I don't think it matters. By the argument I gave in my last post, they probably aren't worth anything like $40B. If the market cap figures everyone's quoting don't take some of the shares into account and the real number would be $57B, that just makes the valuation even more implausible.

Your incorrect corrections were rather matter-of-fact. And we are discussing the notion of Mark continuing as the CEO, not the plausibility of the company's current market value.

To be fair, I still can't find a single source to back up your higher figure, while I can find dozens with a quick Google search that quote a market cap of around the $40B that I and at least one other poster who replied to you were using. If you want the $60B you stated to mean something other than the most common valuation (market cap), you could clarify what exactly you're talking about instead, or the figure doesn't really further the discussion.

In any case, it still doesn't matter. Your argument for Zuckerberg's effectiveness is that he has built a very valuable company. Part of my argument is that it's funny money and the company isn't really that valuable at all. Whether we're thinking of the same kind of "funny money" doesn't make any difference to this argument.