sfosteredi
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 351
- Points
- 18
Ivy I agree. I see by the question that some are influenced by some experts on tv or in papers who were saying that most people with Michael's wealth have more detailed trusts. In other words, Michael should have a detailed trust, because those OTHER people have detailed trusts. We need to stress that as long as Michael's trust accomplishes its goal, then it is adequate for Michael Jackson.
Further, how can anyone say they would like to see Michael "with a similar detailed document." Michael did not leave any money to us. The estate exec are not confused about what to do. They understand the trust and know how to act.
On another issue, I don't want to be rude, but are some people making this thread more complicated than it should be? Are people bringing in complicated scenarios and mathematical equations to confuse the issues?
I agree, too complicated. I'm not an accountant, an attorney, or in any other specialized field dealing with large estates. I do know this. Michael built and left a music empire. He left it to his children to someday own and manage.It has grown since his dealth, for that we can all be thankful. It's not about will this child get 5 mil or 4.5 mil,etc. They will all own the MJ Estate exclusively someday. They will donate to charity and continue his humanitarian efforts. Michael tried to make it as clear cut as possible, What he appears to have wanted is simple: kids run company, give to charity, don't spend all his money.