As far as I can tell, this is all true. @Midnighter really needs to start vetting his Twitter re-posts more carefully.Wait--is this the Boom Enterprise (or whatever it's called) thing that came up like 3-5 years ago? I thought it was established they only create technology and both are investors but not partners. Really seems misleading if it's the same thing
As far as I can tell, this is all true. @Midnighter really needs to start vetting his Twitter re-posts more carefully.
Actually reading into it, I wouldn't see it as a problem at all. But the headline will grab eyeballs and make people assume something is bad with the relationship.
If it’s on Twitter it’s gotta be trueSo posting another tweet that again has misleading information is supposed to change something?
So posting another tweet that again has misleading information is supposed to change something?
Can you prove otherwise? At a minimum it’s a conflict of interest. I get we’re numb to that these days but no one has disproved these two are investors in companies/products that compromise the integrity of their positions. Cheers.
Erial is a good poster overall, but he has a penchant for opposing the prevailing opinion here on most any subject.
If Matt Campbell and Jerry McGinn both own stock in Uber, is there a conflict of interest for McGinn to be put on one of our games? They aren't "business partners", they both happened to invest in the same company. The company's website lists out their 14 biggest investors, and neither of these two are invested to that level. Claiming that there is a "conflict of interest" for two people that have invested in the same company is pretty ridiculous.Can you prove otherwise? At a minimum it’s a conflict of interest. I get we’re numb to that these days but no one has disproved these two are investors in companies/products that compromise the integrity of their positions. Cheers.
If Matt Campbell and Jerry McGinn both own stock in Uber, is there a conflict of interest for McGinn to be put on one of our games? They aren't "business partners", they both happened to invest in the same company. The company's website lists out their 14 biggest investors, and neither of these two are invested to that level. Claiming that there is a "conflict of interest" for two people that have invested in the same company is pretty ridiculous.
And to claim that Schefter and Kraft "own gambling companies" ignores the facts that they are minority investors...and calling it a "gambling company" gets clicks, but it's not like they own a sportsbook (or own a casino like NBA/NHL owners have done without issue).
And, why would it matter if Schefter has tweeted the word "Russini"? That's a lazy way of checking if he's reported on the story. Spending 3 minutes looking will show you he has in tweets like these...
Probably because the prevailing opinion is often wrong.Erial is a good poster overall, but he has a penchant for opposing the prevailing opinion here on most any subject.
Probably because the prevailing opinion is often wrong.
It's not--he also shouldn't have been posting the woman's nameCan you prove otherwise? At a minimum it’s a conflict of interest. I get we’re numb to that these days but no one has disproved these two are investors in companies/products that compromise the integrity of their positions. Cheers.
You can "worry" about anything you want but this is just odd. Schefter is one of the best in the business period.How are opinions ‘wrong’ exactly? They’re subjective. Thinking an opinion is right or wrong is the prevailing issue here for the most part - no one has disputed the facts save they’re ‘insignificant’ or ‘inconsequential’. Ok. Entitled to *your* opinion.
Ok. In my opinion, the sky is red. Prove me wrong.How are opinions ‘wrong’ exactly? They’re subjective. Thinking an opinion is right or wrong is the prevailing issue here for the most part - no one has disputed the facts save they’re ‘insignificant’ or ‘inconsequential’. Ok. Entitled to *your* opinion.
Let's start with your subject: "The More You Know: Adam Schefter is partners with Robert Kraft in a gambling company."How are opinions ‘wrong’ exactly? They’re subjective. Thinking an opinion is right or wrong is the prevailing issue here for the most part - no one has disputed the facts save they’re ‘insignificant’ or ‘inconsequential’. Ok. Entitled to *your* opinion.
Ok. In my opinion, the sky is red. Prove me wrong.
Let's start with your subject: "The More You Know: Adam Schefter is partners with Robert Kraft in a gambling company."
Do you feel it's appropriate to call two people that are minority investors in the same company "partners"? If you and I both own stock in IBM, would it be appropriate to call us "partners"?
And is there a "conflict of interest" for two people that have invested in the same company to have a working relationship, as was claimed by the tweet you posted? Your tweet even referred to it as "collusion".
Lastly, do you feel that it's an accurate depiction to claim that Schefter and Kraft "own the company"? If so, I guess I have a new flex since I can claim to "own" any company that I hold stock in at any point in time. "Drinks on me tonight, I own Apple".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is like the worst kind of clickbait...the "let me ask a question with some misleading facts, half-truths, irrelevant info, etc", and then leave it to others to disprove that what was said is correct. And you buy it hook, line, and sinker. I give a bunch of tweets where Schefter covers the Patriots story, but your response is "Tweet said he hasn’t said the word Russini. You didn’t disprove that.". Why would it possibly matter if that word was specifically used in any of his tweets?
Probably because the prevailing opinion is often wrong.
This is a problem.
Let's start with your subject: "The More You Know: Adam Schefter is partners with Robert Kraft in a gambling company."
Do you feel it's appropriate to call two people that are minority investors in the same company "partners"? If you and I both own stock in IBM, would it be appropriate to call us "partners"?
And is there a "conflict of interest" for two people that have invested in the same company to have a working relationship, as was claimed by the tweet you posted? Your tweet even referred to it as "collusion".
Lastly, do you feel that it's an accurate depiction to claim that Schefter and Kraft "own the company"? If so, I guess I have a new flex since I can claim to "own" any company that I hold stock in at any point in time. "Drinks on me tonight, I own Apple".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is like the worst kind of clickbait...the "let me ask a question with some misleading facts, half-truths, irrelevant info, etc", and then leave it to others to disprove that what was said is correct. And you buy it hook, line, and sinker. I give a bunch of tweets where Schefter covers the Patriots story, but your response is "Tweet said he hasn’t said the word Russini. You didn’t disprove that.". Why would it possibly matter if that word was specifically used in any of his tweets?
This is a problem.
That said, you are swimming upstream - and there will be another new river of nonsense flowing tomorrow (and the next day, and the next)
Ignore us...research what Boom Entertainment is. Reality is always just beyond your grasp.Grunt Green and Loado... there's 2 credible sources.
![]()
A mid- summer Midnighter poll is needed!This is just Midnighter more firmly cementing his status as drunk grandpa who gets duped by fake Facebook conspiracies.
From once proud poster, to now being aligned with crazy laka and even crazier JohnJumba.
Hopefully we get a post stating that he's entering into treatment and we should respect his privacy during this difficult time.