Subscribe
Well, it looks like the tabloids are tired of the Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes are divorcing/fighting stories and they are now back to the baby news.
OK! Magazine published a story that says Tom and Katie will try for another baby in the New Year. The mag goes on to say that the couple has agreed this is the right time.
They also have a quote from an “American friend” who said, “She no longer feels like she’s just Mrs Cruise. She’s her own person again. She and Tom have their disagreements, but deep down they love each other very much. That’s what is important."
Interesting.
The magazine goes even further with their next cover story which says that Katie will get $75 million dollars to have this second baby of theirs.
Again, interesting.
Image Credit: Bauer Griffin
Actually, the headline on the cover of OK is misleading. The article says that Tom set aside 75 million for the new baby, not for katie.
In any case, I think the whole article is rubbish.
Reply
Ah, thanks for the clarification bambi. That’s a huge difference, but yes, rubbish none-the-less.
Reply
I read on huffington post that Katie’s film “The extra men” is going to Sundance film festival. i wonder if Katie will be there.
Reply
Oops i meant “the extra man”
Reply
All over the place, its she negotiated a 75 million deal to have a 2nd baby, even on the news
Total rubbish for sure, but ”if”it was true, he sure must like her to pay that kind of money, thats the only way you can look at it.
Reply
bizarre story……….. who knows though….TC is one strange dude!
Reply
i dont understand the payment thing?? when you are married, at least in my situation, no matter who makes more, it goes into everyones account, and SHARE!!! Its THERE money. not his..not hers. It should be combined. I understand a pre-nup, but to pay your own wife to have a baby is un-heard of. crazy! They should have 1 big bank account that they both can use. share. its there money combined. Anyone agree????
Reply
I don’t really think about it heather because I think it is total BS.
Reply
WOW!! My husband and I have had 3 children together and I didn’t get paid!! I’m going to have to discuss that with him! LOL!!
All kidding aside, IF they had to negotiate a second child, they probably shouldn’t have another one. A strong marriage doesn’t require negotiation or payment for something bourne of love. Also, I agree with you heather, a married couple should function as one financially as well, but I imagine Tom is very much in charge of HIS money. Then again, that’s probably because, with 2 ex-wives, he’s probably already paid out quite a bit in settlements and doesn’t intend to pay out more than he has to in the future (should it be necessary). I’m sure Tom has an ironclad prenup with Katie. With his track record, he’d have to be a fool not to and Tom is no fool.
Reply
Women or Men today are better off with a pre-nup
It protects their money they worked for and any other investments/if something goes wrong they cant get her money or his money /IRS* is big on getting people
in Hollywood/
There must be more investments* that just what is in the bank/meaning he has more stashed in other* countries several banks.
Protects his investments in another name also cannot be detected/IRS in other countries ect/
Its like a financial agreement* between them and it protects the children from the parents spending their money gives the future security Taxes/child support issues
Its settled with lum sums In california the laws are different you have to pay alimony in that state.
Several living addresses are used and if one resides in N.Y the laws protect them from divorce issues/several living addresses also depends on what state their in….loo someone is smart…. something must be in the clause for her to move to N.Y /who gets the children in divorce/ which there taken care of so thats not the issue here ..or it was his idea in the contracts at the time because he is paying lum sums but we don’t know only the laws there ;)
If you remember they were married where? Then again where? Other countries ect. If the marriage paper was signed in Calfornia it may not hold up in Italy see…smart! Something not right…..
It also protects the childrens money for future use and cannot be touched by other incidents/another words Their must be a flaw somewhere/bankrupt? would be the only reason too/divorce in contract of say they married for 7 yrs and he wants out ect he just wants the children ect..and its been done before
Its just an agreement …but she is too smart but tango’s with the wrong source’s He won battle cause he had a pre-nup and other things in a contract before marriage
Its not a bad idea if you have it why not?
I think he was very smart What does he have to loose..nothing he has children and money what could he ask for more in life?
If parents don’t teach children the right way to a good marriage so its all about being a zillionaire and its problems
Now arent you all glad your poor! LOL LOL Its not easy on her but then again….if its love it will last ..money cant buy you love then again how many of us get married and divorced and have no money? Alot.
Money has problems and so does Love
Children come into the picture money is then set aside for their future use
How much money he gives Katie is private never told but she already was/ i think a millionaire right? If not perfect reason for keeping a pre-nup and you girls know we would do the same…
As far as having another child Best wishes!
Reply
What does Katies have to loose in this?
Reply