O/U: Browns Super Bowl ticket?
-
SportsAndLady
You seriously don't think saying "I get info faster and usually info that most people don't get" isn't spouting off? What possibly more could he have said to make it spouting off? lolCommander of Awesome;1078363 wrote:Hardly him spouting off as the know it all you claimed.
And sleeper is right..BR just posts articles or blogs on here, which yeah is nice, but it also has to do w/ his personal vendettas against the Browns/Browns players. Like, if a blog post was stating how the Browns need to part ways w/ McCoy you best believe BR is posting that shit on here.
Or he'll post "pipe dreams" like Calvin Johnson to the Browns! LOL -
Con_Alma
That franchise is publicly traded???sleeper;1078356 wrote:Really? Tell me Con_Alma, who owns a publicly traded company? -
Con_Almapssst there are also differences between investors and shareholders.
-
sleeper
Semantics, Con_Alama, nothing more than semantics.Con_Alma;1078394 wrote:pssst there are also differences between investors and shareholders.
The franchise is not publicly traded but investor and owner CAN be used interchangeably. A person who buys stock in Exxon is 'investing'(aka is an investor) in Exxon and owns(as in owner) of Exxon. You're playing games with words in an attempt to make my claim(which I now know to keep my investments private because Chatter scrutiny is absurd) illegitimate. It's not. Enjoy. -
Con_AlmaI have never suggested anywhere including this thread that you do not own what you say you own.
An investor and an owner are not interchangeable.
One can invest in a business without purchasing equity ownership in it. It's not semantics. When it comes to stock that is a direct equity purchase. When it comes to your agreement with the franchise owner it depends on the investment terms you have with him....of which of course I have not referred to at all.
I always enjoy Ohio Chatter. Thanks. -
sleeper
I don't know what you are arguing. They can definitely be interchangeable. I just gave you an example of it. Don't be dense. Thanks.Con_Alma;1078406 wrote:I have never suggested anywhere including this thread that you do not own what you say you own.
An investor and an owner are not interchangeable.
One can invest in a business without purchasing equity ownership in it. It's not semantics. When it comes to stock that is a direct equity purchase. When it comes to your agreement with the franchise owner it depends on the investment terms you have with him....of which of course I have not referred to at all.
I always enjoy Ohio Chatter. Thanks. -
Commander of Awesome
No, I took it as "I'm a big browns fans and look around the internet for articles most people on here probably wont see or find."SportsAndLady;1078379 wrote:You seriously don't think saying "I get info faster and usually info that most people don't get" isn't spouting off? What possibly more could he have said to make it spouting off? lol
QQidontlikeBRQQ -
Con_Alma
It's very clear to me that you don't' know which is why I commented on it.sleeper;1078409 wrote:I don't know what you are arguing. They can definitely be interchangeable. I just gave you an example of it. Don't be dense. Thanks.
A person can invest in a company without acquiring equity ownership. That means the two terms are not the same thing. -
sleeper
I agree. You can, but the other way is possible as well. Investor and owner can​ be used interchangeably, that was the entire point. They not always but they are used in some cases.Con_Alma;1078418 wrote:It's very clear to me that you don't' know which is why I commented on it.
A person can invest in a company without acquiring equity ownership. That means the two terms are not the same thing. -
SportsAndLady
Commander of Awesome;1078410 wrote:No, I took it as "I'm a big browns fans and look around the internet for articles most people on here probably wont see or find."
Which is exactly sleepers point..thanks! -
sleeper
That's what I was saying the whole time. I can go look around for Browns articles too and pretend like I know what I'm talking about.Commander of Awesome;1078410 wrote:No, I took it as "I'm a big browns fans and look around the internet for articles most people on here probably wont see or find." -
Con_Alma
Yes and that's why the details are important. If you go back to my original post on the topic. They are not the same things.sleeper;1078431 wrote:I agree. You can, but the other way is possible as well. Investor and owner can​ be used interchangeably, that was the entire point. They not always but they are used in some cases. -
queencitybuckeye
More correctly, one is a subset of the other.sleeper;1078431 wrote:I agree. You can, but the other way is possible as well. Investor and owner can​ be used interchangeably, that was the entire point. They not always but they are used in some cases. -
sleeper
I'd rather not argue semantics or talk about in which situations an owner isn't an investor and/or vice versa. Pointless discussion, I think everyone here can use Google.
-
Skyhook79
Just like anyone can claim they own a McDonald's Franchise.sleeper;1078479 wrote:I'd rather not argue semantics or talk about in which situations an owner isn't an investor and/or vice versa. Pointless discussion, I think everyone here can use Google. -
sleeper
If they want to claim they own a McDonald's franchise, by all means go ahead. Doesn't matter to me, I'm not sure why it bothers everyone on here that I do, in fact, own(invest if you ask Con_Alma) a McDonald's franchise. It's been a great decision, I'm happy with it.Skyhook79;1078482 wrote:Just like anyone can claim they own a McDonald's Franchise. -
Con_Alma
Being an investor isn't necessarily a subset of being an owner. A person can be an investor and not have equity ownership.queencitybuckeye;1078447 wrote:More correctly, one is a subset of the other. -
Con_Alma
I have never questioned nor commented on whether you are an owner or investor...ever.sleeper;1078484 wrote:If they want to claim they own a McDonald's franchise, by all means go ahead. Doesn't matter to me, I'm not sure why it bothers everyone on here that I do, in fact, own(invest if you ask Con_Alma) a McDonald's franchise. It's been a great decision, I'm happy with it. -
Commander of Awesome
No Sleep commented on "insider info" which BR never claimed to have. Try and keep up.SportsAndLady;1078433 wrote:Which is exactly sleepers point..thanks! -
queencitybuckeye
I was going the opposite direction, but the more I think about it, there are too many cases where owners aren't investors for it to be accurate. You're right, they are two separate things.Con_Alma;1078500 wrote:Being an investor isn't necessarily a subset of being an owner. A person can be an investor and not have equity ownership. -
SportsAndLady
Commander of Awesome;1078505 wrote:No Sleep commented on "insider info" which BR never claimed to have. Try and keep up.
Wow this is flying way over your head LOL -
Con_Almaqueencitybuckeye;1078519 wrote:I was going the opposite direction, but the more I think about it, there are too many cases where owners aren't investors for it to be accurate. You're right, they are two separate things.
...but that's just semantics.
-
Commander of Awesome
That's what I'd say if I was made to look idiotic too.SportsAndLady;1078535 wrote:Wow this is flying way over your head LOL -
SportsAndLady
"I get info quick and info that no one on here gets" = inside info...you're a fucking retardCommander of Awesome;1078551 wrote:That's what I'd say if I was made to look idiotic too.