Hacker News Reader

Comment by hkmurakami | Hacker News Reader

> But Facebook is not a charity. Facebook is not a social cause. If it were, Zuckerberg would have sold his shares and reinvested the cash back into Facebook when announcing his plan to donate $45bn.

Could you elaborate on your reasoning for this? I've reread this a handful of times and haven't been able to figure out the rationale for such a move under those conditions.

View on HN

Sure. Zuck realized he wanted to do a lot of good with his money. If he thought that Facebook was the best way to have an impact, then he'd simply donate his shares back to the company, which would give them ~$45bn in capital to reinvest in their mission.

He didn't do that. Which means, as the person with the single greatest understanding of Facebook, he thought he could have a more positive impact on humanity by putting that money elsewhere.

This doesn't mean Facebook doesn't do good things. This doesn't mean Facebook isn't a great company. His actions merely show that, for some objectives, he thinks other organizations can have a better impact.

Or maybe it's just that throwing more money at Facebook won't make it any faster or better at doing good. It's quite possible the Zuck really does think Facebook is the best way to have an impact, but more money won't increase the impact. So, having more money than ability to deploy in a single entity, he's branching out into others.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com