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.
I'll go with the guy with one house. The guy with one house is scared about losing his house.
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.
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.
