So, yeah, Michaels is wrong, but comparing rates across income levels not adjusted for inflation is dumb. For example, $250k in 1975 is more than $1million in today’s dollars.

Who the fuck cares. Let people gamble if they want.

Why not?

Yeah, no I get it. I’m saying the thought of working 18-20 weekends a year for $170-$200k sounds so good that I wouldn’t work another job.

That’s ... impressive (?)

Ok...?

OK, but it is the average, no? What is the minimum if the average is going to be $200,000+ in a few years?

So we’re shitting on the MLS again? Cool.

Uh, they make $173,000 per year, and still work another job?

Dyson doesn’t want the game to be more like backyard wiffle ball games? This is when baseball is most fun.

“Act like a professional” aka I want to say something racist

So: Get outside, don’t think about work after 5pm, eat an early dinner, and avoid booze? In other words, I’m fucked.

Christ. The FBI and DOJ is investigating fantasy football? This is so absurd. Just let people fucking gamble.

+1

it’s hard to get psyched about plunking down hundreds of dollars to attend a football game

Well, unconsionability is exactly what was at issue in Concepcion. And the court ruled against it. And the illusory promise part seeks extremely weak—I’ve never heard of a terms of service agreement failing on those grounds. As the court said in Gateway, it doesn’t matter if you read the terms or not, they are…

Except that was ex post arbitration, not ex ante. The Draft Kings case is about whether the parties go to arbitration at all. Brady’s case had nothing to do with that. His case was about the arbitration award. No one in the Brady case challenged whether the hearing properly went to arbitration, which is at issue here.…

Yeah, both AmEx and Concepcion basically make this impossible to win. Even in contracts of adhesion and one party didn’t read the terms of the deal, it doesn’t matter (Hill v. Gateway). There’s nothing unique about this case that would make the court not enforce the arbitration clause. The courts would basically have…

I mean I don’t like Trump and I’m all for bashing him, but the fact that he failed on some investments is a dumb reason to make fun of him. Plenty of successful people failed dozens of times each. Failing is not a bad thing, and not a thing to ridicule really.

I think you’re right. I can’t imagine these class actions going to trial given recent pro-arbitration decisions.