6 ms·

No, asking for the postnup is a first-strike. Before that point, there was no reason to assume that there was a problem in the relationship. Asking for the po

by crusso 9y ago

No, asking for the postnup is a first-strike. Before that point, there was no reason to assume that there was a problem in the relationship. Asking for the postnup introduces distrust into the dynamic. If I were the spouse being asked to sign the document, I'd say, "Nope, let's get divorced right now and split the money in half. After that, if you want me in your life, feel free to court me again."

wolfgke 9y ago
> Asking for the postnup introduces distrust into the dynamic. What he is doing is just good business practice: He wants to keep the business as free as possible of liabilities. Her not willing to sign is what introduces distrust: It implies that she at least want to leave her the optinion open to run away with money from his business.
- crusso 9y ago
  No. There are ways that the business can protect itself for various events. For example, I was a founder in a business years ago. We included clauses in the stock buy-back agreement that could be triggered upon various events (death of a partner, divorce, etc.) Normally, those kinds of clauses ensure that the non-partner-spouse gets the value of the business owed to him/her, but loses decision-making control of the business. You don't have to force your partner to sign a trust-breaking post-nup in order to have those kinds of protections for the business.
- cjensen 9y ago
  If one's adherence to business practices are more important than one's marriage, then one's priorities are broken.
  - wolfgke 9y ago
    > If one's adherence to business practices are more important than one's marriage, then one's priorities are broken. If the wife is not supportive of the business ventures of the husband, I see no future in the marriage.
    - AnimalMuppet 9y ago
      Your answers seem to be coming from the perspective that the business is more important than the marriage. That's not a perspective that many people here share; your one-line replies that assume your perspective aren't going to go very far to persuade people.
Nadya 9y ago
Agree + Stay together ; Agree + Divorce ; Disagree + Stay Together ; Disagree + Divorce Only one of these has potential risk to the business and it falls under the "Disagree" options. So for the business, agreement is necessary to prevent that risk and some business partners that otherwise might be on board would refuse due to that risk. The above is copied from another reply of mine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16011037 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16011037
- crusso 9y ago
  You act as though this situation is new or unique to businesses. They deal with married business partners every day, and they don't do it by forcing everyone to get post-nups. I challenge you to find an attorney that would advise her to sign any such post-nup. Maybe a reasonable stock buy-back in the event of a divorce, but asking for a post-nup is completely beyond the pale.
  - Nadya 9y ago
    Oh - I agree a reasonable stock buy-back is the better alternative option with a better result for most relationships. >I challenge you to find an attorney that would advise her to sign any such post-nup. You couldn't as there's no benefit for her to doing so - especially if she ever decides to leave him.
  - wolfgke 9y ago
    > I challenge you to find an attorney that would advise her to sign any such post-nup. On the other hand, not signing it is a clear sign that she is not supportive to keep her partner's business as free as possible from liabilities.
    - crusso 9y ago
      "not signing it is a clear sign" Not signing it would be a clear sign that he should find a normal every-day method of solving his "business partner is married" issue that doesn't involve a first-strike measure to leave her out in the cold because his side-projects are now worth money. The funny thing is that on top of my business experience with using stock agreements to get around this issue in a business I helped to found, I've also dealt with coming into a bunch of money shortly after being married. Trying to get my wife to sign a post-nup agreement would have been horribly obnoxious and asking for strife.

by crusso 9y ago

wolfgke 9y ago

> Asking for the postnup introduces distrust into the dynamic. What he is doing is just good business practice: He wants to keep the business as free as possible of liabilities. Her not willing to sign is what introduces distrust: It implies that she at least want to leave her the optinion open to run away with money from his business.

crusso 9y ago
No. There are ways that the business can protect itself for various events. For example, I was a founder in a business years ago. We included clauses in the stock buy-back agreement that could be triggered upon various events (death of a partner, divorce, etc.) Normally, those kinds of clauses ensure that the non-partner-spouse gets the value of the business owed to him/her, but loses decision-making control of the business. You don't have to force your partner to sign a trust-breaking post-nup in order to have those kinds of protections for the business.
cjensen 9y ago
If one's adherence to business practices are more important than one's marriage, then one's priorities are broken.
- wolfgke 9y ago
  > If one's adherence to business practices are more important than one's marriage, then one's priorities are broken. If the wife is not supportive of the business ventures of the husband, I see no future in the marriage.
  - AnimalMuppet 9y ago
    Your answers seem to be coming from the perspective that the business is more important than the marriage. That's not a perspective that many people here share; your one-line replies that assume your perspective aren't going to go very far to persuade people.

Nadya 9y ago

Agree + Stay together ; Agree + Divorce ; Disagree + Stay Together ; Disagree + Divorce Only one of these has potential risk to the business and it falls under the "Disagree" options. So for the business, agreement is necessary to prevent that risk and some business partners that otherwise might be on board would refuse due to that risk. The above is copied from another reply of mine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16011037 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16011037

crusso 9y ago
You act as though this situation is new or unique to businesses. They deal with married business partners every day, and they don't do it by forcing everyone to get post-nups. I challenge you to find an attorney that would advise her to sign any such post-nup. Maybe a reasonable stock buy-back in the event of a divorce, but asking for a post-nup is completely beyond the pale.
- Nadya 9y ago
  Oh - I agree a reasonable stock buy-back is the better alternative option with a better result for most relationships. >I challenge you to find an attorney that would advise her to sign any such post-nup. You couldn't as there's no benefit for her to doing so - especially if she ever decides to leave him.
- wolfgke 9y ago
  > I challenge you to find an attorney that would advise her to sign any such post-nup. On the other hand, not signing it is a clear sign that she is not supportive to keep her partner's business as free as possible from liabilities.
  - crusso 9y ago
    "not signing it is a clear sign" Not signing it would be a clear sign that he should find a normal every-day method of solving his "business partner is married" issue that doesn't involve a first-strike measure to leave her out in the cold because his side-projects are now worth money. The funny thing is that on top of my business experience with using stock agreements to get around this issue in a business I helped to found, I've also dealt with coming into a bunch of money shortly after being married. Trying to get my wife to sign a post-nup agreement would have been horribly obnoxious and asking for strife.