Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

Just looked at the Sunday Times Rich List site and there are 1794 listed millionaries!!!

From £27.7 billion down to a paultry £40 million, I havent the inclination to add it all up.

There are at least 40 on £80million, so if we say that £100million was an average then thats 1790 X £100 million = £179,400,000,000 or 179.4 billion. Thats about half of what the UK needs to run the country for 6 months.

So why the F**K are we asked for our hard earned cash by some of these people to give to charity when this lot of rich pussys could solve the worlds problems over night. It just makes me sick that these rich B******S have the front to ask for my cash when they are so rich. The interest on their money alone could run quite a few third world countries. And these F**KERS are only the BRITISH ones.

What if we add on the good old USA, FRANCE,GERMANY and JAPAN.

I bet there would be enough money to make sure we ended world poverty, nobody would starve and cancer and most deseases would be cured.

Now that I have totally upset myself I am going for a kip. (sleep)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi All,

Just looked at the Sunday Times Rich List site and there are 1794 listed millionaries!!!

From £27.7 billion down to a paultry £40 million, I havent the inclination to add it all up.

There are at least 40 on £80million, so if we say that £100million was an average then thats 1790 X £100 million = £179,400,000,000 or 179.4 billion. Thats about half of what the UK needs to run the country for 6 months.

So why the F**K are we asked for our hard earned cash by some of these people to give to charity when this lot of rich pussys could solve the worlds problems over night. It just makes me sick that these rich B******S have the front to ask for my cash when they are so rich. The interest on their money alone could run quite a few third world countries. And these F**KERS are only the BRITISH ones.

What if we add on the good old USA, FRANCE,GERMANY and JAPAN.

I bet there would be enough money to make sure we ended world poverty, nobody would starve and cancer and most deseases would be cured.

Now that I have totally upset myself I am going for a kip. (sleep)

Wow, where to begin. First of all, charity is something people need to engage in irrespective of their station in life because we are called to love one another and to love our neighbor even as we love ourself. Having said that, remember that while there is no doubt these wealthy musicians can give a lot more money to good causes than most of us can, they are also taxed at an enormously high rate. I live in America so I am not that familiar with the tax system in England, but, from what I understand, it is not particularly favorable to capital formation which means the marginal rates are pretty high and I'm sure progressive (i.e., the more you make the higher the rate you will pay).

Isn't this why the bands from the 60's, and 70's, (Stones/Beatles/Zeppelin) had "tax holidays"? So the Queen didn't confiscate 100% of their income for the year?

Bottom line is the wealthy already give away a significant percentage of their income to the government via income, property and other forms of taxation. Even middle class taxpayers in America are paying almost 50% of their income to the tax man. Hmm...tax man, wasn't there a song about that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can i just ask, why is Plant worth more than page, i mean Page like created led zeppelin.

Not to mention you need hell of alot of talent to be that good at the guitar which takes a hell of a long time, and he was in the yardbirds aswell, and singing isn't the hardest thing to do.

What i am saying is NOT Plant hasn't got talent becuase he has and he does have a really angelic voice......anyway getting off the plot ..........to rap it all up Page has a gift for the guitar and he is the creater for the greatest rock band ever to live yet he is worth less.......i just don't geddit. :mellow:

Edited by Jimmy's A Legend
Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow, where to begin. First of all, charity is something people need to engage in irrespective of their station in life because we are called to love one another and to love our neighbor even as we love ourself. Having said that, remember that while there is no doubt these wealthy musicians can give a lot more money to good causes than most of us can, they are also taxed at an enormously high rate. I live in America so I am not that familiar with the tax system in England, but, from what I understand, it is not particularly favorable to capital formation which means the marginal rates are pretty high and I'm sure progressive (i.e., the more you make the higher the rate you will pay).

Isn't this why the bands from the 60's, and 70's, (Stones/Beatles/Zeppelin) had "tax holidays"? So the Queen didn't confiscate 100% of their income for the year?

Bottom line is the wealthy already give away a significant percentage of their income to the government via income, property and other forms of taxation. Even middle class taxpayers in America are paying almost 50% of their income to the tax man. Hmm...tax man, wasn't there a song about that?

Hi Mate,

"GOTCHA"

I dont really care about rich people and what they do with there money and I dont believe they really care about me either.

In the 60's and 70's the goverment in England Taxed the rich at a maximum of 98%, they got 2 and 6 in the pound in our old money, thats about 2p nowadays. And the Beatles and Stones still got rich.

The conservative goverment in 1979 then set the rate at 40% max tax. Thats 20 times more money for them. Only thing is many rich people had already gone abroad to pay tax at a reduced rate to goverments that they had no alliegence with. The Rolling Stones pay there taxes in Holland and have done since the sixties, thats why they can only spend a limited time in the UK before they go "HOME" to there perfered country. I remember Mick Jagger once missing one of the other stones daughters weddings because of this.

Did you know that most corporate companies in England pay little or no tax to this country so the burden of tax falls back on the poor. I am in no way attacking anyone for being rich, why any one of us could win the lottery tommorrow, but I dont like it when they start trying to get money for their charities from the very people that made them rich in the first place, US.

We the poor pay more in tax than the rich ever will, just ask any businessman like I have and they will tell you about their tax breaks. I pay 50% of my income every week one way or another to the tax man, does the rich man? When he does then he can ask me to contribute to his charity but not untill then.

And lets face it, a lot of the rich people that we adore on here havent used their wealth exactly in the right way, have they? And dont you have a go at our Queen, and call her Mam next time, LOL. Her decendents gave up their wealth 200 years ago to the goverment, thats called the Crown Estates which generate about 80 million, of which she gets about 22 million to run the Royal family.

And just to finnish, I think that one of the reasons that our cities are in such a bad state is becauase our goverments dont tax the rich enough. Just look at the rich list that brought about this discussion, I bet they wouldent print how little personal or corporate tax they all pay.

Sorry for the rant, back to bed I think.

Regards Danny

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can i just ask, why is Plant worth more than page, i mean Page like created led zeppelin.

Not to mention you need hell of alot of talent to be that good at the guitar which takes a hell of a long time, and he was in the yardbirds aswell, and singing isn't the hardest thing to do.

What i am saying is NOT Plant hasn't got talent becuase he has and he does have a really angelic voice......anyway getting off the plot ..........to rap it all up Page has a gift for the guitar and he is the creater for the greatest rock band ever to live yet he is worth less.......i just don't geddit. :mellow:

One word: Heroin

Link to post
Share on other sites
One word: Heroin

I don't agree with that. First, I think Page probably spent more of his income over the years on real estate, rare art, etc., than Plant did and those assets may or may not be taken into consideration when doing this type of ranking.

Also, keep in mind, in addition to Zeppelin, Plant has had a successful solo career with a few platinum selling records including Now and Zen, the Honeydrippers and now Raising Sand. Plus he's had several successful world tours over the last two decades unlike Jimmy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
One word: Heroin

I wouldn't be so quick to make that judgement. Post-Zeppelin, Plant has released more albums and toured way more than Page. Page has released only solo 2 studio albums and didn't tour to support one of those, and one live album with the Crowes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't agree with that. First, I think Page probably spent more of his income over the years on real estate, rare art, etc., than Plant did and those assets may or may not be taken into consideration when doing this type of ranking.

Also, keep in mind, in addition to Zeppelin, Plant has had a successful solo career with a few platinum selling records including Now and Zen, the Honeydrippers and now Raising Sand. Plus he's had several successful world tours over the last two decades unlike Jimmy.

First off, it was a joke. Maybe in poor taste, but none the same. Sorry no smile emoticon attached.

Secondly, Page's heroin problem was many years ago. I believe he's over that now.

Who knows, with the world financial situation, maybe Robert had better investment advisors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
First off, it was a joke. Maybe in poor taste, but none the same. Sorry no smile emoticon attached.

Secondly, Page's heroin problem was many years ago. I believe he's over that now.

Who knows, with the world financial situation, maybe Robert had better investment advisors.

I would add that there is a large margin of error in these sorts of lists - it's not like you ring up Page and Plant and ask them how much money they have. Who knows how it's compiled? But if they are saying Plant is worth 80 and Page 75, it would only take a 3.5% margin of error to make it possible that Page actually had more than Plant. 3.5% margin of error is reasonably accurate, and I would imagine this particular poll would have a larger margin.

Edited by Cactus
Link to post
Share on other sites
And it goes without saying that these figures would have to be drastically adjusted if they happened to announce a few shows down the road. :D

Your a master of understatment.It is touring that generates the real big money

Link to post
Share on other sites
Your a master of understatment.It is touring that generates the real big money

True but its not like they would tour like the old days, i mean yea it would generate more during the time they are touring but albums stand the test of time and 20 years down the road can still be bought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Really? It never used to

Musicians, especially well established and successful musicians, have become much better business people. All of them have sharp pencils on their "staff" which protets them from shady promoters and vendors.

Today, with all of the creative ways to market your brand, a band like Led Zeppelin could expect to gross 1 billion dollars from a world tour.

Also, don't forget, with respect to the worlds richest list, unlike a Bill Gates or Warren Buffet, each of whom has their wealth tied directly to publicly traded companies (Microsoft, Berkshire) where everyone on the "street" knows the value of their stock, a musician can keep as much of their holdings and personal wealth secret as they choose and only share what they want to share.

I can say this with almost absolute certainty, some mid level corporate accounting bureaucrat in Page and/or Plants publicists office released only that information that was approved by the assistant to Plants business manager who answers to his lawyer who probably answers to his personal manager who probably answers to his girlfriend or some other close and trusted relative.

When you have this much money, you don't hold a press conference and announce it. Plant has said in the past that he doesn't know how much money he makes, how much money he has and he said he certainly doesn't give any of it away. These guys have been burned too many times and the last subject that interests them is money. I understand Mick Jagger is a rare musician when it comes to the financial side of the music business. They say he's actually a quite shrewd business man.

More power to him but most artists are exactly that, artists and so they leave the accounting to other people while locking it up behind a trusted team of lawyers, accountants and trusted friends and family.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Musicians, especially well established and successful musicians, have become much better business people. All of them have sharp pencils on their "staff" which protets them from shady promoters and vendors.

Today, with all of the creative ways to market your brand, a band like Led Zeppelin could expect to gross 1 billion dollars from a world tour.

Yeah I am aware of the improved level of conduct in the touring business, I made my remark based on the notion that touring became quite expensive for bands, with the equipment needed, travelling costs, number of staff required. I was under the impression that in this day and age, staging a large rock concert tour in stadiums was an extremely costly venture and bands were finding it difficult to recoup the money through ticket sales alone, which is why a lot of big names were turning to corporate sponsorship to help off-set the cost of the tour.

Although I guess with increase in concert attendance and the continual upping of ticket prices, it probably isn't the case anymore, but there was a period there where tours were proving difficult to pay for themselves. I mean definately Pink Floyd made no money on their Wall tour in 1980.

In the 80's, the idea was you toured to promote your album sales, but I guess today, seeing as though no one pays for music anymore, singles and albums now promote your concerts.

It's such a strange time we live in when you think about it, I mean with the advent of iPods and portable MP3 players, people are now listening to more music, more often. And it should've really been a goldmine for artists and record companies, except all this demand for music isn't being paid for, so the only way artists can earn a living is on the road.

But I guess it works. I haven't paid a single penny for any music by Pink Floyd or Led Zeppelin, but I did shell out $700 for tickets to see Roger Waters, and I'd do the same for Led Zep

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can i just ask, why is Plant worth more than page, i mean Page like created led zeppelin.

Not to mention you need hell of alot of talent to be that good at the guitar which takes a hell of a long time, and he was in the yardbirds aswell, and singing isn't the hardest thing to do.

What i am saying is NOT Plant hasn't got talent becuase he has and he does have a really angelic voice......anyway getting off the plot ..........to rap it all up Page has a gift for the guitar and he is the creater for the greatest rock band ever to live yet he is worth less.......i just don't geddit. :mellow:

I'm not 100% sure about this, but I believe that lyrics are 'worth' more than music composition when it comes to songwriting royalties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this doesn't mean shit, but it's kind of interesting, check it out:

1. Paul McCartney 500m

2. Elton John 235m

3. Mick Jagger 225m

4. Keith Richards 190m

5. Eric Clapton 140m

6. Phil Collins 140m

7. David Bowie 120m

8. Rod Stewart 120m

9. Roger Waters 90m

10. David Gilmour 85m

11. Robert Plant 80m

12. Jimmy Page 75m

13. Brian May 75m

14. Nick Mason 55m

15. Pete Townshend 40m

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite a "gentlemen's club" eh?

Not to be nit picky, but you forgot Ringo Starr, who's in there with 140 mil too!

Yes he is, actually that's a testament to the Beatles earning power, I mean look at George Harrison, when he died 7 years ago, he left £99 million in his will, and now it's up to £160million, £61 million in just 7 years...

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not 100% sure about this, but I believe that lyrics are 'worth' more than music composition when it comes to songwriting royalties.

It's not a hard and fast rule that that is the case...it all depends on the band and how they choose to split royalties - I know G'n'R came up with a system where lyrics were worth approx 30%, vocal melody 20%, music 40% and drums 10% or something along those lines. Therefore whoever wrote the lyrics got a certain amount, but if someone else wrote the vocal melody, a certain amount, and the 10% for drums means that the drummer gets a cut, which doesn't always happen.

So in response to your statement - it really depends.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm calling bull here....isn't Page the executive producer on all their albums? That should mean he makes the most. I think he doesn't want the government to know what he's really worth since of all the lame tax laws in the UK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...