Posted on 12/16/2009 9:08:39 AM PST by Steelfish
Tiger Woods: Elin Nordegren 'Hires Top Celebrity Divorce Lawyer Over Star's £337Million Fortune'
16th December 2009
Tiger Woods's estranged wife could get up to £169 million of his fortune after calling in California's top divorce lawyer, it was claimed today.
Elin Nordegren is believed to be meeting celebrity attorney Sorrell Trope - who has represented Nicole Kidman and Britney Spears - in the hope of obtaining half of what the golf star has earned in the five years they have been married. The 29-year-old former model is also likely to file for divorce in California where the couple have a home, and not in Florida, where they live.
Under California law, the 'no-fault divorce' means there is an equal division of assets and property.
This could mean any pre-nup agreement Ms Nordegren has signed with Woods, 33, could be torn up and she could get half of the £337.5 million fortune.
A life apart: Woods's wife Elin with their daughter Sam yesterday [Pic in URL]
Mr Trope, 82, is said to be the 'best divorce lawyer in the business'. More...Elin Woods pictured without wedding ring on as she emerges for the first time since Tiger admitted cheating on her
Elin is also believed to be in talks with sportswear manufacturer Puma about becoming the face of its Swedish-inspired clothing line Tretorn, according to website TMZ. To add to the billionaire's woes, a 48-year-old blonde, Theresa Rogers, became the oldest woman to be linked with the golfer.
Woods, 33, is said to be living apart from wife, Elin, 29, and a removal van was parked outside Woods's family home in Windermere, Florida, yesterday prompting speculation that his wife was moving out. The speculation is that she is planning to return to her native Sweden, where she recently bought a house.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
IMO, as an endorsement value, Tiger to a significant extent transcends golf and even sports.
First, Tiger still has a very youthful look, so even if we were to grant your argument as to middle-aged endorsers, I don’t think that association applies to him, certainly not very strongly.
Second, Tiger’s phenomenal endorsement power is, in my opinion, due to the combination of two principal factors: (1) He is the dominant figure in golf, has been for many years, and in my view is more dominant than anyone who has ever played the game and (2) his racial make-up — we all know the importance of PC and diversity for advertisers and Fortune 500 companies, and Tiger brings perceived diversity to the brands he endorses, especially products traditionally associated with golf and the predominantly white suburban demographic that pays attention to golf.
Add to those factors a very photogenic and telegenic appearance, winning smile and so forth.
His heretofore wholesome image is certainly not unimportant, in my view, but it long predated his marriage and arose primarily from his personal story connected with his father and his appearance on the scene as a prominent golfer even in his teens, so people who follow golf kind of feel like they have seen Tiger grow up.
However, having gotten married and cheated has hurt him substantially, but after a while he will again be a dominant golfer and popular endorser, even if not at the stratospheric levels he achieved before the scandal.
So I think it is overly simplistic to try to force Tiger into neat categories such as merely “middle-aged” or merely a golf figure. I think his value as an endorser defies easy categorization like that.
I do maintain my position that if Tiger had remained a bachelor, his endorsement power would not be significantly different.
As a thought experiment, imagine if George Clooney, the notoriously randy bachelor, instead of Tiger had dominated the golf scene just as Tiger has these past few years. His bachelorhood would make little difference, in my view, as his golf dominance, handsome appearance and good humor would make him a huge endorsement value. The element he is missing is the diversity element, so I expect he would not reach Tiger levels, but not far down from that.
The comparison to OJ is way over the top.
Tiger hasn’t stabbed a couple of people to death, as far as we know.
“Tiger hasn’t stabbed a couple of people to death, as far as we know.”
Not to DEATH, no.
And was thinking that 20 Million was probably 4 hours in a photo studio holding a Mach 3 razor or something.
A Mega-Yacht for a days work....and maybe a few appearances.
WOW
I can't help but wonder what chaos most men would create in their lives if they woke up to find that they could literally have any woman they desired.
This is a reply I made on another thread on the same subject.
"Personally I think it's absolutely normal for men to "cheat". The concept of lifelong monogamy flies in the face of biology reality."
I completely agree. Biologically men are the hunters, the warriors, the protectors, and the breeders. Women are the nest builders, the child bearers and nurturers who need security during those times.
The sex drive is probably our strongest natural drive. It is intended to assure the survival of the species. Look in the wild. The males usually have multiple females, as many as they can corral and keep away from the others. Males can ejaculate multiple times a day but females, depending on species, have a limited number of offspring for a predetermined time.. Once pregnant that is it for them until next time, They are off the market so to speak as far as propagating the species is concerned.. Not true the male.
That being said the problem arises when we enter the realm of social and personal values. If you take an oath to devote yourself to one person, til death do us part, then your personal honor and worth is at stake. Therefore, you must subordinates your natural desires to your personal values. Some can, others can't.
The Bible says that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. That is because money gives more choices to a rich and famous person than to a poor unknown one. It is easy for a poor unknown person to pass up all those gorgeous women because he never had a chance with them anyway. Those people, the poor and unknown, who condemn Tiger are empty vessels on hypocrisy because they may have done the same under his circumstances. It is easy to be pure when sin is unavailable.
However, the poor and unknown who are true to their values, assuming their values are worthy, are superior to the rich and famous who share the same values but violate them.
Tiger may not have needed the HGH to play better golf but he may have needed them to attract and keep up with his wife and his extracurricular activities at the same time.
That's absurd! Especially in this case. She unwittingly was a big part of the facade the jerk put on his public face. He made the $$$ pretending to be Mr. Nice Guy and she was half the picture. She was a MUCH better wife and mother than he was husband and father. She was an asset to the serial adulterer.
Absurd is ending a marriage and then laying claim to finances and resources that weren’t yours going into the marriage.
This as nothing to do with Tiger’s conduct, everything to do with screwed-up divorce law.
No way to know that. A lot of people think there's something SERIOUSLY wrong with him. Plus, will he be able to focus with the paparazzi stalking him for years to come?
I’m amazed he has been able to focus to play championship golf as an Ambien junkie.
After the revelations, I wonder if half the PGA tour isn’t now popping Ambien to see if it will raise their game to Tiger’s.
Well, first he had to become the best golfer in the world, but you're right, after that, it's easy to do a photo shoot.
Ummm, did you read the hooker's story about how Tiger was with her when "daddy" was dying? Then Tiger wanted to come back and "do" her some more? Even the hooker was surprised ...So much for that bullsh-t crap about father/son luv... The newest rumor is Tiger might have been using drugs to bulk himself up - surly that would affect your view of his marketability...
For me, it's looking like everything about him was a lie.
Well at least there are two of us. There is power in numbers.
:-)
It's worse than what you think - your comment is one of the new "thug dem" mantras. You weren't the first person I had heard that comment from - just the first "conservative".
Dems used to use the "everyone does it" to justify their evil - but it didn't play. For one thing it was easy to point out that in fact, everyone doesn't "do it"...( when referring to corruption).
So they modified it - now it's "yes, there are moral people - but that's an illusion - they're only moral because they don't have the opportunity and power to do "X" ( fill in the blank).
With you - it was easy to refute - take Tiger's case and reverse it - a White attractive woman decides to have sex with young black males - 10 at a time - just like Tiger. Could any woman do that ? I'll bet on it. Even if she's not attractive. It's not a question of power or access or opportunity. Some people actually are more moral than others.
Everyone is NOT corrupt.
The problem is the dem's position is that any corruptions is acceptable because we'd all be in the gutter if only we could get to the right gutter. They are wrong. But their filthy ideas have wormed they way into a conservatives mind - because YOU Ayn said their newest "corruption - talking point".
That was my concern. You don't need to apologize - like I said - I've heard it before - just not here.
Thank you for elaborating on the matter so clearly. I understand that I misguidedly used a rhetorical argument that I myself do not support.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.