Sentences with phrase «ai took less money»

Denver didn't fare as poorly this year, as Iguodala had a productive season and helped lead them to their highest win total in franchise history, but AI took less money to sign with the Golden State Warriors, the very team that ousted the Nuggets from the playoffs last season, once George Karl and Masai Ujiri departed.

Pedro, Curt, Pavano, and Vlad were all taking less money to keep the core together for the new park, and Tommy was going to be the centerpiece.

Not to mention Rudy Gay, who's taking less money to try and get into the playoffs.

The rationale is that the banks are taking less money, the title companies are giving us a break, the gas company is donating lines, appliance companies are offering products at cost, and this is your [real estate practitioners] piece of the pie.»

Not exact matches

Research shows that fearing or accepting risk is a behavior people learn, and people who've grown up in households that are always one paycheck away from eviction are less likely to have learned to take risks with their money.

So happy, they may even be willing to take a pay cut to work for a dog - friendly company: a survey conducted by Modern Dog magazine revealed that 65 % of readers would take a job for less money if it meant they could bring their dog to work.

«When you go through life, what you'll find is what you take out of the world over time — be it money, cars, stuff, accolades — is much less important than what you've put into the world.»

You will never feel satisfied with money alone, it's what money can do, namely help those less fortunate, take care of your loved ones, allow you geographical freedom, that really does satisfy you.

If you choose instead to take the entire cash prize at one time, you get much less money up front: The cash payout value at the time of writing is $ 411.7 million.

But, increasingly, China's travelers are taking their families — and their money — to less conventional locales.

There are many complex systemic reasons women take home less money than men; take some time to understand them (Cass R. Sunstein at Bloomberg offers a good primer).

Of course, if you say it's not about the money, you could prove it's not about the money: You could forgo that raise, give back that bonus, take less equity or profit.

The founder now takes 26 percent dilution but often they start to get less dilution - sensitive because they think about how nice it would be to have more money.

Luckily, there are a few ways to take advantage of this potentially lucrative market for far less money and time.

Personal Capital takes less than one minute to sign up and is the most valuable tool I've found to help folks manage their money.

MORE: «Expert» Wine Sippers Take Us All for Suckers Tastes Great, Less Money: Buy Store Brands to Knock an Easy 30 % Off Your Grocery Bill Store Brand Taste Test Challenge: They're As Good As Big - Name Brands

«When it comes to things like employee incentives, we're definitely part of this larger macroeconomic shift that's taking place — where there's less money being spent on material goods, and more money being spent on experiences.

Due to potentially - large oscillations in the desire to hold cash and to the fact that changes in the money supply can take years to impact the cost of living, this theoretical rate of purchasing - power change will tend to be inaccurate over periods of two years or less but should approximate the actual rate of purchasing - power change over periods of five years or more.

In the event of a default the property is sold and the bank gets all its money back because they are in a full equity position, the amount lent is less than the total value of the asset so they are only out the time it takes to get the property sold.

Now take the money you have put aside into cash when times are good and reinvest after market correction and you are looking at a significant market return that will put the look of envy on others less savvy then yourself.

It seems like most of your articles are assuming your readers make this great money and don't take into account that there are tons of us trying to be financially responsible on less than half what you're working with.

A: The notion is that they're less distortionary because they don't double - tax savings by taking money first as income tax, then claiming still more as capital gains taxes.

The paper reports that Clark's defence team insisted that he took less than # 44,000 and was in the process of paying the money back.

The willingness of President Bush (in his better moments) to spend money to shore up civil society — making it perhaps less necessary to spend money down the road, as the promise of the «ownership society» was fulfilled — was taken as an opportunity by those not invested in that «limited» project (I have in mind here both the conventional Republicans in the Bush White House and the pork - barrelling Republicans in the House and Senate) to open the federal purse with relative abandon.

Charities help reduce the need for government dependence, so less tax money has to be taken from the citizens.

That said, what I really, really despise, is the TV Evangelists that would ask for more and more money, and guilt it out of people... and of course, the most vunerable are the elderly or sick shut - ins that often would send their old age pension, and barely eat, thinking that they were doing good... and the TV Evangelists could care less that they were literally taking food money from them.

It is all about the money folks, people just want to protect their turf, and they think if the less fortunate are helped, then it will be taken away from them, so they live their greedy lives in fear.

I know some people have goals this new year to eat more meals at home, to eat healthier, or to spend less money on takeout, so this is a perfect time to share this recipe — it can take care of all three of those!

If you're on a budget this is a dish that will cost you less time and money then take out fried rice would.

The money is something he can get anywhere you go and if your winning taking a little less is ok.

Because the Rangers are paying Cole Hamels something less than Ian Kennedy money, they can then take the savings and have themselves an international - signing blowout one of these years, replacing the prospects they lost in the trade, and still have several millions left over.

Strangely though there are plenty of thumbs down, there are no comments saying «get rid of Walcott» or opinions as to why he should go or take less money.

I know he's injured quite a lot, but I do think it's taking the mick offering him less money!

What I am saying is that we have athletes all over the country that lose far less time for drugs, weapons, assault, taking money, academic fraud, etc..

It makes me wonder though, if the NHL had taken less money and gone over to ESPN after the lockout instead of Versus (now NBC Sports Network), would the league be making more money and would more teams be out of the red?

From what I have read, once he sighed and finally signed, that was against the Boras recommendation, and it may be that the only place he was willing to take less money was with the Royals where he was already familiar with everything.

As the commenter above mentioned, the Rangers really don't have any leverage and the players union is strictly against letting players renegotiate their contracts to take less money.

Likewise, if they take a month off, that's less money that they can charge on an annual basis.

Let me see if I understand your point... So, they took less money with Invicta, and this was the right decision?

What this bunch has to say I can care less, my disappointment with this team and their leader is beyond belief...... I will stop posting and will express my frustration in some other way, but I will definitely take action against the board and their puppet, not buying seasons ticket, will watch the team at any park but the Emirates, will not buy merchandise, bottom line they can do whatever they want, keep the senile for another 2 years but they will not do it with my hard earned money....

2 things; wenger has to take massive crtisism for favoritism with certain players and for spending latley on less than whats needed e.g why play ozil, ramsey, walcott, when they havnt performed, anyone can see a front 3 of welbeck, sanchez and perez would cause havoc Xhaka wtf he cant takle, is not mobile enough and has the temper and the decision making skills of a of a suicide victim, why did nt we go in for Kante less money and 10x a better player or even Schneiderlin thinking about what happens after wenger ask yourself this will we win the league next year with wenger then ask if we got the right manager next year would we win the league

After the 2004 - 2005 lockout, I moved upstairs, in part because of pricing and in part out of protest to hand over less money to a business I thought was taking fans for granted.

Had everyone agreed to take less money to keep the core four, the Thunder could very well still be intact today.

Is this way of thinking that kept us now for 10 years wanting anything more than taking a trophy from Wigan (FA Cup)... we are there for better things... managers with less resources have brought joy to their fans... the money is there you just need to spend it right drop the deadwood and find the key players it is called MONEYBALL..Is this way of thinking that kept us now for 10 years wanting anything more than taking a trophy from Wigan (FA Cup)... we are there for better things... managers with less resources have brought joy to their fans... the money is there you just need to spend it right drop the deadwood and find the key players it is called MONEYBALL..is there you just need to spend it right drop the deadwood and find the key players it is called MONEYBALL..is called MONEYBALL....

3 is a silent pick em so money line the game with a dog of 3 pts or less, 85 % of teams that cover 3 points as dogs win the game outright so why give the books any more than you have to, make sure you take dogs in first half ONLY, i cant stress this enough, more times than not if a dog will cover the game, (big dogs +7 or higher) they will show up early and you do not want to get screwed in the 2nd half by blowing the cover, these are things the sports books never would tell you but surely will save you a lot of aggravation in the LONG RUN

Arsenal are becoming less and less profitable, through Kroenke... probably missing out on Champions league, sponsors are going to be less willing with all the protests and empty stadium, he's said that all he cares about is money, so I don't see why he just doesn't take the profit and go.

Richie was not forced to renegotiate or take less money, he chose to.

This is not a knock on Kawhi at all: there is no heroism in taking less money than you're due for the benefit of a more wealthy person's bank account.

with so much money in cash reserves perhaps Stan Kroenke is insisting on holding ever bigger amounts in Arsenal in order to satisfy his creditors elsewhere that he always has a large supply of cash on tap if he should need to call on it kroenke completed his Rams takeover with an acquisition of 60 % of its share capital in August 2010, less than eight months before paying # 250 million to take his shareholding in Arsenal beyond 60 % when the global financial system was in crisis

I'm sure Wenger will take him if he's eventually offered for less money and Sami drops his ridiculous wage demands.