This is a guest post from Andy Jolls, founder of VideoCreditScore.com. Andy ran the myFICO.com business for a number of years and now educates consumers with free credit videos. You can follow him on Twitter at @vidcredit.
My wife and I were married a few years ago. I was working at myFICO at the time we got engaged, so I was already swimming in the world of credit, debt, and personal finance.
In fact, Suze Orman was a partner of myFICO, so I was exposed to a lot of her principles. For example, she believes that all couples should go through the prenuptial agreement process, which seems like heresy to most of her viewers. The “pre-nup” has negative connotations for most people, but Orman has a different spin on it — which I adopted.
Her concept is that a pre-nup doesn’t need to be focused on a negative outcome of divorce. Instead, it can be used as an exercise to really talk about money, and especially values around money. Her thinking is that if a couple can get through a pre-nup, they’ll be better equipped to handle financial issues down the road. Orman believes that every couple should have a pre-nup, and that it isn’t a tool just for wealthy people.
So, Molly and I decided to do a pre-nup. We told friends that we intended to do a pre-nup and the reactions were, perhaps, unsurprising. Most looked at me with disdain, as if it were something I was forcing her to do. But we held firm because we knew the data: 80% of all divorces are related to money issues. Over half of credit distress issues come from an estranged spouse.
Honestly, the process was awkward at times. But mostly, it was a healthy discussion about goals, fairness, and respect. It was a chance for each of us to show each our true character. I learned what was important to Molly, and she learned what was important to me.
To be frugal, we had a lawyer friend draft up the standard documents, and then we each hired an attorney to make sure we were covering all the bases.
To those of you who say, “I don’t need a pre-nup to have great communication with my spouse!”, I say this: There’s a value you can’t see until you go through it. You are forced to show more of who you really are, and it’s hard to force that in the courting stage.
In the end, the process was cathartic. Now our money discussions don’t involve communication issues. Don’t get me wrong: Like most couples, we have disagreements about how to spend money! But we feel great about the transparency the pre-nup provided, and the fact that it’s made us better communicators.
Do you have experience with a pre-nuptial agreement? How do you feel about the process? Would you recommend it to others?
GRS is committed to helping our readers save and achieve your financial goals.Savings interest rates may be low, but that’s all the more reason to shop for the best rate.Find the highest savings interest rate from Ally Bank, Capital One 360, Everbank, and more.
This article is about Planning, Real-Life, Relationships
Disclaimer: This content is not provided or commissioned by American Express. Opinions expressed here are author's alone, not those of American Express, and have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by American Express. This site may be compensated through American Express Affiliate Program.
Discover is a paid advertiser of this site. Reasonable efforts are made to maintain accurate information. See the Discover online credit card application for full terms and conditions on offers and rewards.
SEARCH FOR RECENT ARTICLES
One issue I haven’t seen mentioned yet is that a pre-nup is not just for the high-earner; it’s also beneficial for the lower-earner in the marriage. It protects them as well. For instance, what about a woman who quits her job to stay home and raise the children? Studies show that in most cases she will come out much worse after a divorce – by leaving the official work force, she makes it much harder to come back in and make the same amount as her husband whose been working all these years. Current laws do not adequately compensate her for that.
Were I to get married, I would absolutely want a pre-nup, even though I would almost certainly be the one with lower assets and lower income. There is a certain peace of mind that comes from knowing, to some degree, what your financial future holds, whether you’re still married or divorced.
Personally, I would want to have a pre-nup that states we each leave with the total asset value that we came in with, and then we split everything we accumulate during the marriage. That would allow us to merge our finances completely. No one is surprised in the end. I am not one who would want separate accounts.
loading....
“What’s stopping a married couple from drawing up and signing a pre-nup?”
SO you are asking me what’s stopping a couple who is POST-nuptials from signing a PRE-nup(tial agreement)?
Answer: Timing.
Wow..the lack of reading comprehension out there is staggering, but this one takes the cake.
I still believe that a huge percentage of the people here who are SO against pre-nups are already married without them.
If they were to be single and have high assets they would change their tunes, nevermind if they were to suddenly find themselves in divorce court with a vengeful spouse.
loading....
You don’t need a pre-nup to have the conversations you described. You used a pre-nup to force you to have the discipline to have those discussions, because Suze Orman said you should. I personally don’t consider Suze Orman an authority on relationships. (Frankly don’t like much of her money advice either – she operates out of fear too much of the time.)
Again, a pre-nup isn’t necessary. The conversations are.
Anne @alivenkickin
loading....
To “Mr. Not the Jet Set”
You hit the nail on the head, mister. Well-done.
Anne @alivenkickin
loading....
@Mr ToughMoneyLove
Mr. ToughMoneyLove Says:
October 29th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
“On top of that he cites Suze Orman as an authoritative source on marriage and money. How many marriages has she been in? ‘Nuf said.”
Per Wikipedia:
“Her partner of seven years is Kathy Travis, a co-producer on The Suze Orman Show.[27][28][29][30] In the interview, Orman said that she wishes she could marry her partner partly because it could save them both a lot of money. She says, “It’s killing me that upon death, K.T. is going to lose fifty percent of everything I have to estate taxes. Or vice versa.”[27]”
So your comment is neither accurate nor fair to Suze about how many “marriages” she’s had, she can’t get married because its not legal where she lives.
loading....
@ Adam: I know that Orman can’t marry her producer which is precisely why I said that she cannot speak authoritatively on the bonds of marriage. She makes my point with her own comment that she wishes they could marry “because it could save them a lot of money.” Nice.
loading....
Personally I think a pre-nup should be required, along with the marriage license. It would save time, money, and acrimony in divorce cases, and it would lose its nasty connotation. No one is HURT by a pre-nup. Really. It doesn’t indicate lack of trust, or misplaced value, or an escape plan. It’s a legal document drawn up in case of worst-case scenario, to be prepared and then effectively forgotten, like choosing guardians for your kids. A lot more people (who never thought it could happen to them) get divorced than die while their kids are young.
In a perfect world, divorce would never happen. Same with abortion, childhood cancer, and air pollution. It only makes sense to prepare for the world we actually live in. It ain’t nice but it’s true.
loading....
Oh my goodness, so many people in this thread want to tell everybody in the world what “marriage” is, and who is worth committing to! Stick to your own lives, people, and leave everybody else to theirs. I’m a little surprised so many people are still so against divorce, haven’t we just accepted it yet? I didn’t even think people said “till death do us part” anymore. Seriously guys, we live like, 40 years longer now than we did two centuries ago. Do you honestly expect to be the same person and with the same person in that time span? That’s insane. I’ll feel very lucky indeed if my partner and I continue committing to each other when we are 70.
I guess I’m a little biased since I think it’s all a sham anyway (and no, my parents aren’t divorced. they are as co-dependently trapped in their marriage as ever, is that success to you?). If I ever get legally married it will solely be for legal reasons, in which case a pre-nup would be a great thing. And as for this “spirituality of marriage” crap, leave your religion out of my finances. Only Catholics call marriage a sacrament, anyway.
loading....
Frances, I like your style. I’m not sure most of this crowd will, but it made me smile.
loading....
@Joe Morgan (82)
I really loved what you said there. Behind every man/woman there is a great partner that is the backbone or the supportive spouse. So I definitely feel that they are entitled to their share. I feel the exact same way.
Now if two people are already established/successful when they get married then it can get a little bit more complicated. However, I feel this doesn’t necessarily warrant a pre-nup.
While I did enjoy everyone’s perspective, I find this whole thread a little amusing. Asking a question like this is like asking if a [insert random financial product here] is for everyone.
Of course it’s not for everyone, and it will never be. It will always depend on someone’s situation/beliefs.
To make it simple, If the end goal of a marriage is to stay married, then everything that a couple does should add to or promote that goal.
At the very least, people should bring up the idea not with the intention of getting one or not, but rather to gauge each other’s feelings on the matter. If it’s the case where people disagree, and one is for and the other is against it, then for a healthy relationship to move forward, they must resolve by agreeing on something.
Since money is such a fundamental value, a couple must overcome this disagreement for their healthy relationship to be sustainable. Nothing should ever be left under the table. Topics like these should be brought up just for the sake of opening dialogue. This is true for anyone, regardless of your beliefs or experiences.
loading....
I’ve been dating my boyfriend for 9 months. We haven’t talked marriage or combining assets yet, but I think a pre-nup is a sensible thing in our case.
I’ve never married and don’t want children. I have a healthy retirement saving, enough emergency reserve, zero debt, and very little other assets. He is 12 years older than me, earns twice as much as I do, owns a house that is almost paid off, and has two teenage children who live with his ex-wife.
I believe part of his asset should always remain in his name only and then get passed on to his children one day, and I don’t want to get my hands in it at all. I also believe that any asset that I didn’t earn through my own effort should not automatically become mine through marriage. If I’m totally honest when I’m saying this, then why should I be reluctant to prove it with a legal document?
On my part, I want all or a large part of my retirement savings to go to my mother if I die before she does. We have been each other’s only close relative in the past 15 years or so. She has lived a much tougher life than my BF has, and the money will make a bigger impact to her than to him. But if my husband doesn’t sign a spousal waiver, then he will automatically inherit all my retirement savings. Yep, marriage itself is an automatic pre-nup agreement.
Here’s my version of idealism: Some people have less faith in marriage than others. Call it a character flaw if you want to, but a flaw doesn’t make me immediately run out of the door and start looking for the next Mr. Perfect. A lot of people come into marriage with emotional baggage, financial debt, or health problems. If I want to share a life with this person then we will deal these issues together and grow together and the trust will build up instead of going down the hill from the day we signed the pre-nup. Maybe 20 years down the road he and I would think that the pre-nup turned out to be totally unnecessary, but would still agree that it was the right thing to do at the time we got married.
I’m not going to let the standard marriage vow dictating my life, because I did not write that vow.
loading....
Hey Frances – Keep your money and inherited dysfunction out of my sacrament and we’ll be fine. (Except for your partner, of course. He/she is in for an unfortunate surprise when your relationship timer expires.)
loading....
@ Jeff and the “fun fact” that divorce lawyers write most prenups – No. Family law lawyers write most prenups. Because they know about family law. Do you want a real estate lawyer drawing up your marital contract?
I haven’t read all these comments yet but just want to add: if we have to take a test to get a driver’s license, why shouldn’t we have to take a test to get a marriage license? And why shouldn’t it include questions on personal finance? Make it a take-home test and there’s your conversation starter.
loading....
A pre-nup is a waste of money for most average people in first marriages. Half of nothing is nothing. It can be different for those in mid-life marriages where you might have responsiblilities like children or serious businesses. I only know one couple who got one. She had a significant amount of money and her pre-nup was fairly simple and it made clear that she couldn’t simply leave the marriage without some financial fall out.
Most people don’t have any real assets to protect. But yah, I guess my husband could have protected his guitar and that beat up hand-me-down sofa. I would get to keep my vintage coat collection. (I’m sure he’d be dying to keep those.) Who gets the paintings I bought at goodwill?
Steve – Good for you (and all men like you) for not marrying. You’d probably make some stupid woman very unhappy.
I know a girl who badgered her boyfriend into proposing. He We all have no idea why she’s with him. She doesn’t need a pre-nup. She needs some self esteem and better taste in men.
loading....
Speaking as a young, unmarried girl, I will say that a pre-nup is not for me, personally. I think a problem here is that the issue is not clearly defined. Some people are saying that they will/would get a pre-nup to protect their children, and I think that’s absolutely necessary. Or in the case of a spouse’s death, when their money should be yours and not your new spouse’s; sure. But I think many of the people who are on here not agreeing to a pre-nup are thinking about first marriages, and probably young marriages. As Gee (#114) says above me, half of nothing is nothing. I would venture to guess that many of the people against pre-nups are imagining marriages at a young age, when people have little or nothing to their name.
I also want to agree with #110, “If the end goal of a marriage is to stay married, then everything that a couple does should add to or promote that goal.” I agree with this completely. To turn it around, if the end goal of marriage is to stay married, then why draft a plan for the break-up?
loading....
J.D. I think we’ve identified the “source” of the anti-prenup view: it’s religion. ToughMoneyLove put it all out there with his “marriage is sacred” stuff.
Some of you may recall J.D.’s post on the International Museum of Women’s online exhibit. There’s a nice little piece there on the history of marriage.
Religions worldwide may “bless” certain marriages, but they don’t create them. Marriage is, and has always been, a civil contract subject to civil law. Historically, it was a way to transfer property from one household to another, the property generally including a female person. In Europe, an accompanying contract spelling out the use of the property was, for the literate propertied classes, unquestionably part of the deal.
So, it’s nice that some people think marriage is sacred, but it is also, unavoidably, a legal arrangement; and needs to be entered into with the fullest possible disclosure just as a matter of good faith and TRUST.
loading....
I still strongly believe that the couples with nothing, as the last two posts have pointed out, could use a pre-nup or counseling because most people don’t stop to consider the costs of having a stay-at-home parent when they marry. “Off-ramp” for 5 years, and you will not be able to rejoin the workforce at the same level you left it at, let alone higher.
Oh, and all the people who are assuming that mental illness, drug addiction et al is a choice: it’s not. It’s often uncontrollable. 15 years down the road your spouse may lose a parent or a best friend and become horribly depressed and start drinking heavily because it dulls the pain. Suddenly they’re not the same person anymore, and they’re belligerent and defensive about the drinking. No one plans to do that.
loading....
“Mr. ToughMoneyLove Says:
October 30th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Hey Frances – Keep your money and inherited dysfunction out of my sacrament and we’ll be fine. (Except for your partner, of course. He/she is in for an unfortunate surprise when your relationship timer expires.)”
Isn’t that the whole point? When we’re not in love anymore (yes, I say “when,” not “if” because I’d rather be pleasantly surprised), there won’t be any surprises. Almost in spite of yourself, you hit the nail right on the head.
loading....
I think a lot of people who are interested in protecting children/assets from a previous relationship when going into a new relationship would be better served with a trust-type of legal document rather than a pre-nup.
But then – most people should probably set up trust documents whether they are going to be married or not, as it is a much more foolproof way of protecting assets and allocating them.
loading....
Samantha – Young couples need prenuptual agreements just as much as established couples. The reason is a legal concept called “permanent alimony.” It is imposed by courts after a lengthy marriage (10 years) breaks up. You could get married at 20, divorce at 30 and have to turn over half of your salary to your ex-spouse for the rest of your LIFE. If you decide you want to stop working and travel for a few years, or voluntarily retire at age 65, the court will throw you in jail for failing earn enough to maintain your alimony payments. See the Pierce v. Pierce decision currently before the Massachusetts Supreme Court. Both men and women can find themselves trapped in this indentured servitude if they are foolish enough to enter into a marriage contract with the wrong person without a pre-nup.
loading....
Kevin (#120) -
I certainly didn’t mean to say that young couples don’t need to talk about these issues. I think pre-martial counseling is necessary, not just for financial decisions, but for everything that needs to be discussed. By saying I was young, I’m only (a.) trying to be clear since a few people have brought up a possible age->position correlation, and (b.) because I think some posters were thinking about the “half of nothing is nothing” side of it.
For anyone who hasn’t heard of the Pierce v Pierce case, the issue seems to be that in Massachusetts, alimony has no “expiration date” so to speak, and the payer can be responsible to the payee even past retirement age.
But in the end, details of that case or any other don’t matter. Being naive, or stupid, or optimistic, I refuse to say, “honey, I love you, let’s spend the rest of our lives together — probably.” If I’m going to marry someone, join myself to them, have children with them, then that’s because I’m jumping in with both feet.
loading....
@Kevin.
In many states, there is no longer “permanent alimony”. Instead, the assets and debts are simply split in half.
loading....
@Chacha1
You are right. Religion is what binds us to “until death do us part;” “What God has put together let no man put asunder.”
I am not yet married but I know I would go slow if a guy was anti-prenups. I have been a Christian all my life and realize that if I love someone whether they give me their money or not, should not be an issue. A few months ago I discussed this with a married friend and she thought the devil was speaking through me. Our religious beliefs have a strong influence on how we view things.
I watched Whitney Houston a few weeks ago, on the Oprah Show and she said she stayed in the marriage because she respected and totally honoured the vows. In fact she used the phrase “Holy Matrimony”. She never wanted a divorce even when they had challenges. She then said the only vows she broke was when she took drugs (I don’t know what that meant). But I guess she was in for “in sickness and in health.”
Anyway she then leaned towards Oprah and said she knew what she was doing “when she signed the prenups.” I smiled. Smart girl, I thought. However, I still clearly remember her saying to Oprah, “What God has joined together let no man put asunder.” All I can say is that we all need to watch our backs and think before we leap. Wish me luck that my Mr. Right does not freak out on pre-nups!!!
loading....
After reading the responses to this topic I’m just glad that divorce is frowned upon in my country and the women never consider divorce as a serious option. Kind of makes me think twice about marrying an American woman. (No offense to American women).
loading....
Well, Mike, I’m not offended at all by your recognition that American women expect to be partners with their husbands at will and feel justified in leaving a marriage that they can no longer stand, just as I’m sure men are free to do in your country. Thankfully we’ve (mostly) given up treating women as chattel, and a pre-nup can now replace a dowry agreement (yeah, it’s way nastier for a woman to make a financial agreement with her husband than for her father to do so. right).
loading....
No pre-nup for us either. We met when we were 18. When we got married, we owned enough stuff to just fill our Volkswagon.
Now 16 years later, we’re on the same page about finances. But I will say this, if something were to happen to my husband, and I were to get re-married (I can hardly imagine it, much less type it), but I would want a pre-nup. Not for me so much, but to protect our three boys.
loading....
As this last comment demonstrates, lots of folks confuse estate planning with marriage failure planning. Creating a protective trust and care-upon-death plan for your children is something that you should have already done and if not, certainly doesn’t require a prenup to accomplish.
And Mike – Your comment is on-point. Lots of women and men in this country treat marriage as a disposable relationship, to be discarded when real work is required to maintain it.
loading....
I am surprised by people’s reaction. Maybe I am missing something.
To me, prenups aren’t about “planning for a divorce”. To me, prenups are part of the “making sure it’s the right one”. Especially if you do want to spend your life together. You will want to make sure you are compatible, and prepared. Some nasty stuff can be revealed during a marriage and I am pretty sure they can lead to separation and divorce.
I said earlier I didn’t get a prenup but I certainly wouldn’t have been offended by the idea of taking one. I think it’s a generally good idea. We just thought we’d do the “discussing” part on our own to save the money.
And I’m confident our talks helped us jump into this marriage with both feet, to use that same expression. I’m not afraid of anything turning up because I know exactly what I agreed to when I married him.
I do agree that what’s important is the talks, not the prenups. But often the prenups provoke these discussions that people might avoid otherwise. And I think getting married without having such talks is more of a recipe for disaster than getting a pre-nup is.
loading....
I really like the suggestion of mandatory pre-nups for all. Then you don’t have to worry about it being ‘unromantic.’
I haven’t seen my scenario yet. I’m getting married next fall. I have very few assets. My fiance has many, as does his extended family. I am the one pushing hard for the pre-nup while he is the one resisting. He trusts me, and that’s great. I trust him. But it’s also extremely important to me to demonstrate to his family that I’m not interested in their money. I have enough insecurity about them looking down their noses at me. This is a defense.
loading....
@33 – There are actually other reasons beyond planning for divorce that a couple might chose to have a prenup (or Premarital agreement as we call them in my state) as an estate planning attorney I use them regularly, and not just for older couples or those who have been previously married.
Obviously you should trust the person you are marrying. I don’t think the author is arguing that point. However, the process of creating a prenup can bring up issues that a couple never thought to ask one another prior to getting married. Many couples who come into my office don’t understand how property titles, inheritance, or debt is impacted by their impending marriage. Maybe pre-marital finances classes would be a better term.
loading....
DavidV: “Kevin (71), I’m an Ontario lawyer (granted, not family lawyer) and I’d disagree with your assessment that pre-nups don’t hold water here.”
I would really love to hear more about this. What can a pre-nup concretely change that is different from state/provincial law? Can you get a pre-nup after marriage? What if one partner changes their mind and tries to go for the typical agreement while divorcing, which would give them more access to the couple’s assets? Could/would a judge choose to honour family law over the pre-nup? Why/why not?
Would love a future post on the ins and outs of this, JD.
loading....
To Frances, I forgot to mention that I lived in the Philippines. The women there have enjoyed much better gender equality than what you assumed.
http://business.rediff.com/report/2009/oct/27/wef-india-ranks-a-poor-114th-in-gender-equality.htm
Philippines ranked 9 out of 134 countries surveyed.
Perhaps this is due to women holding many top ranking positions in business and holding presidency twice in recent memory.
Divorce in my country is illegal and neither partner is allowed to divorce the other. As a Catholic majority country we value family relations and don’t take marriage lightly.
By the way, the divorce rates for Filipino women and American men are estimated to be much lower than the US average.
loading....
Kevin (#37, 120) (and PerDiem, #111) bring up the good point that you can trust your spouse totally and yet not trust your state. Surely you can make a better contract with your fiancé than your state can, which at best is forced to go what it thinks is generally best for most people.
Aaron, some people are way better with kids than they are with finances. If I were having kids, I’d rather marry someone like that than someone who’s better with finances than with kids.
Steve, there definitely can be benefits for men to get married. 1) It can be a lot easier to visit their love in the hospital (or maybe hospitals aren’t so mean anymore, I’m not sure). 2) Their auto insurance rates go down. 3) They get much better rights to children they have with the person they married. 4) They have access to cheaper health insurance if their working spouse can get some for them while they are between jobs.
Brooklyn money, I can see the view that if something happens you ARE supposed to be okay with your spouse getting half the assets you earned prior to your marriage. Once you get married, you are a single family. There is no “re-start” button you can push like in a video game to go back to where you started. (I can also see the other view of course.)
FYI, there is such a thing as post-nups–you can re-write your pre-nup or create a new document.
I don’t think that not wanting a pre-nup is a sign that you shouldn’t marry someone. And even if you do consider this a negative, it’s impossible to find people without negatives, so hopefully you find someone whose negatives you can handle.
I personally have a little trouble with the idea of combining money and forgetting who earned it and forgetting who spent it because you’re just one family now. You’re still made out of two+ people. And I’m one who doesn’t want to do what it takes to make a big pile of money. I’d rather be frugal and retire early. I’m likely to marry someone who makes a lot more money and wants to spend more money, live in a bigger place, etc. I am not willing to pay my fair share for a bigger place, but I’d want to live with my spouse. So there are going to be weird agreements about how much I’m willing to earn and willing to spend. And if I got a divorce it would not be fair for me to get half of the net worth if I were unwilling to do half of the work to build that. I don’t want kids, so I wouldn’t be sacrificing my work skills to build up other parts of the relationship–I’m sacrificing earning potential because I prefer the free time and lack of stress. If my partner is willing to spend more time and deal with more stress, he deserves to get more money.
On the other hand, my current guy feels squicky about pre-nups. We’ve both left trails of evidence of how we treat our exes after break-ups and it seems pretty clear that we are both reasonable and even border on being overly generous. So it doesn’t seem like a big deal not to have one.
loading....
PerDiem, #111 and Debbie, #133
If you are concerned with inheritance especially in the setting of a blended family, you:
1) absolutely should not leave that up to the state and it’s specific intestate laws
2) absolutely should discuss this with your potential spouse and both understand each other’s point of view.
3) can handle all of that with a fairly simple, state-specific will.
still no ‘pre-nup’ needed.
I’m no estate planning attorney, but maybe the TML’s can correct me if I’m wrong on #3.
loading....
I will absolutely have a prenup. It is not an option NOT to for me, anymore than not having a living will. I am 23. If I were to get married tomorrow, you better bet my estate planner AND accountant would have to meet me at the courthouse.
I don’t think any of my friends would be surprised I would want a prenup, nor my SO. My family knows I wouldn’t get married without one.
Also, all I could think of while reading this post and comments was the Kayne West song Gold Digger. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57X3kCB2FtI)
loading....
wow! lots of comments here. I guess I’m part of a the minority, because I have a pre-nup. and i don’t regret it, and it wasn’t a big deal.
while we were engaged, we went through exercises to share everything we’re expecting from the marriage. we also share the belief that we are in this for good and are 100% committed to make it work (honestly, i don’t think some people are, despite the vows).
i feel completely certain that he’s the type of person who wouldn’t ‘go after’ me in the event things went wrong.
But we did it anyway. a main reason was for my parents, they were divorced and it got ugly. i think they just want peace of mind that this thing is there that would help me in that worst case scenario.
and as for trust, i think my family trusts him MORE for doing one. they’ll never truly know the feelings between us, so this is a sign of commitment.
#111 Per Diem – really well put.
#129 Karen – i understand your situation completely!
#135 Jenn – haha! i was thinking of that song too!
loading....