3 ms·

Not being sarcastic, but support for 20 years, is a bit far fetched. At some point after inception, Amazon was successful, even before it went public. So are y

Not being sarcastic, but support for 20 years, is a bit far fetched. At some point after inception, Amazon was successful, even before it went public. So are you saying Amazon rose in value because Jeff had the undying support of his wife? I would say the support helped Jeff until the company was self-sustaining and successful. Of course, without the initial support of his wife, Amazon would not have started in the first place, or perhaps, started a bit late or grow a bit slowly. Think of the counter argument. If Jeff's wife was vehemently against it, Jeff did not start any company, and then after 20 years she divorced him, she would still get a share of his money. Do lawyers then argue that since she did not support him in his endeavors, she ought to bear some of his opportunity cost? Day to day operations were taken care of by Jeff. Extremely difficult decisions, ones that make or break a company were taken by Jeff. Hiring and firing decisions were taken by Jeff. Vision for the company originated with and sustained by Jeff. I would not credit the wife with half of everything. Difficult to put a number to the situation. It's just sad.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
I don't want this thread to devolve needlessly; in summary: I treat my wife like my cofounder with an equal share of equity. I wouldn't let my cofounder take anything less than half of the total value of the business if a liquidation/separation/liquidity event occurred, so why would I treat my spousal relationship differently considering the work a relationship requires? If you're concerned about your partner entitled to half as not being equitable, you might consider your partner selection before the division of equity. This applies whether I'm worth a thousand dollars, or a billion dollars. EDIT: Was I being judgemental? It was intended more as "Choose Wisely" from Indiana Jones. As you mention sytelus, most of success is luck, but you can make every effort to pick the right partner.
- kumarvvr 8y ago
  I am not commenting on the law. The law says a divorced wife gets half of whatever. I don't care. What I do care is the notion that the growth and success of Amazon is 50% due to the wife. That I disagree with.
  - sytelus 8y ago
    Assume you need atleast $100K to start a business but you have only $90K. Your friend comes around and puts in $10K but only if you are willing to offer 50% ownership. Given no other choices, you agree and work your ass off for next 25 years to grow business to $100B while your friend did nothing else for it. Does your friend deserve $50B? I am not asking from legal point of view because that answer would be yes. I am asking this from philosophical perspective. Clearly if your friend didn’t lend you $10K, you wouldn’t have your $100B business. But that’s the seed stage only work your friend did. Does he deserve fruits of your 25 years of labor? Does your friend deserve that stack because he took risk without knowledge of how future would turn out? This is one the deepest question that has huge consequences all the way in to the concept of money, capital, debt, rewards, collaboration and purpose itself.
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      It's easy (and fun!) to go down the rabbit hole philosophically. Does Jeff deserve billions of dollars more than the hundreds of thousands of Amazon employees who have collectively built the company? Are their fruits of their labor worth so much less than his, regardless of Jeff's hard business decisions and many more hours per week worked, simply because of how equity is constructed and distributed? Jeff has clearly spent over 20 years building his company, nights, weekends, missed time with family he'll never get back, but can you point to the decisions worth hundreds of millions of dollars to Jeff alone? Value, its attribution, and its equitable distribution is hard, and executed in an imperfect fashion.
      - sytelus 8y ago
        In capitalism, rewards are proportional to how much capital you have (either your own or borrowed), your efforts are minimally material.
        toomuchtodo 8y ago
        But capital alone is no indicator of ownership interest grants (see: advisors or key employees who are granted equity for their contributions [1]). Rewards in capitalism are to those who can convince others of value provided in exchange for an equity interest; capital is only a small part of that. Lots of equity is sweat equity! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Parker#Facebook https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Parker#Facebook
- sytelus 8y ago
  I have seen this go both ways. Some spouses give everything for other to succeed while some become extra work in addition to what you already have. Lot depends on circumstances, personallies and loads of luck. Let’s not be judgmental here.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

toomuchtodo 8y ago

I don't want this thread to devolve needlessly; in summary: I treat my wife like my cofounder with an equal share of equity. I wouldn't let my cofounder take anything less than half of the total value of the business if a liquidation/separation/liquidity event occurred, so why would I treat my spousal relationship differently considering the work a relationship requires? If you're concerned about your partner entitled to half as not being equitable, you might consider your partner selection before the division of equity. This applies whether I'm worth a thousand dollars, or a billion dollars. EDIT: Was I being judgemental? It was intended more as "Choose Wisely" from Indiana Jones. As you mention sytelus, most of success is luck, but you can make every effort to pick the right partner.

kumarvvr 8y ago
I am not commenting on the law. The law says a divorced wife gets half of whatever. I don't care. What I do care is the notion that the growth and success of Amazon is 50% due to the wife. That I disagree with.
- sytelus 8y ago
  Assume you need atleast $100K to start a business but you have only $90K. Your friend comes around and puts in $10K but only if you are willing to offer 50% ownership. Given no other choices, you agree and work your ass off for next 25 years to grow business to $100B while your friend did nothing else for it. Does your friend deserve $50B? I am not asking from legal point of view because that answer would be yes. I am asking this from philosophical perspective. Clearly if your friend didn’t lend you $10K, you wouldn’t have your $100B business. But that’s the seed stage only work your friend did. Does he deserve fruits of your 25 years of labor? Does your friend deserve that stack because he took risk without knowledge of how future would turn out? This is one the deepest question that has huge consequences all the way in to the concept of money, capital, debt, rewards, collaboration and purpose itself.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    It's easy (and fun!) to go down the rabbit hole philosophically. Does Jeff deserve billions of dollars more than the hundreds of thousands of Amazon employees who have collectively built the company? Are their fruits of their labor worth so much less than his, regardless of Jeff's hard business decisions and many more hours per week worked, simply because of how equity is constructed and distributed? Jeff has clearly spent over 20 years building his company, nights, weekends, missed time with family he'll never get back, but can you point to the decisions worth hundreds of millions of dollars to Jeff alone? Value, its attribution, and its equitable distribution is hard, and executed in an imperfect fashion.
    - sytelus 8y ago
      In capitalism, rewards are proportional to how much capital you have (either your own or borrowed), your efforts are minimally material.
      - toomuchtodo 8y ago
        But capital alone is no indicator of ownership interest grants (see: advisors or key employees who are granted equity for their contributions [1]). Rewards in capitalism are to those who can convince others of value provided in exchange for an equity interest; capital is only a small part of that. Lots of equity is sweat equity! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Parker#Facebook https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Parker#Facebook
sytelus 8y ago
I have seen this go both ways. Some spouses give everything for other to succeed while some become extra work in addition to what you already have. Lot depends on circumstances, personallies and loads of luck. Let’s not be judgmental here.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]