Sentences with phrase «means leaving money on the table»

NovelRank has always been about helping out the little guy authors, and that won't change even if it means leaving money on the table.

For others, it means leaving money on the table and paying more than necessary.

But for many homeowners, it also means leaving money on the table.

As I explained to him, one of the biggest problems was not that the points expired but that it was hard to use the remaining points effectively because Wells Fargo had a minimum redemption threshold: he had to redeem enough points for at least a ~ $ 400 ticket, meaning you left money on the table if you wanted anything cheaper.

That means you leave money on the table if your ticket would normally cost less.

Accepting this offer almost always means leaving money on the table.

This is the fastest way to «recover» from a low appraisal, but it could mean leaving money on the table.

If you aren't prepared, that could mean leaving money on the table.

Not exact matches

Still, the massive price increase means that Mulesoft left money on the table when it offered because it could have set its IPO price higher than $ 17, potentially raising more money from investors.

That pricing gap meant that Snap effectively left $ 1.2 billion on the table, money that could instead be shoring up Snap's fast - dwindling coffers.

There are more people browsing for products on their mobile devices than ever before, and not using a quick and simple checkout solution could mean leaving a lot of money on the table.

That means you all are leaving money on the table when you could be backing potentially successful companies if only you understood their customers.

That means you are leaving $ 1,800 of free money on the table!

Neglecting to take advantage of this benefit means you could be leaving money on the table as every working year goes by.

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

Unless the wheels completely come off the franchise, a new deal for Bynum is almost assured because those that know him say he will not leave the money on the table to walk away and Philly has been given some level of assurance that Bynum is OK with what this new situation means for him.

However, that doesn't mean you should leave money on the table, and the Westgate Superbook in Las Vegas has released their odds for the men and women's field hockey tournaments.

It was outside the scope of the study, but Florida recently lengthened the vesting period from six to eight years, meaning even more teachers are likely to become ex-teachers before qualifying for pension benefits, leaving even more money on the table.

For these teachers, leaving the classroom means leaving a substantial pot of money on the table.

Choosing cash over credit means «consumers are leaving that money on the table,» Pukas said.

Investing any less basically means you're leaving money on the table — but if you contribute more than that optimal amount, you're not able to squeeze any more grant money out of the feds.

This means they are leaving money on the table every transaction, which is completely unnecessary and avoidable.

Not putting that money to work in investments or your retirement accounts means you're leaving opportunities to grow your wealth on the table.

This means my dad could only redeem for tickets costing $ 437.50 or more without leaving money on the table.

This means big law firms won't leave money on the table.

Boris Lavent is an accident lawyer that knows how to fully value a claim, and we'll ensure that you don't leave any money on the table, whether that means going to court for a verdict or negotiating a settlement.

However, our study also found that current real estate listings in the multiple listing services (MLSs) do not contain sufficient information to market these homes accordingly — meaning that sellers are essentially leaving money on the table.