. Of course, tax deductions, etc., are also beneficial. So the system does in a way account for it, but there are some who feel doing housework and raising children should be rewarded more tangibly by society, and not degraded as unproductive work which has no corporate value. If that work was not done, where would the people who work in corporations come from?

jonnythan
08-10-2009, 12:53 PM
I dunno if I can get behind that. Another topic, though.

Topaz
08-10-2009, 01:03 PM
On the flip side, look at Federer. Mirka became his girlfriend well before he was rich and famous and before he won anything. He was also much uglier back then, so you know that she loves him for who he is deep inside and not for his money, fame, and success nor for his looks. :)

Mirka was with roger in 2000 and 2001 before he started winning tons of slams and getting the BIG bucks.

In addition to the fact that yes, Mirka has been with him before he started raking in the millions, she doesn't need him for money...her family has enough of it on their own. There are other ways to make money than being a tennis pro.

I realize this may totally shatter some posters' views and beliefs on women and marriage...but there 'ya go.

ChanceEncounter
08-10-2009, 02:47 PM
Would you be willing to expose your vast wealth to a potential gold digger if you were rich?
Yes, because no one signs those silly things called pre-nups these days.

BreakPoint
08-10-2009, 02:50 PM
Would you be willing to expose your vast wealth to a potential gold digger if you were rich?
I don't date gold diggers, period. I'm not stupid.

There are hot women who are not gold diggers. I've dated plenty of them.

sureshs
08-10-2009, 02:51 PM
There is a stigma associated with pre-nups, and rightly so. It means the couple doesn't trust each other. Though people may say lifelong marriage was an old concept which came into being when life span was much shorter and getting the basic necessities of life and making children survive disease was the first priority. But a guy asking the girl for a pre nup can be taken by her that he doesn't trust her. At the time of marriage, the guy may not be rich, and afraid that a pre nup will make him lose her. Situation can change later. She may become the big earner and he the bum. Or worse things could happen health wise.

sureshs
08-10-2009, 02:52 PM
I don't date gold diggers, period. I'm not stupid.

There are hot women who are not gold diggers. I've dated plenty of them.

Didn't you get married a couple of years ago?

NamRanger
08-10-2009, 02:52 PM
ROger doesnt get a pre-nup and Mirka calls it quite especially now, he wont have a whole lot of money left.


Jordan made a hell of a lot more money in his career than Federer, and his wife almost bleeded him dry. Somewhere in the neighorhood of 300 million

And alot of depends on your lifestyle too.. You would be amazed at how fast money can go. Michael Jackson, Mike Tyson ring a bell?




Roger Federer does not live the lifestyle of Michael Jackson or Mike Tyson.

BreakPoint
08-10-2009, 03:10 PM
Has he become better-looking with age?

http://www.fotobank.ru/img/P008-8357.jpg?size=l

http://www.dalmacijanews.com/Portals/0/images/2009-07/federer_mirka.jpg

I rest my case.

maximo
08-10-2009, 03:16 PM
http://www.fotobank.ru/img/P008-8357.jpg?size=l

Christ, i thought it was Shakespeare for a momment. :lol:

http://i29.tinypic.com/2nkp1ti.jpg

raiden031
08-10-2009, 03:43 PM
Yup. The idea is that if the woman stayed at home to raise kids, etc, while the man made money, she should not be faced with the prospect of staying in an unhappy marriage or being penniless on the street.

In my opinion, any assets earned by a spouse prior to marriage should not be shared with the other spouse upon divorce. But I absolutely agree that if the man is earning income while the woman is staying home raising children, if they divorce then the man has a responsibility to divide and share some of the nest egg they were building during the time they were married, and temporarily provide spousal support to give the woman time to get on her feet.

sureshs
08-10-2009, 04:29 PM
In my opinion, any assets earned by a spouse prior to marriage should not be shared with the other spouse upon divorce.

I don't think it works that way. If that was the case, the sons of old-money families would not have to give up any of their homes, etc. which they would have owned before marriage. I think the total wealth is to be considered, because the couple entered the marriage together and she had a right to live in those homes after marriage. If he enjoyed the use of those assets with her during marriage, she has a say in it.

sureshs
08-10-2009, 04:30 PM
http://www.fotobank.ru/img/P008-8357.jpg?size=l

http://www.dalmacijanews.com/Portals/0/images/2009-07/federer_mirka.jpg

I rest my case.

Not if you prefer the wilder Nadal kind of look.

BallzofSkill
08-10-2009, 04:34 PM
Christ, i thought it was Shakespeare for a momment. :lol:

http://i29.tinypic.com/2nkp1ti.jpg

lmao, i bet you really did. you don't seem the type to say something just to humiliate roger federer or anything.


/sarcasm

BallzofSkill
08-10-2009, 04:34 PM
Not if you prefer the wilder Nadal kind of look.

we all know which guy you prefer to tuck you in at night.

raiden031
08-10-2009, 04:36 PM
I don't think it works that way. If that was the case, the sons of old-money families would not have to give up any of their homes, etc. which they would have owned before marriage. I think the total wealth is to be considered, because the couple entered the marriage together and she had a right to live in those homes after marriage. If he enjoyed the use of those assets with her during marriage, she has a say in it.

This doesn't make sense to me. What difference does it make that he enjoyed his assets with her? The fact is he owned the asset regardless of any contribution from her. But I think when someone devotes 10 years of their life to you, then that is worth dividing of 10 years of wealth accumulation the way I see it.

sureshs
08-10-2009, 04:41 PM
This doesn't make sense to me. What difference does it make that he enjoyed his assets with her? The fact is he owned the asset regardless of any contribution from her. But I think when someone devotes 10 years of their life to you, then that is worth dividing of 10 years of wealth accumulation the way I see it.

Because she provided companionship to him in that setting.

sureshs
08-10-2009, 04:52 PM
we all know which guy you prefer to tuck you in at night.

Well, certainly you don't have the muscular physique of Nadal so you won't know

raiden031
08-10-2009, 04:53 PM
Because she provided companionship to him in that setting.

Yeah I agree companionship should be compensated, but only in the form of wealth accumulated during the companionship.

What you're saying is like saying that if I invite my friends to hang out with me at a beach house each year, they should be given partial ownership of the house because I enjoyed it with them even though I paid for the house.

sureshs
08-10-2009, 04:55 PM
Yeah I agree companionship should be compensated, but only in the form of wealth accumulated during the companionship.

What you're saying is like saying that if I invite my friends to hang out with me at a beach house each year, they should be given partial ownership of the house because I enjoyed it with them even though I paid for the house.

Hopefully they did not provide you the kind of companionship that a wife provides

Serendipitous
08-10-2009, 04:56 PM
http://www.fotobank.ru/img/P008-8357.jpg?size=lhttp://www.fotobank.ru/img/P008-8357.jpg?size=lhttp://www.fotobank.ru/img/P008-8357.jpg?size=lhttp://www.fotobank.ru/img/P008-8357.jpg?size=l

BallzofSkill
08-10-2009, 05:00 PM
Well, certainly you don't have the muscular physique of Nadal so you won't know

dude, sorry if it sounded like i was homophobic. what you do or dream about in your free time is your business.

sureshs
08-10-2009, 05:13 PM
dude, sorry if it sounded like i was homophobic. what you do or dream about in your free time is your business.

I am not the one posting pics of Fed