Jump to content

Top 100 wealthiest celebrities, look who's #7


surrenders
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Subscriber

Well, I'd love to be rich, so I can't throw the first stone at them, but I just want to say that the list is a bit misleading as U2 is not a person, it is 4, so if we divide the total they are around 32m$ each, which isn't that bad, but they would rank much lower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber

That's why it's listed as 'U2' and not an individual, so it's not misleading in my book.

But they list them as a group while the rest are individuals, then most people, not you or me but most people, will read Bono and, well, you know the rest...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber

I agree that they should be individual, but on the other hand they really are the richest rock band right now, possibly of all time by the end of U2360. But yeah, who cares, even if they weren't they'd still be the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't Bono still own a chunk of Forbes, through Elevation Partners?  Shouldn't Forbes then acknowledge that Bono is in fact an investor/owner in the enterprise?  That's just good Journalism 101 - any ownership or conflict of interest, etc., should be divulged.  For example, if Rupert Murdoch is out to grab another media company, and the Wall Street Journal writes about it, it's just the norm to disclose that Murdoch also owns the WSJ.  But Forbes doesn't seem to be doing that with Bono - yes, I've caught several examples of this, since EP bought into it.  Bad journalism. No wonder all they can do it tote up people's income and make lists of famous people!

 

-- eaplatt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber

Doesn't Bono still own a chunk of Forbes, through Elevation Partners?  Shouldn't Forbes then acknowledge that Bono is in fact an investor/owner in the enterprise?  That's just good Journalism 101 - any ownership or conflict of interest, etc., should be divulged.  For example, if Rupert Murdoch is out to grab another media company, and the Wall Street Journal writes about it, it's just the norm to disclose that Murdoch also owns the WSJ.  But Forbes doesn't seem to be doing that with Bono - yes, I've caught several examples of this, since EP bought into it.  Bad journalism. No wonder all they can do it tote up people's income and make lists of famous people!

 

-- eaplatt

 

I don't reallty understand how Bono owning part of forbes would create a conflict in a list like that - unless you think they made up/ changed the income for u2?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...