- Joined
- May 10, 2022
- Messages
- 3,582
- Reaction score
- 6,484
Maybe it’s fighter pride, maybe Conor would be able to afford better lawyers.
Who knows?
Who knows?
Cause they were shook, and Conor was in the right.
@Only Here for Attachments is the voice of reason, and always is right on with the truthUFC/Dana probably “strongly discouraged” it, or McGregor Inc. paid some proactive settlement money which seems to be his MO.
EDIT: Keep in mind this whole thing was a staged angle. UFC employees are on video briefing Conor and the crew and leading them to the bus (where camera crews just happened to be perfectly set up).
Chiesa literally lost money because of what Conor did after he was cut by the incident and no longer medically allowed to fight his opponent.
Do you have a link to that? Thank you.UFC/Dana probably “strongly discouraged” it, or McGregor Inc. paid some proactive settlement money which seems to be his MO.
EDIT: Keep in mind this whole thing was a staged angle. UFC employees are on video briefing Conor and the crew and leading them to the bus (where camera crews just happened to be perfectly set up).
After the bus incident. I heard once they still decided to still fight on the card they couldn’t sue and ufc knew that and pressured them to. Is that true?
nailed it"Hi Dana, I'm suing Conor."
"Great, by the way, we're going to offer you shit fights and make your life a living hell so you don't earn any money. Oh and enjoy the time and money you're going to spend on everything."
How exactly do you propose suing the most famous UFC fighter without it becoming public? Can't wait to hear this.Publicly suing people is wimpy as hell.
It's a really strange cultural thing in the US.
Does it happen elsewhere?
Anyway, I'm kinda glad they didn't, but that's on the basis they received some damages anyway.
These things should always happen behind closed doors, and if there's no permanent damage done you simply don't need to sue people for millions.
What's there to sue over? Their contracts say they only get paid when the fight starts. Not before. Intent to fight =/= actually did fight. Their contracts are based on the latter, not the former. There's no clause saying you get a portion of your purse for showing up for fight week. The clause is you get your purse when you actually fight. AKA he didn't take any wages away from anybody.
Combine that with the fact that Conor no doubt has better lawyers than any of them, the UFC was backing him, he has the kind of fuck you money to bury them in legal fees, and possibly offered hush money, and of course it went nowhere.
Damn, the failure is STRONG with these, lol. Oh cool, I don't have to reply, it's already been done...Except he didn't literally lose money. His contract is that he only gets paid when the fight starts.
"Show money" doesn't mean "showing up to fight week".
Are you retarded?
If you have a wage job and I injured your leg and you can no longer go to work as a result of what I did to your leg, you can sue me for damages and you would win. You normally wouldn't receive pay unless you clocked in, but because of what I did to your leg I was directly responsible for you being unable to clock into your job. As a result of said incident I can be sued for the amount of hours you would or did miss.
Publicly suing people is wimpy as hell.
It's a really strange cultural thing in the US.
Does it happen elsewhere?
Anyway, I'm kinda glad they didn't, but that's on the basis they received some damages anyway.
These things should always happen behind closed doors, and if there's no permanent damage done you simply don't need to sue people for millions.
Do you have a link to that? Thank you.
NDA’s as part of settlements to keep claims out of courts/trials, obviously. Not sure how much more you need spelled out
Hold on, I am actually very curious. What in the actual f*** are you talking about?
I said Conor got in trouble, he had to stand in front of a criminal court and people brought suits against him in civil court.
When Conor was in criminal court, the things you alleged would 100% come out.
Your response to this was “ndas wud prevent it from coming out”
Now you are changing the response and saying NDAs would have prevented the trial in the first place?
How tf does this make any sense, he already stood in front of a judge