When we rely on others to finance our foreign policy, we put it at risk.
Why take the pay-per-view gamble? I don't need to do that.
Generally speaking, the more money that's involved in anything, the more people are expecting and hoping that it's not going to fail.
Like everybody, I have invested in things that have gone bad, because there's never any guarantee of success or profit when it comes to money.
There's nothing so comfortable as a small bankroll. A big one is always in danger.
Anytime you take someone's money, that puts enormous pressure. But I think if you want the most reward, you have to take the most risk.
Maybe this is pathetic, but I still dread producing a book that doesn't earn back its advance. I hate obligations that are financially foggy.
In my era of wrestling, there were no guaranteed contracts, so it was inherent that you draw the crowd in to make money.
I might make an investment and lose some money, but that's something I can recover from.
I'll go with the guy with one house. The guy with one house is scared about losing his house.
Small debts are like small shot; they are rattling on every side, and can scarcely be escaped without a wound: great debts are like cannon; of loud noise, but little danger.
If I knew in 1986 how much it was going to cost to keep Pixar going, I doubt if I would have bought the company.
