PASabreFan Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 Kim knew this sort of thing matters to Jimmy Sometimes Jimmy and lockerrooms don't get along. During the Bills purchase, it was quite transparent what Kim's role was. If you didn't follow that closely, I suppose it could have went unnoticed. It's just a little weird that they're co-owners but one was in the spotlight more when the teams were purchased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 (edited) Yes, oh dear. Let us fan ourselves. It's not the heat, it's the humidity. Maybe Scott will have to get Scott Berchtold on the bat phone and clarify the whole situation. Whatever, man. You asked what Kim did to earn her position with the Bills. I say blechk to that. Like she needs to do anything beyond being one of the purchasers of the team in order to take a FO position. Here's what might be considered sexist and offensive... Kim sat during the initial presser while her husband spoke. Then her first assignment was redecorating the lockerroom. Am I to be blamed for not realizing, even to this day, she is co-owner? It's as if their roles are evolving, and as if their own understandings of their roles are evolving. So weird. To your question: I suggest that biases have a way of inhibiting comprehension. Kim knew this sort of thing matters to Jimmy Well-turned. Edited August 17, 2016 by That Aud Smell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 I know she's active on one of the many NFL committees, fwiw. Super Bowl planning maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 Are you in a life partnership with the owner? Are you up high in the organization? We have no idea what role she or Terry played in their professional lives before they bought the Sabres. From the information we've gotten since then, it's pretty easy to guess that it's a partnership in more ways than one. So every other spouse of every other owner in the major NA sports wasn't? You expect me to believe she's some savant in business or football that would lead her to getting this ownership any other way than through him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 So every other spouse of every other owner in the major NA sports wasn't? You expect me to believe she's some savant in business or football that would lead her to getting this ownership any other way than through him? She probably wouldn't have had $1.4 billion in cash to buy the team. But I'll be honest, I don't even know what point you're trying to make with this whole thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 You expect me to believe she's some savant in business or football that would lead her to getting this ownership any other way than through him? I'm going to go ahead and trust that you don't intend this to sound as bad as it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 I'm going to go ahead and trust that you don't intend this to sound as bad as it does.In a similar sense, why is Hal Steinbrenner the owner of the Yankees? She probably wouldn't have had $1.4 billion in cash to buy the team. But I'll be honest, I don't even know what point you're trying to make with this whole thing.I think if people are trying to paint her as a trail blazer, they choose a poor one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 In a similar sense, why is Hal Steinbrenner the owner of the Yankees? I think if people are trying to paint her as a trail blazer, they choose a poor one But why does it matter how she got there? As you say, why don't other women do what she doing? She's pushing involvement more than all but a select few women ever have in an amazingly male-dominated arena. That's the very definition of being a trail blazer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 Kim's background is in public relations and marketing or in a nutshell image. In the energy industry, that is no small challenge and is multiplied in the emotionally charged debate over fracking. Whatever her true contribution to East was in dollars and cents is probably indeterminable. But she is eminently qualified to be the business "face" of any organization. Her biggest projects to date have all been related to brand enhancement. I think you will see her be very active in these type of endeavors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 In a similar sense, why is Hal Steinbrenner the owner of the Yankees? I don't think that follows. And I don't think this is a line of thought worth following. Kim's background is in public relations and marketing or in a nutshell image. In the energy industry, that is no small challenge and is multiplied in the emotionally charged debate over fracking. Whatever her true contribution to East was in dollars and cents is probably indeterminable. But she is eminently qualified to be the business "face" of any organization. Her biggest projects to date have all been related to brand enhancement. I think you will see her be very active in these type of endeavors. All fine and well that she has some skills to bring to the table. My point really remains: She co-owns the team. That alone entitles her to a prominent FO position. If she's actually good at it (and it appears she is), that is gravy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 I don't think that follows. And I don't think this is a line of thought worth following. All fine and well that she has some skills to bring to the table. My point really remains: She co-owns the team. That alone entitles her to a prominent FO position. If she's actually good at it (and it appears she is), that is gravy. I should have prefaced my post better. It was implied up thread that her first act was to redo the locker rooms. I was trying to connect her skills in image and branding with her actions. I am and always will be a believer in the church of "If can write the check, you are qualified to be an owner, and owe nothing to anyone else regarding what you do with that asset, within the bounds of the law." Ask PA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 I should have prefaced my post better. It was implied up thread that her first act was to redo the locker rooms. I was trying to connect her skills in image and branding with her actions. I am and always will be a believer in the church of "If can write the check, you are qualified to be an owner, and owe nothing to anyone else regarding what you do with that asset, within the bounds of the law." Ask PA Quite so, quite so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 (edited) Whatever, man. You asked what Kim did to earn her position with the Bills. I say blechk to that. Like she needs to do anything beyond being one of the purchasers of the team in order to take a FO position. I didn't ask. I just like the question. I think you can tell from this thread who's attached to a ball and chain and who's uncontaminated. Edited August 17, 2016 by PASabreFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 I didn't ask. I just like the question. I think you can tell from this thread who's attached to a ball and chain and who's uncontaminated. Channeling Liger: Yeah. No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 She probably wouldn't have had $1.4 billion in cash to buy the team. But I'll be honest, I don't even know what point you're trying to make with this whole thing. Probably? There aren't that many big tippers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 I didn't ask. I just like the question. I think you can tell from this thread who's attached to a ball and chain and who's uncontaminated. Oh, dear Lord. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 Probably? There aren't that many big tippers.Yikes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 Just sk everyone knows, PA is not trolling. Because he doesn't troll. He really hates when people say he's trolling. No. He actually holds the antiquated views he's expressing. Either that, or he's trolling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 My point really remains: She co-owns the team. That alone entitles her to a prominent FO position. If she's actually good at it (and it appears she is), that is gravy. I think we've finally come around to the nub of it. Maybe WC's question should have been what did she do to earn the title of active and involved owner? I'm not a fan of sports owners doing anything along those lines. (Surprise!) Buy the team, hire good people and get out of the way. I know that's naive, because I know the wealthy buy teams to be their play things, to play fantasy GM and coach. When it's a "fan" buying "his" team -- sorry, "fans" buying "their teams -- my argument is even stronger. They should want to do what most logically will lead to success on the ice/field. And noobies making decisions is illogical. Let's follow this to its logical conclusion. I win the Powerball and, as longtime fan of movies, I buy a major studio. (It was a yuge Powerball.) Am I entitled to run the studio? Have I somehow "earned" that right? Is it smart for me to run the studio? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 Let's burn this thread like a cross at a KKK meeting. Sorry, light this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 Oh, dear Lord. It's a compliment. You've been "improved." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 Yes yes Depends Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 Just sk everyone knows, PA is not trolling. Because he doesn't troll. He really hates when people say he's trolling. No. He actually holds the antiquated views he's expressing. Either that, or he's trolling. You're the one who threw the "offensive and sexist" bomb, sir. WC did not deserve that. Let's burn this thread like a cross at a KKK meeting. Sorry, light this thread. Neo will like this. Let the market decide. Stop purchasing the thread's content. Go follow the Vesey talk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 You're the one who threw the "offensive and sexist" bomb, sir. WC did not deserve that.Oh please. Nothing Aud said was out of line.Neo will like this. Let the market decide. Stop purchasing the thread's content. Go follow the Vesey talk. I'd rather a mod nuke the thread. It embarasses me a little bit to have it on the front page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted August 17, 2016 Report Share Posted August 17, 2016 Oh please. Nothing Aud said was out of line. WC's question was a good and thought-provoking one. It could have been posed about a male spouse of a female multibillionaire. The conversation could have been a good one. It didn't have to have charges of sexism. People are seeing in it what they want to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.