6 ms·

> Did Zuckerberg sign a prenuptial agreement? An internet search implies he didn't. Yes. That's exactly the kind of questions that Google helps you solve.

waterlesscloud 14y ago
Given how carefully he has protected his stake thus far, it would be very surprising if he had not done a pre-nup.
- dragonsky 14y ago
  My understanding is that he's been with this girl since Facebook started anyway. I'd be surprised if she did not have a fair stake in Facebook even if she were not married to Mark.
  - Tossrock 14y ago
    Why would she have shares? If she wasn't an employee I don't see why she would. I mean Mark might have given her some as an anniversary gift/etc at some point, but you don't get shares in a company just for dating the founder. Although I suppose she could have been part of a friends/family founding round.
    - objclxt 14y ago
      He gifted his father some shares, is it that surprising he'd gift his partner/wife shares as well?
    - matthewowen 14y ago
      It may be different in the USA, but in many countries there are legal limits on what a pre-nup can actually cover. If the relationship pre-dates the foundation of the country, it isn't unrealistic that she would have some claim on "Mark's" assets should they break up in the future. For what it is worth, this is really very poor taste.
- gscott 14y ago
  He doesn't really need one. Facebook is a premarital asset and he has no other assets. In California anything you own before marriage is yours including the gains on those assets and you can take money out and spent it on other things and as long as you can trace it back to the premarital money then your good to go.
  - jszielenski 14y ago
    Pre-nups address many other things as well including alimony and future earnings.
stephengillie 14y ago
Given the sheer quantity of eyeballs on this story, I expect that the world would know if it exists.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

waterlesscloud 14y ago

Given how carefully he has protected his stake thus far, it would be very surprising if he had not done a pre-nup.

dragonsky 14y ago
My understanding is that he's been with this girl since Facebook started anyway. I'd be surprised if she did not have a fair stake in Facebook even if she were not married to Mark.
- Tossrock 14y ago
  Why would she have shares? If she wasn't an employee I don't see why she would. I mean Mark might have given her some as an anniversary gift/etc at some point, but you don't get shares in a company just for dating the founder. Although I suppose she could have been part of a friends/family founding round.
  - objclxt 14y ago
    He gifted his father some shares, is it that surprising he'd gift his partner/wife shares as well?
  - matthewowen 14y ago
    It may be different in the USA, but in many countries there are legal limits on what a pre-nup can actually cover. If the relationship pre-dates the foundation of the country, it isn't unrealistic that she would have some claim on "Mark's" assets should they break up in the future. For what it is worth, this is really very poor taste.
gscott 14y ago
He doesn't really need one. Facebook is a premarital asset and he has no other assets. In California anything you own before marriage is yours including the gains on those assets and you can take money out and spent it on other things and as long as you can trace it back to the premarital money then your good to go.
- jszielenski 14y ago
  Pre-nups address many other things as well including alimony and future earnings.

stephengillie 14y ago

Given the sheer quantity of eyeballs on this story, I expect that the world would know if it exists.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]