> When a person has made more money for shareholders than 99.999995% of people in history, it's an extraordinary claim that someone else could have made more T

> When a person has made more money for shareholders than 99.999995% of people in history, it's an extraordinary claim that someone else could have made more That claim is not being made. The question is not whether another CEO could have made money from the start, the question is whether another CEO could have made more money from the point at which Facebook paid billions to shield Mark Zuckerberg. What has he personally done to move the needle that much in the past two years?