On the other hand the reality is that divorce does happen and for people with $20 billion fortunes is different. I wonder if the Google founders have prenups in place.
Though to be fair, if you have a lavish lifestyle and go from $20bn to $10bn, I suspect it's going to hurt a lot less than having say $4m and losing half.
Chan's ring featured only a "very simple ruby," a source authorized by the couple to speak told the AP.
That explains why she isn't smiling :) . Seriously people, smile for crying out loud. You know billions of people will see that picture over the years.
eh, this comment seems like a fractal snapshot of the whole thread.
why on earth do you feel any kind of right to be telling some random people you don't know how to behave? why does hn feel the need to have some private moment from these people's lives on the front page? why does this matter to me, a hacker? but is a wedding private? isn't it a public statement? why does a hacker like zuckenberg (sp?) need to make a public statement like this (i've been living w the same person for 20 years and neither of us see a need to get married)? and why rings? what the kind of ancient property-related crap is that? but that gets back to public statements. and why can't he do his tie up - he looks a mess? and now am i as bad as the person i am replying to?
and most of all, why take a photo with their washing line in the background?
Two appeal courts have said yes and DOJ said yes too. Personally I'd be more afraid of getting my @ss kicked for "resisting police" and having my video erased, than being arrested for taping cops.
That's why you use something like Justin.tv or QIK or something that live uploads. Cop beats you up and smashes your phone? The resulting payout you'll get will make the beatdown worth it.
I'd totally take a beatdown if it would make me a multi millionaire :)
Let's just say that, generally speaking, Russian and Chinese companies work very differently from those in USA. If their "CIA" shows up and wants something added, you either add it or you may be out of business...and that's if they're feeling generous. You can't exactly file a whistle blower lawsuit or go public with the info.
Still, this isn't necessarily a negative for Facebook. They optimized their take, and Zuckerberg won't be needing the market's approval or capital again for a while.
Technically, but the minute you go public you have to worry about the stock price. If the stock drops (IMO, it will drop here) expect a deluge of doom and gloom stories from the media questioning their business model and everything else in between. Then you may have unhappy employes due to the stock drop, harder time hiring, higher expenses since the stock price isn't rising and so on. Bezos did it so far, but it isn't easy. Zuckenberg sold a nice chunk of his $100 Billion company, buyers will be vocal if the price drops.
FB will have to do everything right for a few years just to justify the $100 billion price tag. It's not easy as ads can drive people away.
good read, I +1 you. And don't forget that Facebook does not have a special place in media when it comes ONLY to a positive news; they will write about them big time whether its good or bad news. This will definitely not play nice when there are some bad news, because lots of publicity around bed news will have an impact on their stock performance.
You're assuming Google would do that and/or that it will be allowed to do that once sites find out. They are a lot of businesses who have zero incentive to give their data to Google.
This "AI" is just scrapping and replacing wikipedia while serving ads.
Google gets 100% of Google.com ad money vs 30% or so on Adsense. A major difference I'd say. Plus, some sectors are worth a lot more and you can bet Google is aware of that.
To be fair, Acel, DST and others are really small investors, compared to Fidelity, Barclay's, BOA and the likes. Plus, Accel's and DST's business model is to score and more or less get out at the IPO.
DST = (Not sure about AUM, but they have about $1B in Facebook which is a relatively large amount, but they only invested $200m which is a very small amount compared with large mutual funds.)
Compared that to large asset managers and you can see they are very small:
Go to page 23, Accel would be ranked around 480 on the list with just $6B under management. (the numbers listed on that table are in millions, top asset managers have multi trillion dollars under management.)
Also it is worth noting that the companies he mentions like Fidelity are experts at valuing publicly traded companies where Accel etc. are experts at finding small, rapid growth companies.
