Tiger Woods & Christensen...

What we can learn is to only publish "official" secrets and not dig too deep into who is owning which yacht when not published before. Today privacy is very much about security and this we must respect.

I rather send a message or mail if some member here want to know such things, than publish names that will be picked up by search engines...

All's Fair...

50 LARGE for compensatory damages vs. cost of the yacht (20 Large).
Ok, ok, now I fully understand how this "the rich get richer" things works.
As a mere imp of satan, I cannot claim to be a true demon - but I'm willing to learn!
(I guess that being boarded in Puerto Rico by Homeland Defense officials recently did not sit well either aboard "Privacy".)

There are many figures in the air, a claim that could top 50 mill but at least 75.000 is to read here; http://ybw.com/ibinews/newsdesk/20041005114756ibinews.html
They must have got the price of the yacht wrong though...

In the end Christensen might benefit from the publicity which Tiger´s lawsuit causes and this alone might be of higher value than what Tiger can gain...?

I'm not sure this lawsuit is well founded...

Tiger Woods is a public figure, therefore maintaining anonomity is difficult. It was only a matter of time before his "Privacy" became public.

If Tiger Woods was really concerned about privacy, he would have let this slide, as the damage was already done. This lawsuit only serves to raise awareness, which effectively makes this whole issue MORE public. Also, I would have to seriously question the validity of this claim, because his yacht would have a record of ownership, which is probably under a corporate name. Therefore, Tiger would (or should) be listed and THAT'S public information.

This lawsuit just might backfire and leave Christensen as benefactor of the press.

Just my .02 cents.

A well publicized CG boarding had already "outed" the ownership of the vessel and the name. It has been mentioned elsewhere that the boat is actually in Mr. Woods’s wife's name. (This could be just a rumor, or it could be true)

I am more concerned about the appearance of the industry.

Tad

I would suggest to read the full story here to avoid more rumours and misunderstandings of the matter; http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1103041tigerwoods1.html

So what are you saying, let everybody who signs legal contracts off the hook because it doesnt really matter?

No, not at all. If you don't adhere to a legally binding contract, you suffer the consequences. However, there are two sides to every story and we don't know how accurate the claims are against Christensen. Attorney's have a way of manipulating the truth... especially when lots of money is involved. Just have to wait and see.

All's fair...

Excellent. Good points all.
Still, I'm inclined to think the man has a legitimate issue.
We'll see....

Four years ago, this ad was published...., almost worth a free repeat here?

So good....

...., that now I have to know whose ad that was.
Prescient, no?

Hehe... prescient. Good choice of words. Classic Feadship Ad.