Tiger Woods may not currently be much of a threat on the golf course, but his attorneys are still remorseless carnivores, waiting to pounce on any prey and tear it to shreds. And that includes Hugh Hefner. Rachel Uchitel found that out recently when she had to turn down a very lucrative Playboy photo shoot, because it would have jeopardized her multi-million-dollar keep-your-trap-shut deal she had signed with Woods (allegedly!) in December. No nude Rachel for you!
Playboy wanted to feature Uchitel, “nude, without any clothes on” as Radar O’Reilly would say, in an upcoming issue. Uchitel reportedly would have been paid $300,000 for the photo shoot. But Playboy had a lot of fun ideas to invoke Woods for the spread, up to and including posing Uchitel with a real tiger cub on the cover. And that would have run afoul of her reported hush money deal with Woods in December of last year. From the New York Post:
RadarOnline said the conditions jeopardized Uchitel’s deal with Woods. As a result, she realized there was no way to pose for Playboy without taking the financial risk.
Had Uchitel gone forward with the shoot, RadarOnline reported that she would have appeared “totally naked except her pubic area.”
Isn’t Uchitel currently on Celebrity Rehab? What recovery stage is posing for Playboy, exactly?
***
Tiger blocks former gal pal Rachel Uchitel from posing for Playboy [New York Post]
Tiger Woods Stopped Rachel Uchitel’s $300K Nude Magazine Deal [Radar Online]
-
- BC - Sep 16, 2010 at 3:49 PM
-
FAIL.
-
- M - Sep 16, 2010 at 7:29 PM
-
When are we done with this story?
Please, something else. This has exceeded Tebow-sphere.
-
- JEG - Sep 16, 2010 at 10:05 PM
-
When Tiger quits worrying about what his 121 former faithful partners do and people like you and I quit reading (or posting) lol!
-
- alan69 - Sep 17, 2010 at 1:41 AM
-
“totally naked except her pubic area.”
Well, that’s not totally naked, is it? Morons!
Why doesn’t Tiger just pose with her and give the money to charity? That’ll sell some issues.
