|
|
|
|
|
by shmapf
3190 days ago
|
|
Can someone explain the maths to me? His original plan was to donate 99% of his wealth to philanthropy. The problem was that would involve selling the majority of his fb shares, and he would no longer have control of the company. To solve this he would split the stock into voting and non voting rights which would allow him to sell the non voting ones and maintain control. Now the claim is that the stock has increased so much this is no longer necessary. If I understand this correctly, that would mean that the excess shares he has over 50%, comprise 99% of his wealth, which can't be true because that excess is strictly less than 50%. Or perhaps he's just conceded that he will actually give away control, it will just take 20 years to do so. |
|