A Quote by Mikey Garcia

If I did a multiple-fight deal, I could probably get more money but it's not always about the money. — © Mikey Garcia
If I did a multiple-fight deal, I could probably get more money but it's not always about the money.
To walk in money through the night crowd, protected by money, lulled by money, dulled by money, the crowd itself a money, the breath money, no least single object anywhere that is not money. Money, money everywhere and still not enough! And then no money, or a little money, or less money, or more money but money always money. and if you have money, or you don't have money, it is the money that counts, and money makes money, but what makes money make money?
The difference is that the money I make from Reebok is per fight, meaning I have to fight to get that money. If I don't fight, there is no money. It's not based on me being a good spokesman or one of the faces of their company. It's a per fight thing. It's a very different thing. It's more like a fight bonus than a sponsorship.
I've always treated money with respect, but I don't really think about money - I try to avoid it, because I don't like what money does to people. I find if you get too much money involved, people get corrupted.
Money is always a motivating factor, but money has never been my driving force. In my first fight, I paid the promoter in order for me to fight. I was in the hole 300 bucks for that. Money has always been a byproduct of me doing something I love.
Education of course is a very empowering experience, so many people who went to school also managed to improve their quality of life much faster because they could get a job, they could get money, and with money you could buy things that you cannot buy if you don't have money.
I'm a prize fighter. Titles don't pay bills. I fight for money. I'm making money. They're making money. Everybody's making money. That's what this is all about.
I was never interested in money. I always looked down on it. But now that I have less money, I see that without money, you cannot do much. Everything in the end is about money.
The Bible teaches that we are to love people and use money, but we often get that reversed and you start loving money and using people to get more money. Money is simply a tool to be used for good.
You're already a financial trader. You might not think of it in just this way, but if you work for a living, you're trading your time for money. Frankly, it's just about the worst trade you can make. Why? You can always get more money, but you can't get more time.
Sometimes money isn't the determinant. But it sure as hell makes a huge difference. Nobody is saying "Well, thank God we don't need to raise money any longer." It's a very, very big deal to have money, and it is a very, very big deal to have more than your opponent.
Money is a great isolator. In fact, we don't even need to have money or make money, we only need to be perceived as having money to be isolated in the strangest ways from most of the community around us. It reaches the point where a person with money spends a great deal of time reacting to people who are reacting to the money.
My father said, 'You must never try to make all the money that's in a deal. Let the other fellow make some money too, because if you have a reputation for always making all the money, you won't have many deals'.
'Great Expectations' has been described as 'Dickens's harshest indictment of society.' Which it is. After all, it's about money. About not having enough money; about the fever of the getting of money; about having too much money; about the taint of money.
I decided that I would do my best in the future not to write books just for money. If you didn't get the money then you didn't have anything. If I did the work I was proud of and I didn't get the money, at least I'd have the work.
Before money or anything else. Money cannot buy it...Because a man I do not trust could not get money from me on all the bonds in Christendom.
The more important point, however, is not about what the money does. It's about what has to be done to get the money. The effect of the money might be (democratically) benign. But what is done to secure that money is not necessarily benign. To miss this point is to betray the Robin Hood fallacy: the fact that the loot was distributed justly doesn't excuse the means taken to secure it.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!