Oklahoma oil tycoon to eventually pay ex-wife nearly $1 Billion in divorce

Status
Not open for further replies.
AbortedWalrusFetus said:
If you could start a multi-billion dollar business why haven't you?
Click to expand...
Well Harold Hamm argued that he basically won the lottery and the company ran itself. The rest of us gaffers just aren't that lucky.

So it's not really about skill or knowledge. Just about rolling the dice and seeing if a company can take you to the high life.
 
EFLQNoz.png
 
Sho_Nuff82 said:
"She's accustomed to the lifestyle." I had this argument with a few coworkers when there were rumors of Tiger Woods' settlement being in the range of 300 million.

It's like, realistically, even if you have two kids, and you raise them from birth to the age of 18, $1 million US dollars a year, per child, is more than enough to ensure that the kids are in the top 1% of people in the world in terms of lifestyle. Over 18 years, that's $36 million for two kids. Say you round up for inflation, you get to $70 or $100 million even.

Why is $300 million reasonable in any way, shape or form? What are you giving compensation for? It seems much more like a) an award for successfully marrying "up" an b) a penalty for breaking your marriage vows. I don't believe the judicial system has any business doing either.
Click to expand...
That's pretty interesting. Now that you pointed it out, I can see how people can argue that idea.
Nonetheless 1 billion is insane for this case, but that argument does have a point (although I disagree with it)
 
As a "victim" of a divorce that finalized in 2014, the extend to which men get screwed in a divorce and even in marriage - even today in a world of equality - is absolutely insane to me.

It's one of those things that in 20-30 years we'll look back on our culture and still be in awe of the fact that alimony in this way still existed.

We still live in a day and age when a loyal and even hen-pecked man can have angry texts use against them to suggest physical violence. I was so thankful that in my divorce things didn't resort to that. But make no mistake, getting married is usually, LITERALLY (when considering first and second marriages), a statistical mistake. Chew on that one for a few minutes kids.

My female lawyer told me... brace for this... that often men could do better in their divorce negotiation if their ex wife has a male lawyer.
She told me that the female lawyer+ female divorce duo stack the decks in their favor in such a way that the man getting divorce often gets "so tired of dealing with these 2 cunts" (her words, not mine), almost in a vortex where their shitty soon-to-be ex wife seems to have cloned herself. Now you're dealing with 2 of them. Then they just end up saying "take it, just fucking take it and get out of my life". Anything to make those 2 disappear.

There are indeed good women out there, of course. But my advice to anyone would be to never get married. It's the kind of thing that you don't realize until it is too late, and you think back to hearing that perspective for so long and in the end you're just thinking to yourself.... fuck. They were right. There is a very long history with this kind of sentiment, and it's the majority opinion, not the minority opinion.
 
Kieli said:
Pre-nuptials can be overturned, or so I learned from Gaf.

So really the only thing to do when you got money is to not marry.
Click to expand...

There are good girls out there. It's very dangerous to get married in America, but there are good women out there that don't want to rape your wallet.
 
AbortedWalrusFetus said:
Oh thank god, you are just a troll. I thought people actually thought like that for a minute. Upon reflection I find you hilarious.
Click to expand...

You don't make billions of dollars in Oil and Gas without fucking over a lot of people. No one "deserves" billions of dollars and certainly not in that industry. I say this as someone who has directly benefited from living in a region with heavy O+G industry
 
Perspicacity said:
You don't make billions of dollars in Oil and Gas without fucking over a lot of people. No one "deserves" billions of dollars and certainly not in that industry. I say this as someone who has directly benefited from living in a region with heavy O+G industry
Click to expand...

Everyone deserves what they can make. If he made a billion dollars, good for him. In terms of fucking over people: it happens in all economic brackets.
 
E92 M3 said:
Everyone deserves what they can make. If he made a billion dollars, good for him. In terms of fucking over people: it happens in all economic brackets.
Click to expand...

You misunderstand. There's a difference between "earning" and "deserving". He earned the money fine within the system and good for him, but she earned it just as much and good for her. Neither one really "deserves" that much money though, it's an obscene amount.
 
I feel like in the next ten years conservatives will make the argument that splitting income after a divorce is exactly like the Estate tax(death tax). There are reason will be that the rich person made the money, why should someone else deserve it?
 
Sho_Nuff82 said:
"She's accustomed to the lifestyle." I had this argument with a few coworkers when there were rumors of Tiger Woods' settlement being in the range of 300 million.

It's like, realistically, even if you have two kids, and you raise them from birth to the age of 18, $1 million US dollars a year, per child, is more than enough to ensure that the kids are in the top 1% of people in the world in terms of lifestyle. Over 18 years, that's $36 million for two kids. Say you round up for inflation, you get to $70 or $100 million even.

Why is $300 million reasonable in any way, shape or form? What are you giving compensation for? It seems much more like a) an award for successfully marrying "up" an b) a penalty for breaking your marriage vows. I don't believe the judicial system has any business doing either.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I can absolutely understand high alimony if it will save a woman (or man, I suppose) from poverty, but in this circumstance I don't see why a "measley" 10 million wouldn't suffice. Her children will still inherit the dad's money regardless.
 
Watch Divorce Corps on Netflix. Family law is insane in North America.

But Chris Rock said it best:
Who needs a prenup. everybody needs a prenup.
 
Perspicacity said:
You misunderstand. There's a difference between "earning" and "deserving". He earned the money fine within the system and good for him, but she earned it just as much and good for her. Neither one really "deserves" that much money though, it's an obscene amount.
Click to expand...

I believe the word "deserve" shouldn't be in the same thought as earnings. We are not to judge what is obscene or not. He earned the money, period. No such thing as not deserving what you have earned.

We just share different philosophies on life.

entrement said:
Watch Divorce Corps on Netflix. Family law is insane in North America.

But Chris Rock said it best:
Click to expand...

Family law is ATROCIOUS in the United States.
 
Perspicacity said:
You misunderstand. There's a difference between "earning" and "deserving". He earned the money fine within the system and good for him, but she earned it just as much and good for her. Neither one really "deserves" that much money though, it's an obscene amount.
Click to expand...
how much does he deserve then?
 
E92 M3 said:
I believe the word "deserve" shouldn't be in the same thought as earnings. We are not to judge what is obscene or not. He earned the money, period. No such thing as not deserving what you have earned.

We just share different philosophies on life.
Click to expand...

Regardless of our philosophies on capitalism, she "deserves" the money she is getting as much as him. It's part of the system and she earned it through years of marriage and a divorce settlement per you; "Everyone deserves what they can make"

ntropy said:
how much does he deserve then?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant to my point, I just feel it's dumb for people to say he somehow "deserves" that much but that she doesn't.
 
First of all, $1 billion is a lot less than Hamm could have potentially lost. There was speculation that he could lose up to half of what was acquired during their marriage: something in the $7-8 billion range.

Secondly, his wife actually worked at Continental in a fairly senior role during the time that the value of the company skyrocketed from what I understand. This wasn't the stereotypical trophy wife scenario that many here seem to be picturing.
 
Perspicacity said:
Regardless of our philosophies on capitalism, she "deserves" the money she is getting as much as him. It's part of the system and she earned it through years of marriage and a divorce settlement per you; "Everyone deserves what they can make"
Click to expand...

I was never talking discussing her with you. It was just about him.
 
KingGondo said:
First of all, $1 billion is a lot less than Hamm could have potentially lost. There was speculation that he could lose up to half of what was acquired during their marriage: something in the $7-8 billion range.

Secondly, his wife actually worked at Continental in a fairly senior role during the time that the value of the company skyrocketed from what I understand. This wasn't the stereotypical trophy wife scenario that many here seem to be picturing.
Click to expand...

Well then, she earned a salary and she can keep her earnings as the economist that she was at Continental and should be fine then, right? I'm sorry but if she deserved more than what she had earned and saved, then she should have dealt with that during her own salary negotiations, and not in the process of her divorce. And yes, she is entitled to some money as part of the split marital assets. I've read he's worth 14 billion. I STILL don't think a marriage entitles a person to 1/14th of that "just because", but this is really messy since she worked there when the company was growing. Doesn't mean she (or he) was a great employee - the were oil tycoons playing the waiting game. A billion dollars as an alimony payout though - fuck - well maybe that will be a rallying cry for alimony repeal to gain momentum.

I cringe when I hear that term "documenting". Wanna know when you start documenting? When you are getting ready to get rid of an employee and terminate them. In the context of a marriage, the concept of one spouse documenting means that they should have left the relationship ages ago. The contempt one has to harbor to feel they need to start documenting is when it has gone beyond grounds for divorce and into self-preservation. Many women (and some men) do this alimony bullshit for one reason alone - and it is the same reason that people still smoke cigarettes: because it is still legal to do it. Not because it's right. But because even in 2014 a guy can get fucked like this still, by a woman - backed by a legal system that still supports women over men in a divorce. Having just gone through it with a woman who worked as hard as I did but managed to wrangle the system a little bit before my lawyer shut her down - there are absolutely avenues that women can take that aren't available to men. In a divorce, in America, in 2014, sexism is alive and well and absolutely benefits the woman over the man in this way. Anyone who has gone through a recent divorce will tell you that. The only area men have made inroads is in terms of parenting.

In my state, men can expect to be granted 50/50 custody of their kids unless there is extreme reason to do otherwise. But that doesn't stop women from trying it. 3 out of the 4 women who approached my ex girlfriend with questions about their plans to leave their husbands. they start right out of the gate with 'how can I get full custody' and cut him out of the picture. Thank god at least that doesn't happen these days.
 
Two rich out of touch people with way more money than they know what to do with (literally) arguing over how rich they each should be after going their separate ways and dividing up their assets.
 
E92 M3 said:
I believe the word "deserve" shouldn't be in the same thought as earnings. We are not to judge what is obscene or not. He earned the money, period. No such thing as not deserving what you have earned.

We just share different philosophies on life.



Family law is ATROCIOUS in the United States.
Click to expand...

Canada too. It's why I said North America.

Look up the Kids in the Hall's Dave Foley settlement.

A lot of Canada also has common law marriages, which is bullshit. US does too, but not many states have it.
 
KingGondo said:
Secondly, his wife actually worked at Continental in a fairly senior role during the time that the value of the company skyrocketed from what I understand. This wasn't the stereotypical trophy wife scenario that many here seem to be picturing.
Click to expand...

She was vice president of crude oil marketing. Definitely well off, but almost certainly nowhere near $1B in earnings potential. We're talking about executives that are handsomely rewarded monetarily versus executives that are much more handsomely rewarded monetarily and given significant equity compensation on top of that.

We're talking someone 1 or 2 levels down from the corporation's executive leadership team (CEO would receive reports from something like the executive vice president of crude oil, assuming that's a business area under their org chart).

Beneath the EVP of crude oil would be the vice presidents of various crude oil functional units, such as the VP of crude oil marketing.


Now, I'm not saying that he deserves $16 billion or whatever, but just because she was married to him and a successful executive in her own right doesn't mean she should be entitled to a few billion, particularly if her career path was something that would give her a lifetime compensation probably not even approaching
$50 million.

The split in assets and divorce payments should be based on lost earnings and joint income/equity-generating activities, and familial/household sacrifices made, not "oh, I married him, he has X amount of dollars, I should get a not-insignificant percentage of that because while married what's mine was his and what's his was mine"
 
Whatever. Wealth concentration is a big issue and I'm not going to worry about some multi-billionaire having to split up his wealth with his ex-wife and a bunch of lawyers.


It just becomes this weird thing about spite. What exactly is he not going to be able to buy? Another gold toilet? At these levels, it is just a fight over who gets to select which charity will get more money.
 
If you are worth $18 billion and only have to pay out $1 billion of that to your wife of 26 years that doesn't actually seem that bad at all.
 
speculawyer said:
Wow, you're a pretty sad bitter angry person.
Click to expand...
I was expecting my comments to generate that response. Ever deal with a woman in the course of a divorce? I hope not. Women are the loveliest thing, they make life worth living ...but "hell hath no fury like a woman scorn" is a saying for a reason.

And the system in the US supports their approach in divorce, it really does. It is one of the most sexist and unfair things about our country's legal system.

For that reason I will fall in love many times and maybe even have another kiddo one day but I will never, ever marry again. In divorce it becomes so clear how fine a line separates love and hate. It is literally a bad move for a man to get married -to a woman- in 2014.
For that reason her actions do not surprise me.
 
I feel sorry for the first wife, I'd feel depressed as fuck if I was in her place. Not only did this one play a part in ending her marriage, she also comes out of it a billionaire.
 
TOP SHOTTA said:
Update: She's apparently appealing the ruling.
Click to expand...

Sue Ann Hamm, the ex-wife of Oklahoma oil magnate Harold Hamm who was awarded cash and assets worth more than $1 billion in the couple's divorce this week, plans to appeal the judgment on grounds that it grossly undervalues the marital wealth she is entitled to.
Click to expand...
If you're already getting a billion then the law of diminishing marginal utility applies. The only reason to fight for more is either hatred or business acumen. Either way, she's probably just as ruthless as he is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

big storms in Oklahoma today
31
752
HeisenbergFX4 replied
do you pay attention to the moon?
44
417
Tajaz2426 replied
Apple is losing more than $1 billion a year on streamer Apple TV+ according to a new report
News  2
82
4K
MastAndo replied
Will every country eventually have the same westernised culture?
Opinion Business 
43
2K
RetroGamingUK replied
Gene Hackman and wife found dead, in their home
2 3 4 5
214
16K
Rentahamster replied
Top Bottom