you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 8 hours ago (5 children)

Why do people bring up the prenup thing? It’s completely and utterly irrelevant.

They got married 8 years before Nvidia was created. Even if they had a prenup, it would have never covered anything from Nvidia anyway, because Nvidia didn’t exist prior to their nuptials. Prenups do not apply to assets gained after the marriage comes in force. Those are always marital assets. Any prenup that tries to protect new assets gained during the marriage wouldn’t be enforceable.

They didn’t have a prenup because at the time they married, and years into it, she actually made more money than he did because she was a more experienced chip designer and worked at AMD. She financially supported him and their family in the early days after he left his paying job to start Nvidia, and she gave design ideas for some of their early chips.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

    Why do people bring up the prenup thing?

    Schadenfreude. The thought that a multi-billionaire might face some kind of consequences, even if they remain a multi-billionaire.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 hours ago

    I get that, but it literally doesn’t apply.

    Prenup or not, they were married before Nvidia existed. She’s getting that money no matter what. It’s marital assets.

    The prenup is wholly irrelevant, so bringing it up just shows ignorance in the form of overconfidence.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 7 hours ago (1 child)

    Actually not true-- it depends on whats written in the prenup. Prenups can absolutely include agreements around future income and assets, designating them as non marital assets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment