• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Kobe and Wife file for divorce

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't have much to say here but I just want to say a prenup isn't a guarantee of anything. In certain states (and I'm guessing California is one of them) a prenup can be nullified depending on the length of marriage and the circumstances of the split. The only certain way to avoid losing money in a relationship split is to remain forever single (even living together or staying together for a long time is risky because of common-law marriage laws) and I don't think many people want to be single forever.

On a personal note it's a little weird to think that Vanessa is only a few years older than me and has already been married for 10+ years.
 
It's a partnership. Don't join into one if you don't want to be partners with someone.

Kobe may lose a lot of money but it'll hurt him a hell of a lot less than the average guy who gets nailed in the divorce + child support. Financially, not much about his life will change so it's hard for me to worry that much about it.
Pretty much hit my two points in general fashion.

Marriage is a partnership. Like any partnership, certain rights within that partnership are governed by contracted terms, or, in the absence of a contract, prevailing law. In this case, the law states sans contract the ownership of assets of each partner is 50%. The subjective value of Kobe or Vanessa's contribution to the partnership is irrelevant; the two of them agreed, in part by failure to contract alternatively, that Vanessa's contribution was worth 50%.

In any case, it's hard for me to care much about the exact percentage split since both of them are going to end up with more money than they can spend in their lifetime.
 
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ba...8217-s-wife-files-for-divorce?urn=nba-wp11952



kobe_bryants_wife_files_for_divorce.jpg




I'd say it's a wrap for the Lakers 2011-2012 season no?

He actually plays better in "fuck the world" mode lol. Sucks for the kids but it is what it is. Maybe the Jeter/Klooney model really is the best for male celebs
 
She was his wife. She bore him children. She raised those children. It was expected of her to not pursue her own career goals because she was his wife and he was the provider. She fulfilled that supportive role in the public eye while he achieved his goals. She stood by his side, before the entire nation, in the face of allegations that Kobe was a cheater at best and a rapist at worst. She continued to stand by his side for years, even after countless allegations and rumors of infidelity.

Vanessa, girl you better get your half.

She was a freaking music video chick when she met him lol. Yeah that really entitles her to half his fortune plus spousal support!
 
I honestly like Kobe. I just think the support he gets in this thread is comical. The most vehement support is from Lakers fans, which is expected, but still comical.

No one defending him being a cheater. It's just the principle of a spouse automatically getting half even though they've contributed little to the total finances of the marriage. I bet you'd see a lot of the same posters in a similar thread even if Kobe wasnt involved

I'm a fan of his but him apparently being a serial cheater sullies it a bit. Especially after he should have changed considering the rape accusations! Unfortunately for him, this divorce will have people talking about that again lol
 
You completely ignored my points on the video game industry. You run a forum that is dedicated to the support of an industry that doesn't cure diseases. Plenty of game designer make a lot more money than researchers. You're okay with this?

I ignored it because it's a silly point. Of course video game designers don't deserve to make that much money. I'm not sure what you were expecting -- did you think I'd fumble it and say, "Oh you're right, now that you relate it to video games, I can see how superficial entertainment really matters."

No. Of course both basketball and video games are superficial and ultimately meaningless, and in an ideal world, of course people shouldn't be paid millions of dollars to play/make them. Again, in an ideal world. Of course, in the real world, video game designers really aren't paid that much money; it's largely a middle class job. The people who make the big bucks are the businessmen -- i.e. not the people who make games, but the people who run companies.

So your point is silly for two reasons: first, because videogames are obviously superficial entertainment and of course I agree that designers shouldn't be millionaires, and second, because almost none of them are millionaires anyway.

Also, let's not forget all of the money Kobe helps bring in for other people. Janitors, ticket sellers, delivery men, security guards, etc feed their families because guys like Kobe can put a ball through a hoop. What about all of the federal and state taxes paid by these people and the businesses that employ them? Taxes that will help fund schools, medical research, and social programs for the needy. There's most certainly objective value there.

What are you arguing here? That Kobe's wealth trickles down some, so in a way he helps other people out? I can't even begin to understand where this is coming from; you're heading far off in to strawman territory. I am not arguing that Kobe Bryant is a terrible person and everyone should be ashamed to care about him. I am saying that he doesn't deserve to make the money he makes, so if you're going to start giving people only what they "deserve," then not only would Kobe's wife lose out, but so would Kobe himself. That is, if we start imagining worlds where people only get what they "deserve."

Okay, let's be direct here: are you arguing that in an ideal world, people who shoot balls through hoops would be at the top of the economic heap, as they are now? That in an ideal world, basketball players deserve to earn millions, while teachers and educators and firemen and soldiers earn a tiny fraction of that amount? Just a yes or no answer, please.
 
Okay, let's be direct here: are you arguing that in an ideal world, people who shoot balls through hoops would be at the top of the economic heap, as they are now? That in an ideal world, basketball players deserve to earn millions, while teachers and educators and firemen and soldiers earn a tiny fraction of that amount? Just a yes or no answer, please.
Well people who shoot balls through hoops or goals or whatever are paid in function of the money made by the sports industry they're in. Seeing as how they are the main attraction I find it only logical that they get that much money.

But I do think that people working in service of society should be paid in regards to the service they provide so that they feel valued by society for their work. You do not want firemen/policemen/teachers etc to be pissed because of their work conditions, pay rates.

Both facts are independent, sports stars aren't taking money out of anyone pockets apart from those who watch those sports.
 
She only stuck with his lying, cheating, scum-bag ass for years AFTER a rape scandal, and bore him children...but yeah, how DARE she divorce an upstanding gent like Kobe Bryant. And FUCK if she thinks she deserves anything...

Never change, GAF...

She doesn't deserve a cent.
 
it'll be bullshit if his wife gets half? 100+ million cause he cheated? hahahahahhahaha

i don;t think people ar erealizing how much fucking money that is. omygod

Not saying she doesn't deserve anything but not anything close to half, plus she'll be getting child support. ahahahah
 
Okay, let's be direct here: are you arguing that in an ideal world, people who shoot balls through hoops would be at the top of the economic heap, as they are now? That in an ideal world, basketball players deserve to earn millions, while teachers and educators and firemen and soldiers earn a tiny fraction of that amount? Just a yes or no answer, please.

Someone else mentioned this before but doesn't the difficulty of becoming a teacher vs. a pro athlete like Kobe factor into this? A rare commodity is always more valuable in terms of economics. I could get my teaching cert and become a teacher in a couple years, but I'll never be anything remotely close to an NBA baller.
 
Someone else mentioned this before but doesn't the difficulty of becoming a teacher vs. a pro athlete like Kobe factor into this? A rare commodity is always more valuable in terms of economics. I could get my teaching cert and become a teacher in a couple years, but I'll never be anything remotely close to an NBA baller.

The reason this is true is that there is already so much money in being a basketball player, that only the very best basketball players can make it to the top. However, lots of the people who would theoretically be the very best teachers are not teachers at all, because there is far more money elsewhere.

You've got causality backwards; it isn't that "only the best" choose to be basketball players, so therefore they should earn a lot of money; basketball players already earn a lot of money, so millions of people are willing to do it, and out of that huge group, only the best make it. If you could earn millions being a teacher, then the competition for being a teacher would become incredibly intense and only the very best would make it there, as well.
 
It doesn't matter. He knew the law when he got married, so why have any sympathy for him?

Why have sympathy for illegals who are deported.

Why have sympathy for people who are jailed for holding pot.

Why have sympathy for people who have their buisnessed fined or closed by some archaic law.

It's stupid.


Okay, let's be direct here: are you arguing that in an ideal world, people who shoot balls through hoops would be at the top of the economic heap, as they are now? That in an ideal world, basketball players deserve to earn millions, while teachers and educators and firemen and soldiers earn a tiny fraction of that amount? Just a yes or no answer, please.
Opiate, i like you but that is a stupid argument. In an ideal world, people will make what people are willing to pay for them. People are more willing to pay the the 5% of society who are exceptional athletes than the 90% of society who can be passable teachers.
 
The reason this is true is that there is already so much money in being a basketball player, that only the very best basketball players can make it to the top. However, lots of the people who would theoretically be the very best teachers are not teachers at all, because there is far more money elsewhere.

You've got causality backwards; it isn't that "only the best" choose to be basketball players, so therefore they should earn a lot of money; basketball players already earn a lot of money, so millions of people are willing to do it, and out of that huge group, only the best make it. If you could earn millions being a teacher, then the competition for being a teacher would become incredibly intense and only the very best would make it there, as well.

Damn, that just destroyed my post. I agree...
 
Opiate, i like you but that is a stupid argument. In an ideal world, people will make what people are willing to pay for them. People are more willing to pay the the 5% of society who are exceptional athletes than the 90% of society who can be passable teachers.

You are describing the real world. I agree, in the real world, that is how the economy operates.

Also in the real world, Kobe's wife gets half his money.
 
You are describing the real world. I agree, in the real world, that is how the economy operates.

Also in the real world, Kobe's wife gets half his money.

Yeah because in the real world family law regarding divorce is fucking moronic, and morally should probably be changed.
 
Have you ever been in a relationship ?

I'm going to ignore your question and instead defend my point. Obviously it wasn't such a big deal for her if she waited EIGHT YEARS to divorce him. The divorce may have not been about that at all. Maybe he wouldn't have to cheat if the divorce didn't so heavily favor his wife... he could have ended that shit and moved on.

What's your solution? Please suggest a good ratio or dollar amount that will fit all cases of divorce, thanks.



It's called a prenup.

Why isn't it capped at a ratio followed by a maximum dollar value after? Why does she need 180 million dollars?
 
Yeah because in the real world family law regarding divorce is fucking moronic, and morally should probably be changed.

And also our willingness to pay millions of dollars to people who play meaningless games is moronic, and morally should probably be changed.
 
These marriage rules need to be updated it seem. Apparently they are stuck in 1960s or something.


And also in the real world our willingness to pay people who throw balls through hoops millions of dollars is moronic, and we should stop that.

Hah it's more to it than throwing a ball through a hoop. You make it sound so easy.

Splitting atoms
Sit at a desk
Babysit kids
Make food hot
Tell army what to do
 
And also our willingness to pay millions of dollars to people who play meaningless games is moronic, and morally should probably be changed.

Except that there is nothing moronic about it. People are willing to pay for it. No one is ripping money out of their bank account in the name of keeping societal values.
 
Except that there is nothing moronic about it. People are willing to pay for it. No one is ripping money out of their bank account in the name of keeping societal values.

There's nothing moronic about our marriage laws, then. People willingly enter in to marriage. Our societal values dictate that the spouse should get half the money upon divorce.
 
I'm going to ignore your question and instead defend my point. Obviously it wasn't such a big deal for her if she waited EIGHT YEARS to divorce him. The divorce may have not been about that at all. Maybe he wouldn't have to cheat if the divorce didn't so heavily favor his wife... he could have ended that shit and moved on.



Why isn't it capped at a ratio followed by a maximum dollar value after? Why does she need 180 million dollars?

What ratio? What maximum dollar amount?
 
There's nothing moronic about our marriage laws, then. People willingly enter in to marriage. Our societal values dictate that the spouse should get half the money upon divorce.

Because during a period of time when women were under represented in jobs, it made sense. That is no longer the case. Society has changed, and so should the rules. Women are equal, if not more successful in our economy and academics, yet when it comes to divorce we should view them as if they are second class citizens who get special treatment?

I should also add the societal views of sports have changed as well. The recent lockouts have lowered the future earnings potential of many athletes. The heyday of free agency and obscene contracts are largely gone in the NBA and the NFL. Reality caught up to them. When will it catch up to family court?

What ratio? What maximum dollar amount?

How about the a ratio of the standard cost of living in her immediate area. That along with spousal support(lol) will mean she will be filthy rich until she dies, despite never working a day for the past 10 years.
 
spouse should get living expenses paid for and a few million. Did she put in 50% of the work at the gym, at practise, when K8 played 60+ games every season, made the all star team, won the rings.No? then she shouldnt get half.
 
What ratio? What maximum dollar amount?

What are you trying to get at? We need to do research and post a solution with specific numbers if we think some woman shouldn't get 180 million for divorcing a rich man? I'm not in a position to know what type of help she, or other any other woman, needs to survive after the divorce but I know it's a lot lower than what she's getting.
 
And also our willingness to pay millions of dollars to people who play meaningless games is moronic, and morally should probably be changed.
Jerry buss said Kobe Braynt brings him in 100 million dollars per year, so I'd say his pay is more then fair.
 
What are you trying to get at? We need to do research and post a solution with specific numbers if we think some woman shouldn't get 180 million for divorcing a rich man? I'm not in a position to know what type of help she, or other any other woman, needs to survive after the divorce but I know it's a lot lower than what she's getting.

Was Kobe worth 360 million when she married him? Hardly.

The bulk of that was money accumulated during the marriage. It is not on you or anyone else but the standing law to determine the "worth" of her contribution to the legally binding and mutual partnership known as marriage. This is so straightforward I don't see how anyone could be feeling sorry for Kobe or lashing out at Vanessa.
 
He cheated, and she knew that. It obviously wasn't that big of a deal and she knew exactly what she was getting into in the first place, especially if she was a music video girl. That being said she probably just didn't enjoy being with him any more. They were together a long time and people can easily drift apart, especially people with the means and celebrity they have. So I say good luck to her on the ending of their relationship.

With that being said, she probably doesn't deserve the money she will likely get and spousal support should be outlawed. I just wonder besides whatever she will get outright what kind of ridiculous child support she will get. Child support is a really broken system. Needs to be thrown out completely and replaced with some sort of saner situation.
 
No prenups means he fucked up and will serve as yet another example for young stars. There are steps one can take to protect himself from stuff like this and he was too young or dumb to realize it was needed. I'm not going to go oh u go girl get that money because I think Vanessa from the start was an opportunistic leech, but it's Kobe's fault for:

1: cheating
2: possibly raping
3: not signing a prenup

Besides, who gives a fuck, he's still going to be extraordinarily rich.
 
Was Kobe worth 360 million when she married him? Hardly.

The bulk of that was money accumulated during the marriage. It is not on you or anyone else but the standing law to determine the "worth" of her contribution to the legally binding and mutual partnership known as marriage. This is so straightforward I don't see how anyone could be feeling sorry for Kobe or lashing out at Vanessa.

The law should be updated. That's what many of us have been saying. We know that she's going to get half, nobody is arguing that piece of information.
 
Except that there is nothing moronic about it. People are willing to pay for it. No one is ripping money out of their bank account in the name of keeping societal values.

Actually, most money in professional sports is generated by tv contracts.

And most people (judging from ratings) that own tvs don't watch sports.

But everyone who has a cable/satellite bill helps support professional sports regardless if they watch them or not.

So, it kinda is like that, in a way.

If professional sports contracts were solely funded by ticket sales, it would be a different matter entirely.
 
He cheated, and she knew that. It obviously wasn't that big of a deal and she knew exactly what she was getting into in the first place, especially if she was a music video girl. That being said she probably just didn't enjoy being with him any more. They were together a long time and people can easily drift apart, especially people with the means and celebrity they have. So I say good luck to her on the ending of their relationship.

With that being said, she probably doesn't deserve the money she will likely get and spousal support should be outlawed. I just wonder besides whatever she will get outright what kind of ridiculous child support she will get. Child support is a really broken system. Needs to be thrown out completely and replaced with some sort of saner situation.

The fact that she chose to stay with him doesn't despite his cheating doesn't in any way transfer blame from him to her in the marriage. Kobe is still a cheating dog and it's not made any more forgivable because she should have "known better."

In fact, the courts will view the fact that she stayed in her favor: it indicates that she "tried to make the marriage work" in spite of adversity and continued infidelity on his part.
 
Because during a period of time when women were under represented in jobs, it made sense. That is no longer the case. Society has changed, and so should the rules. Women are equal, if not more successful in our economy and academics, yet when it comes to divorce we should view them as if they are second class citizens who get special treatment?

I should also add the societal views of sports have changed as well. The recent lockouts have lowered the future earnings potential of many athletes. The heyday of free agency and obscene contracts are largely gone in the NBA and the NFL. Reality caught up to them. When will it catch up to family court?

I absolutely agree -- the reason women get more money in divorce is that we typically view them as weaker and less capable, even if that is not objectively the case. Similarly -- as you point out here -- basketball is only "Valuable" because our society has decided to place subjective value on it. If Kobe lived at almost any other point in history, his skillset would have been nearly worthless, because basketball either did not exist or simply wasn't as popular. So even if the basketball provides no objective value, we still pay them well because our societal values suggest we should.

I personally hope our society stops holding silly, idiosyncratic values in all forms. I hope we stop thinking of women as less than men. I also hope we can place more value on objectively beneficial professions that provide meaningful, scientific advancements to our society.

As such, I hope we stop giving divorcees half their husband's money, and I also hope we stop putting athletes at the top of our economic ladder. Our societal values will have to change for both to come about.

Hopefully, we agree on this. Let me know if I'm wrong!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom