Sentences with phrase «have less money then»

And of course if you have less money then the index fund is a better choice.

Not exact matches

You can then receive a sum of money worth slightly less than the receivables pledged until you've collected the money is collected from your customers.

But then I'll have less money to hold!)

And the risk of losing money also falls less on Mylan than it does on those at the end of the supply chain, with the pharmacy having to dispense EpiPens while accepting less in copay money upfront, then applying for a rebate and waiting to see what trickles back.

If both sides, through their eyes and their people's eyes, have concluded that the plaintiff is absolutely going to win this case, and the plaintiff is going to get a lot of money because they're totally on board with everything that has been presented, then that might be a good reason for the defendant to agree to a settlement with the plaintiff for less money than the potential exposure if the jury comes back and finds willful infringement.

But if it is Thiel who is behind this latest legal move from Harder, then money would seem to be less of a motivator than destroying Gawker.

Since then, the arbitrage strategy has declined in a nearly linear fashion to the point where there were no years where the strategy yielded more than $ 200 between 1959 and 1974 and in 11 of these 16 years an investor either lost money or gained less than $ 100.

By then, the U.S. government would be even deeper in debt with less money to spend to revive the economy.

I haven't met an employee, except very highly compensated ones (and then only rarely), who did not have an deeply emotional response to the possibility of ratcheting downward in any given year (i.e., making less money).

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.

But the most important lesson is that no matter what's our profession, nor our salary if we live a frugal lifestyle, if we cut out the waste, if we spend less than we earn and then invest that money on low - cost index funds and ETFs, Anyone has the opportunity to become financially secure.

If they spent 1/10 the time, money and attention to unwed mothers, poor families, and the racial divide in adoptions (everyone wants a white baby, no one wants ethnic babies, ethnic toddlers, or white or ethnic teenagers), then maybe women would be less scared about having problem / unwanted pregnancies.

I understand that I was having a good deal but if paying less money equal having a bad product then I don't want it.

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

he is a ddecent striker but then why haven't have the likes of spuds / chelski or liverlool gone for him we need a top striker + he is also injury prone missed many games for nufc last season there is areason why marilelle sold him for less money

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.

we gave mediocre players stupid contracts, such good ones infact they would rather be a bench player and earn crazy coin, then play first team elsewhere for less money

But if we're reportedly offering less than his # 25m release clause, then that would make him a lot better value for money, so who knows, might be a good deal after all.

I did say in an earlier post «It could be that vardy's aim is to get an improved offer from leicester, maybe less than Arsenal but then he can say to the leicester fans «i could have moved for more money but decided to stay», he can claim to be a loyal leicester player when in reality he has forced them to pay him more money.»

That's a LOT less guaranteed money then even I thought he'd get.

You keep bringing the lack of spending as the cause of our failures; if leicester wins the EPL with less money than AW ever had even during the period of financial restrictions, what excuses will you have then?

100 grand a week is allot for maybe third choice player, if he was on less money and happy playing bit part role well then youd have to say keeping him would be in our best interests.

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

I do have my doubts about this rumour, like all of them, especially when you see the money being talked about as nearly # 50 million, but Manolas is one of the top rated defenders in the world and if the price was a little bit less which it could well be as the contract situation with his current club is said to be the reason for the move, then maybe it could happen.

Yes we owe the banks around 230 million it's a long term loan we pay back around 25 million a year, this season 2014/15 we ar going to turn ower around 330 + million And our outgoing is going to be around 220 million or less, this season and the next 5 seasons we will be malikng around 110 million profit a year, we had 170million in the bank in April which was confirmed by the club we have spent some money on players 70 + million leaves you with 100 million in the bank then in June we recived 3 new sponsership deal worth around 130 million (wether or not it was paid lump sump or spread across the season to lower profit margin that I haven't looked at) all in all we can spend ready cash ower 200 milion if we realy want we can spend double and more of that sum and we still be within the FFP rules becouse they look at accounts 3 years acumalation

@ jAmerican I agree with you totally that vidal will be with us next season and I also think that he will cost less than MS something wenger has looked at as we all know he loves to save money, so after cech and vidal im hoping for an attacker then on to lifting the cl, pl and fa trophy

just reading around and all if not most rags are saying our net spend is # 46 million how can they tell that when they do nt even know what our real budget is if it was # 100 million then we are in profit by quite a bit i do nt really know what they base there assumptions on this is where you could do with swiss ramble to dissect what really was spent from what i could see most of our 5 transfers were covered by out goings and c / l monies earned debuchy - vela deal, chambers - vermalen deal, ospina - cesc and miquel deals sanchez c / l monies and other monies recovered from wages and old installment based deals this is the same with welbeck i would imagine if not then poldolski will be sold in jan to cover this as i think he was going to be sold and this would have covered welbecks transfer more or less also and people do nt always realize that arsenal have money coming in from more than one source to cover transfers not just puma and emirates deals we have property arm of the club which makes money for transfers also outstanding debts we are owed of old transfers we receive each year on song cesc maybe van persie and all other structured deals in installment payments sales we just flogged miquel as an example and all the monies from released wages and youths sold its a bit to complex to just say we have a net spend of xyz when arsenal do nt even make the budget public so they have no starting point from which to go from i bet you we have broke even or even made a slight profit as we are self sustaining it would make sense that we can break even or at least make the net spend under # 10 million each year at least screw then all we are the arsenal we do thing our way

We should have set no target back then, and said to Arsene, you built the Invincibles with less money, so we expect you to be business as usual.

So I'd rather approach it slightly safer, and get someone like Lacazette for less money, and then have enough left to get a quality replacement for Santi, and perhaps another winger.

my problem with AW is that for years he resisted to buy good players because of a million or two difference from asking price today's market those players are worth triple, we could of had a great team with possibly wining the EPL twice and possibly semis or final of CL, if he had just spent the money in the bank, Chelsea are in dept around 850 Million pounds (possible the bulk to Abromovich) and same for Man - United and few more, we are the only club that is cash rich with funds available around hidden 350 million and more accumulating every season, how i know this because i look at their end of year accounts outgoings and income there is around 100 to 120 million less outgoings then income, we can easily spend 700 Million in the summer and we will be well in with FFP rules and only have 350m to pay in two years which we can with bigger and higher sponsorship coming any day now

If they can somehow keep Avram Grant at the club then they have a chance of bouncing straight back but in many ways the playing side of the equation is less problematic than finding the money that prevents the club from folding before the season even ends.

I would just like to see how some of the same moaners and critics managed to keep a club in the top four of the toughest and most competitive football league in the world, firstly with less money to spend than most mid-table clubs have had and then with almost a whole first team of players unavailable due to a crippling an mysterious run of injury problems.

It could be that vardy's aim is to get an improved offer from leicester, maybe less than Arsenal but then he can say to the leicester fans «i could have moved for more money but decided to stay», he can claim to be a loyal leicester player when in reality he has forced them to pay him more money.

Ever bothered to think that we could have bought Toby in 2013 for less money than we paid for Chiriches?There was talk of us looking at him then and would have made sense for him to join up with Vertonghen and Eriksen.I don't actually think he is that good a player otherwise Atletico would not have loaned him out and not be prepared to sell him today....

@ larryking listen jock wenger could never coach anyother club because no big club would go six season without a trophy there is no way wenger could go to madrid and go two season without a trophy no way in hell he would be fired in no time bmunich fired klinsman less than half season look at the real madrid coach grave yard pelligrinie made 95 + points last season that amount would win the league in almost any country yet he got fired i can go on if fergi goes two seasons without a trophy am sure he gone i love arsenal but football is about winning trophies wenger has hypnotize you i do nt care arsenal have gone five years without a trophy and six witout the league not even a carling cup or fa cup and loosing all our best players all for money all this talk about wenger and his youth policies i can count on both hands all the players that came through arsenal youth system that went on to be world beaters look at the current crop walcott nasri diaby denilson bedtner clichy none of these are world class they have improve minimal @ arsenal compare that to barca their youths pedro and co are world beaters event the great vanpercy who we rate he would never leave arsenal because all that chance wenger gives him he would» t get at other big clubs this does not make sense we buy young players they take ages to develop most do nt» t then we sell them or they leave because they want to win things that how you grow pretty soon that top four will become very hard to stay in if we get out of that then what i wish all you wenger fans luck am all out of patients with him last chance this year................

For example, if you buy frozen muffins you're in the 55 - 60 cent range; if you purchase ingredients and make muffins it's much less — maybe a third of the cost — and then you have that money available to pay labor.

You spend all that money for a costume for your little one, who moans to get in on, wears it for less than an hour, manages to drop something on it before you step out the door, and then brings oodles of candy that you either have to hide, eat yourself (not that you need it) or watch painfully as she eats it while you swear you can hear her teeth disintegrating.

Raising a baby can be expensive and trying to save money is a good thing, but $ 8 a day on baby food isn't that bad, an adult would have a hard time having one heathy meal for less then $ 8.

If more people were able to find jobs, then less money would need to be spent on support for unemployed people, because there would be fewer of them.

It would be relatively less painful, of course, if one had any confidence at all that Labour would then spend all that extra money to good purpose.

He added: «It's a logical consequence of what we've said that yes, if there's less Government money, then the private contribution, through the graduate contribution, is going to be bigger obviously.»

After few weeks my stomach have shrunken and i do nt get as hungry anymore (i still do but will myself into not eating, it is a lot easier now then before) I've also spend a lot less money on food now.

I understand that I was having a good deal but if paying less money equal having a bad product then I don't want it.

If you're fed up with diets that don't work, workouts that take too long and don't produce results, of living less than your fullest potential because you don't have the time or money to work out, then get ready to celebrate, because...

Osborne then shows that the charter sector accomplishes this with less money per student than the district and in spite of the fact that the charter sector has a higher percentage of low - income and non-white students.

It's important that teachers have accurate information so that when students ask them about or talk about «I couldn't go to university...», perhaps there's the option then for teachers to say «well, actually, did you know that although of course it will take some money to be able to afford the text books and all the other things, there are options that can really support people with less economic resources to make it to university.»

It is no coincidence then that research has shown students who spend their full K — 12 education career in public schools in states that require collective bargaining with teachers unions earn less money, work fewer hours, are more likely to be unemployed, and are more likely to be employed in lower - skilled jobs than are their peers in states without collective bargaining laws.

If academy trusts are sent all the money, then the academies in the trust will have far less freedom to spend their money than LA - maintained schools have.

A friend — then a sociologist and now a renowned specialty seafood purveyor — suggested a novel line: If, as Hanushek argued, spending more money wouldn't increase achievement, wouldn't spending less money have no effect on achievement either?

ran found the exact car I was looking and even found it fully loaded with every single option for less money then what a base model would have cost me.