3 ms·
Maybe. But Steve Jobs is currently a lot more liquid than Zuckerberg.
by BenSchaechter 16y ago
Maybe. But Steve Jobs is currently a lot more liquid than Zuckerberg.
- aliston 16y ago"I'm not talking a $400,000 a year working Wall Street stiff flying first class and being comfortable, I'm talking about liquid"
- gallerytungsten 16y agoExactly.
- robryan 16y agoMaybe, but Job's still doesn't get paid a wage if I recall correctly meaning he wouldn't be overly liquid unless he has cashed in a fair amount over time.
- prawn 16y agoCorrect me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't shares in a publicly-traded company (e.g., Apple) be considered fairly liquid?
- robryan 16y agoNo expert but wouldn't it depend on the scale of what he wanted to take out. Say for example Job's attempting to take a billion dollars off the table would have to effect the share price.
- clark-kent 16y agoJobs will still be liquid with or without Apple Shares. Remember he sold Pixar for $7.4 billion. And he still owns 7% of Disney.
- Encosia 16y agoAlso, Don't forget the dividends he's been accumulating from his Disney stock. That alone has been tens of millions of dollars each year.
- Aetius 16y agoAnd this matters because?? I've heard Larry Ellison is the most illiquid billionaire, as he finances everything with loans against his massive equity in Oracle. He's still in the top 5 richest people. Zuckerberg is no different.
- SamReidHughes 16y agoLarry Ellison is also more liquid than Zuckerberg.
- ojbyrne 16y agoOracle has 25 years of cash flow to finance against. I suspect he gets good terms.
- quizbiz 16y agoHow exactly does one finance everything with loans against equity? What does that mean? How does he pay back the loans? With shares?
- borism 16y agowow, borrowing against stock, how risky is that (for both him and his shareholders)? apparently he has been sued about it http://articles.sfgate.com/2006-01-31/news/17279373_1_oracle-stock-larry-ellison-shareholder-lawsuit http://articles.sfgate.com/2006-01-31/news/17279373_1_oracle...