10 ms·
You may well be correct, but I'm unable to find anything confirming it. Do you have a source? The linked article says removing the name would require returning
by mthoms 6y ago
You may well be correct, but I'm unable to find anything confirming it. Do you have a source?
The linked article says removing the name would require returning the money per the terms of the contract and "the hospital agreed in 2015 when it accepted the $75 million that it would keep the Zuckerberg name for at least 50 years."
Another article [0] says "[...] Zuckerberg SF General Hospital, a name the Zuckerberg-Chans bought themselves in 2015 for $75 million."
[0] https://sfist.com/2020/07/24/more-supes-call-for-stripping-zuckerbergs-name-from-sf-general-hospital/ https://sfist.com/2020/07/24/more-supes-call-for-stripping-z...
- sfashset 6y agoThe quoted text is just a journalist trying to use a cute metaphor. Anyway, here are two Bay Area journalists who discussed this a few years ago when this topic first came up: https://twitter.com/SovernNation/status/1067938730940411904 https://twitter.com/SovernNation/status/1067938730940411904 https://twitter.com/natogreen/status/1068204834992480256 https://twitter.com/natogreen/status/1068204834992480256
- mthoms 6y agoThanks for that. I still find it curious that according to the contract, they would have to give the money back if they change the name. At least thats whats being reported.