|
|
if he signed a contract he should be held to it.
|
Can you guys chill out? It means nothing whichever side says the contract was allegedly binding or not. That's for the court to decide, no one else. All we have is the usual corporate propaganda.
|
I'll support col in taking legal action. Stephano and mill are definitely losing any respect they had.
|
I bet you thought that contract was real...
Nope, Chuck Testa.
(sorry for posting the pic macro thing, not sure how else to post pics)
|
i was never a big fan of stephano. he was pretty poorly mannered especially when grubby went up to him and was super nice.
|
On September 20 2011 05:30 HorsemasterK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 05:20 Zorgaz wrote:On September 20 2011 05:18 Vadrigar wrote:
Today 9:30 CET, Stephano gets a visit from Millenium Manager (MM).
MM: Good morning, Steph! What did you do, my son? Why are you doing this to me? Is it because of money?
*throws 100 euro bills at his feet*
Eh?
*throws more euros*
There! We have more money than you can ever dream for! We're the most visited site on the frenchwebz (excluding TL france of course)! You're like a son to me! Remember when you were 17 I taught you how to larva inject! I love you, my boy! You can't leave me! We're French! French stick together! Why would you go to the Americans? French have honor, dignity... *French rant for 120 minutes*
So did they make you sign a paper or something? Show it to me!
Stephano: Here it is.
*MM calls his friend Pierre who studied a year of law, but dropped out. They speak for 5 minutes.*
MM: Pfff. That's bullshit, my boy! See here, it says "This contract is valid under the laws of the state of New York." LOL New York. We're French we can do whatever we want. Take the money and stay with France I tell you!
Stephano: OK.
P.S. really disappointed in Stephano right now... Might not be too far off from the truth xd There is more truth in this than any of the Mill press releases.
I'm laughing so hard from that "story"!
He is wrong for toying (that's the best word I can get from all that was posted so far) with both teams. Looks a LOT like "real" sports (football/soccer goes through my mind), when the athlete tries to get a raise by implying some other sponsor/team is offering him more money. Tbh I think Stephano is the one really losing here.
|
what a dick move by stephano if he did sign that contract. Surely he knew what he was commiting himself to 
|
|
|
On September 20 2011 05:43 Krimancer wrote:
if he signed a contract he should be held to it.
Apparently, not in France at 4am. Who knew?
|
If Stephano only made a verbal agreement, this is NON BINDING. It's similar to what NBA's Carlos Boozer did with the Cavs before bolting to for a bigger contract with Utah years ago.
|
On September 20 2011 05:43 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 05:41 SimDawg wrote:On September 20 2011 05:38 AzurewinD wrote:On September 20 2011 05:37 havox_ wrote:On September 20 2011 05:34 Chill wrote:
Yea, this is new information. The fact that col didn't give him a real contract, and just put some "clear intentions on paper" is hugely important to the discussion. this! i want this to be read by everybody - statement by col plz? On September 20 2011 05:17 coljbass wrote:
At the end of the day I am not a lawyer but my partner Jason Lake is. Lot's of people can always say that a contract is "badly" written or it has "no value" but what I can say is that our contract very clearly spells out what we will provide and what is expected from the player. So maybe the focus should be on if someone understands the offer and accepts the offer and then signs the contract, that is probably a tad bit more important than if some clause that is necessary for a French contract is missing.
The intention of a contract is for an offer and acceptance as well as all that is required of both parties and I can safely say that our contract spells all of that out very clearly. There is no doubt that he was getting what he asked for and he should have had no doubt what he was asked for in return. I spoke to him for weeks and answered all questions. So sure we could all spend our lives focusing on something that is not worded correctly or something that is "missing" because I can assure you there is probably not a "perfect" contract out there. The more important issue is did he know what he was being asked to do and did he know what he was receiving in return and did he subsequently sign the contract and agree to the terms as they were? And the answer in this case is absolutely. I don't understand how this boils down to Jason Bass saying "it wasn't a real contract". Sounds like you're putting words in his mouth. Definitely. IMO Chill just misread this entire statement. He was commenting on the validity of a "perfect" contract and not that it was a bunch of intentions on a piece of paper. It's impossible to know exactly what it was from our perspective. Yea I 100% misread it. My mistake.
It's okay. The metagame of this whole Mill-coL dispute is getting really out of control.
|
On September 20 2011 05:41 zhurai wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 05:40 Chill wrote:On September 20 2011 05:38 AzurewinD wrote:On September 20 2011 05:37 havox_ wrote:On September 20 2011 05:34 Chill wrote:
Yea, this is new information. The fact that col didn't give him a real contract, and just put some "clear intentions on paper" is hugely important to the discussion. this! i want this to be read by everybody - statement by col plz? On September 20 2011 05:17 coljbass wrote:
At the end of the day I am not a lawyer but my partner Jason Lake is. Lot's of people can always say that a contract is "badly" written or it has "no value" but what I can say is that our contract very clearly spells out what we will provide and what is expected from the player. So maybe the focus should be on if someone understands the offer and accepts the offer and then signs the contract, that is probably a tad bit more important than if some clause that is necessary for a French contract is missing.
The intention of a contract is for an offer and acceptance as well as all that is required of both parties and I can safely say that our contract spells all of that out very clearly. There is no doubt that he was getting what he asked for and he should have had no doubt what he was asked for in return. I spoke to him for weeks and answered all questions. So sure we could all spend our lives focusing on something that is not worded correctly or something that is "missing" because I can assure you there is probably not a "perfect" contract out there. The more important issue is did he know what he was being asked to do and did he know what he was receiving in return and did he subsequently sign the contract and agree to the terms as they were? And the answer in this case is absolutely. I don't understand how this boils down to Jason Bass saying "it wasn't a real contract". Sounds like you're putting words in his mouth. My mistake I misread it. so it's a real contract again? >_> woo?
He definitely signed a contract. Now the question becomes is it considered legally binding under French law. That seems to be disputed.
|
stop posting image macros =.=
|
On September 20 2011 05:40 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 05:38 AzurewinD wrote:On September 20 2011 05:37 havox_ wrote:On September 20 2011 05:34 Chill wrote:
Yea, this is new information. The fact that col didn't give him a real contract, and just put some "clear intentions on paper" is hugely important to the discussion. this! i want this to be read by everybody - statement by col plz? On September 20 2011 05:17 coljbass wrote:
At the end of the day I am not a lawyer but my partner Jason Lake is. Lot's of people can always say that a contract is "badly" written or it has "no value" but what I can say is that our contract very clearly spells out what we will provide and what is expected from the player. So maybe the focus should be on if someone understands the offer and accepts the offer and then signs the contract, that is probably a tad bit more important than if some clause that is necessary for a French contract is missing.
The intention of a contract is for an offer and acceptance as well as all that is required of both parties and I can safely say that our contract spells all of that out very clearly. There is no doubt that he was getting what he asked for and he should have had no doubt what he was asked for in return. I spoke to him for weeks and answered all questions. So sure we could all spend our lives focusing on something that is not worded correctly or something that is "missing" because I can assure you there is probably not a "perfect" contract out there. The more important issue is did he know what he was being asked to do and did he know what he was receiving in return and did he subsequently sign the contract and agree to the terms as they were? And the answer in this case is absolutely. I don't understand how this boils down to Jason Bass saying "it wasn't a real contract". Sounds like you're putting words in his mouth. My mistake I misread it. Edit: Well, it depends how you interpret the last sentence of the first paragraph. I guess I should have said it was a real contract but not a real French contract. You can't just blow it off like "Oh, well this is way more important than some clause only applicable to French law." That's hugely important to a legitimate contract.
Regardless, I highly doubt Complexity can get anything from Millennium in a legal fight due to french laws.
|
On September 20 2011 05:43 XenClamzz wrote:
i was never a big fan of stephano. he was pretty poorly mannered especially when grubby went up to him and was super nice.
Ohh no! That's horrible, because I love grubby and this has already been staining stephano for me. Mind PMing me a fuller recount of that from your perception? Even if its just a few lines. I take my grubby and my stephano seriously ;D
|
+ Show Spoiler +On September 20 2011 05:43 Lomak wrote:I bet you thought that contract was real... ![[image loading]](http://www.sickchirpse.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Chuck-Testa.jpeg)
Well played, sir. I apologize for what must now happen. Rest assured your sacrifice will not go in vain.
The contract will not hold in France, it will hold in the US, there is no doubt coL can take legal action and make it so, practically, Stephano cannot come to the US without having to answer for his failure to comply. WHOOPS IPL!
|
On September 20 2011 05:40 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 05:38 AzurewinD wrote:On September 20 2011 05:37 havox_ wrote:On September 20 2011 05:34 Chill wrote:
Yea, this is new information. The fact that col didn't give him a real contract, and just put some "clear intentions on paper" is hugely important to the discussion. this! i want this to be read by everybody - statement by col plz? On September 20 2011 05:17 coljbass wrote:
At the end of the day I am not a lawyer but my partner Jason Lake is. Lot's of people can always say that a contract is "badly" written or it has "no value" but what I can say is that our contract very clearly spells out what we will provide and what is expected from the player. So maybe the focus should be on if someone understands the offer and accepts the offer and then signs the contract, that is probably a tad bit more important than if some clause that is necessary for a French contract is missing.
The intention of a contract is for an offer and acceptance as well as all that is required of both parties and I can safely say that our contract spells all of that out very clearly. There is no doubt that he was getting what he asked for and he should have had no doubt what he was asked for in return. I spoke to him for weeks and answered all questions. So sure we could all spend our lives focusing on something that is not worded correctly or something that is "missing" because I can assure you there is probably not a "perfect" contract out there. The more important issue is did he know what he was being asked to do and did he know what he was receiving in return and did he subsequently sign the contract and agree to the terms as they were? And the answer in this case is absolutely. I don't understand how this boils down to Jason Bass saying "it wasn't a real contract". Sounds like you're putting words in his mouth. My mistake I misread it. Edit: Well, it depends how you interpret the last sentence of the first paragraph. I guess I should have said it was a real contract but not a real French contract. You can't just blow it off like "Oh, well this is way more important than some clause only applicable to French law." That's hugely important to a legitimate contract.
The whole thing sounded like to me that he was saying he's not the legal expert but Jason Lake is and since he isn't the legal expert he can't say for sure about things that may or may not be missing. But at the same time he can say that the basic intentions of the contract were definitely there and were agreed upon by both parties.
|
On September 20 2011 05:41 Seronei wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 05:40 anrimayu wrote:On September 20 2011 05:39 vAtAZz wrote:
Stephano just said 3-4 days ago : "I stay in the Millenium Team".
They (coL) are talking about a "counter-offer". The counter offer was at 4AM, french hour. This contract has no legal value in France. So if I sign a contract to loan money at 4am in France, I can just keep the money since the contract is invalid? Sure dude. Nice 2 posts. Good luck finding lawyers or a bank open at 4 am.
Implying you need a lawyer or a bank to write a contract for a loan.
|
just let the dude be on the team he wants. no need to ruing his life with legal action. he was obviously very torn as to which team to join.
|
On September 20 2011 05:43 Lomak wrote:I bet you thought that contract was real... + Show Spoiler +
As much as I personally enjoy the Chuck Testa meme, I simply cannot sanction bringing it up in a thread on TL, much less not spoilering it.
I suggest we take this up in court.
FRENCH COURT.
TRE 'OUI BITCHES
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
