Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

LeBron James says he turned down a $15,000,000 endorsement contract renewal from McDonald’s to pursue equity and franchise ownership in Blaze Pizza “It was a great partnership with McDonald’s. We did some great things on television. We did some great things over the years. But I remember we went...

79,288 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

36 Yorum

ochoElite profil fotoğrafı
ochoElite1 ay önce

Cool name but product is ass

dank profil fotoğrafı
dank1 ay önce

Bl-ass Pizza

Patrick OConnor profil fotoğrafı
Patrick OConnor1 ay önce

There’s only one Papa Shaq

Hribi profil fotoğrafı
Hribi1 ay önce

pizza > mcdonalds

dank profil fotoğrafı
dank1 ay önce

costco hot dog > pizza > mcdonalds

Hribi profil fotoğrafı
Hribi1 ay önce

lol

dank profil fotoğrafı
dank1 ay önce

ft. @KingJames @uninterrupted

yanixx profil fotoğrafı
yanixx1 ay önce

They probably didn't give him enough burgers

Geezer profil fotoğrafı
Geezer1 ay önce

That's because he prefers a Costco Pizza or Hot Dog! Can't blame the man!

Malhanis profil fotoğrafı
Malhanis1 ay önce

Great things are when you get paid crazy money.

wacktose profil fotoğrafı
wacktose1 ay önce

What a dumbass

Imrexx profil fotoğrafı
Imrexx1 ay önce

First time hearing about blaze pizza

EagleIQ profil fotoğrafı
EagleIQ1 ay önce

15m sheesh

bloodredfrog profil fotoğrafı
bloodredfrog1 ay önce

king in every way

heyykamyy profil fotoğrafı
heyykamyy1 ay önce

Haven’t tried Blaze Pizza yet… time to try “phenomenal” soon

Aviandè profil fotoğrafı
Aviandè1 ay önce

I like Blaze Pizza. But that particular model of pizza chain has not worked so far, so it'll be interesting to see if it can stick around.

Sam C. profil fotoğrafı
Sam C.1 ay önce

Most of them closed already.

Dr Ba Taku profil fotoğrafı
Dr Ba Taku1 ay önce

"Forget the money....." yeah, you would have arrived.

saikidd profil fotoğrafı
saikidd1 ay önce

On brand, this dude flops in the business world too.

Sophie 💙 🌙 profil fotoğrafı
Sophie 💙 🌙1 ay önce

Smart to bet on yourself. But equity in a single chain is riskier than a guaranteed $15M. What's the real value of that Blaze stake now?

Gene profil fotoğrafı
Gene1 ay önce

Just couldn't let Shaq have his Papa Johns!!

yo profil fotoğrafı
yo1 ay önce

Is it any good? We had one near me for like a week then it shut down so we never got to try it.

Steve profil fotoğrafı
Steve1 ay önce

He couldn’t do both?

Michael Alosco profil fotoğrafı
Michael Alosco1 ay önce

Cannot stand this guy. But Blaze Pizza is the best pizza I’ve had in Las Vegas. And I’ve lived in NY and NJ.

Locker Room Vs Executive Suite Podcast profil fotoğrafı
Locker Room Vs Executive Suite Podcast1 ay önce

Why didn’t he franchise McDonald’s?

Ashby Fox profil fotoğrafı
Ashby Fox1 ay önce

Blaze is currently going thru a transitional period and a brand overhaul. LOL Just like Bronze every 4 years. LOL

bigsteele45 profil fotoğrafı
bigsteele451 ay önce

Blaze pizza lmao

Rob Johnson profil fotoğrafı
Rob Johnson1 ay önce

Didn’t he hint at showing up at a blaze pizza in LA when he first signed and didn’t show???

JP Finn profil fotoğrafı
JP Finn1 ay önce

Horrific Pizza. I’ve got ocean front property to sell you in Palm Springs if you think he didn’t do it for a bigger pay out.

AⓂ️εεη profil fotoğrafı
AⓂ️εεη1 ay önce

LeBron turned down $15M from McDonald’s to own equity in Blaze Pizza. He chose ownership over a guaranteed check and the bet paid off. 💰

Michael W profil fotoğrafı
Michael W1 ay önce

Tried it recently. Good stuff!

chefbrujo profil fotoğrafı
chefbrujo1 ay önce

Lol funny him acting like it isn’t about the money.

Steven profil fotoğrafı
Steven1 ay önce

This is how smart sports stars became wealthy, not rich. Investing away from the sport.

kkomysh profil fotoğrafı
kkomysh1 ay önce

building something meaningful is always a good idea

nexa_sama profil fotoğrafı
nexa_sama1 ay önce

one of his best financial decisions so far

Sam  profil fotoğrafı
Sam 1 ay önce

Blaze pizza is horrible

Benzer Videolar

Evan Spiegel on the lesson that killed his first startup and led to Snapchat: "We focused on building the perfect product for way too long before we got feedback. We worked for like eighteen months to build this perfect full-featured product, which was in direct contravention to how I was always taught to build things. Build a prototype, build an MVP, get it in front of people, learn as quickly as possible. But we had spent all this time building this perfect piece of software and we hadn't thought enough about distribution. While we built this great piece of software, our competitor at the time, Naviance, had secured distribution through all the different college counselors. What piece of software are you going to choose to help your kid get into college? The one recommended by the college counselors or the one from two kids at Stanford? I think it's a pretty easy choice. So we saw very early that we had no distribution advantage. Even if we loved our software, people weren't going to use it because we didn't have a scalable way to get it in people's hands. Around that time when we saw the emergence of the App Store on iPhone, it was very clear that was a distribution channel we could really use and benefit from. But we also needed to build things we could build quickly, things we really were going to use together with our friends so we could be the first early customers. Ultimately Peekaboo and Snapchat represented that." This is exactly the asymmetry Peter Thiel describes in Zero to One: superior distribution by itself can create a monopoly, even with no product differentiation. The converse is not true. Thiel puts an even finer point on it: most businesses get zero distribution channels to work. Poor sales rather than bad product is the most common cause of failure. If you can get just one distribution channel to work, you have a great business. Estée Lauder said: it's not enough to have the most wonderful product in the world. You must be able to sell it. Many founders over-index on product perfection and under-invest in distribution. The world is full of great products nobody knows about, and mediocre products with massive distribution that dominate markets. Evan Spiegel lived it. He built the better product, watched it lose, and then built something he could actually distribute.

David Senra

27,151 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

James Currier on how he grew a photo sharing site to 47 million users in 6 months “Most product people start by saying, ‘There’s a problem and we’re going to build a product that’s going to solve that problem. Then we’re going to market it,” NFX founder James Currier observes. Of the 45 companies James has spoken to in the last 18 months, at least 40 of them have said some version of this. “I was also taught this back in the 1990s,” James says. “But through experimentation, I’ve realized that this is actually the wrong way to look at it. The right way to look at it — if you want to grow your business — is to ask, ‘What is the language? How am I going to market this?’ . . . Figure out what the language is and then build the product to fit what the language is.” James gives the example of a photo sharing site he launched years ago: “It said ‘Store your Photos’ on the homepage, and we were not growing. So one day, we literally just changed the homepage to say ‘Share your Photos.’ The team that was working on it said, ‘Our site doesn’t actually share photos. It just stores the photos.’ I said, ‘Well, fix that.’ What ended up happening was they started building features that allowed people to share their photos, and we registered 47 million people in 6 months. And that was back when the Internet was 250 million people.” He continues: “What we realized was that by changing the language, you change how the users are interacting with your site. And you also change your thinking about the product so that the features and subsequent language in the product actually fits with the main value proposition.” James gives another example: “We had a matchmaking site, and the promise there was ‘Find a date.’ It wasn’t growing and we had to buy all this traffic from Google and elsewhere to keep the whole thing going. So what we did was we changed the language and the value proposition to say, ‘Help people find a date.’ When we did that, we registered 28 million people in about 9 months, virally with no cost to us. We changed the language, and then we changed the product subsequently.” Video source: Greylock Partners (2016)

Startup Archive

18,388 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

Paul Wesley says he and Nina Dobrev got into a blowout fight on set that stopped filming for half an hour “It came down to that and we would butt heads. It’s so funny because people thought we had such great chemistry and we were like the romantic love story on the show and we kept it on the DL because we did a lot of press and we did a lot of stuff, but her and I just notoriously butted heads” “We got into one big blowout fight on set and they were like, okay, everybody take a half hour, and we’re going to pause filming for a minute and everyone’s going to cool off. You know that kind of thing” “And then the irony of the whole situation is that as the show grew in success and as I became more comfortable in my role and just as a human being too - I had never dealt with fame and I didn’t understand it, frankly I didn’t like it. It’s like I liked it but I also hated it and it really affected me and I probably wasn’t the easiest person to work with at the time” “And the irony is that now we’re such good friends. Once we stepped away from the show and even later, like in later seasons, we just became buddies. And it’s just like this funny thing because her and I are like actual bros now and we get along so well and we always talk about it. Let’s do something together. Let’s do a movie together. And we actually had a few things we were dabbling with maybe doing something together” Penn Badgley: “I’m pretty sure if you did it would break the internet”

Casper

108,590 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Sergey Brin on AI and Jeff Dean back in December when Gemini peaked: “I would say in some ways we for sure messed up in that we underinvested and sort of didn't take it as seriously as we should have, say, eight years ago when we published the Transformer paper. We actually didn't take it all that seriously and didn't necessarily invest in scaling the compute. And also we were too scared to bring it to people because chatbots say dumb things. And, you know, OpenAI ran with it, which is good for them. It was a super smart insight, and it was also our people like Ilya who went there to do that. But I do think we still have benefited from that long history. So we had a lot of the research and development of neural networks kind of going back to Google Brain. That was also kind of lucky. It wasn't luck that we hired Jeff Dean. I mean, we were lucky to get him. But we were in this sort of mindset that deep technical things matter. And so we hired him. We hired a lot of people from DEC, honestly, because they had the top research labs at the time. But he [Jeff Dean] was passionate about neural networks. And it stemmed, I think, from actually his college experiment. I don't know. He was like, whatever, curing third world disease and figuring out neural networks when he was like 16. He's done crazy things. But he was passionate about it. He built up a whole effort. And actually in my division at the time in Google X. We had him but I didn't I was like okay Jeff you do whatever you want. He's like oh we can tell cats from dogs. I'm like oh okay cool. But you know, you also trust your technical people and soon enough they were developing all these algorithms these neural nets that were doing some of our search. And then, you know, Noam came up with a transformer and we were able to do more and more. But yeah, I mean, so we had the underpinnings, we had the R&D. We did underinvest for a number of years and didn't take it as seriously as we should have.” Both Jeff Dean and Noam Shazeer left Google in the past two months.

tae kim

249,117 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

"Every team wants to win a championship, but not every team wants to do the things required for a championship. And here's the thing: it's easy to be an average team. It doesn't require a lot. It's less adversity to be average in the world. The consequences of being average aren't easy. We end up wearing them. There's strain and struggle that comes with that too. The standard is just lower to be an average team. To be a championship team, to be champion, to be a championship team member here . . . I'm not gonna lie to you . . . I'm going to tell you the truth. It is harder. It is. The question is: Is it worth it? Some people say, "Oh it's not harder work." Yes it is. It's harder work. You can pursue comfort or you can pursue excellence. If we pursue comfort, we gotta give up some excellence. But if we pursue excellence, then we're just going to face more adversity. Everyone who's ever accomplished something excellence has had to overcome it. We are here today for a reason. Two reasons actually. Reason #1 is let's make sure that we identify and realize the opportunities that are in front of us. Reason #2 is let's make sure that we are preparing for the adversity that those opportunities require. And just understand: every single time you lever up your opportunities and you identify, "Oh there's something more I can do, more I can achieve. I can get better. I can earn more. I can do this." It's going to be matched with the adversity that comes with it. I want to make sure we are prepared for both of those, so that we're not chasing big opportunities and then getting mad when things start getting harder along the way. Is that fair? Does that make sense?"

Brian Kight

125,742 görüntüleme • 3 yıl önce