Tell Me :
Talk
Who knows how Forbes compiles the list? Ringo may have a high net worth from real estate or other items in the public record. Forbes may also be estimating what these people are worth based on what they would get if they sold everything, including publishing and merchandising. What they would sell for would be several times what they earn in a year.
My only point is that IF Ringo is worth $350MM, it certainly wouldn't surprise me...the commercial reach of the Beatles far exceeds any other act (with the exception of Elvis at his peak, perhaps).
The residuals on the music and merchandise alone would make him a very wealthy man, never mind his other endeavors.
But Mick the courgettes. I would prefer those, they're more nutritious.
----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."
"Shit!... No shit, awright!"
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-10-14 11:22 by Greg.
The Cirque du Soleil LOVE show is now in its 12th year in Vegas. A steady earner for Ringo.......
Man, how did Bono get so much? Mick had a 20 year head start on him accumulating wealth.
Klein...
actually it's moving those massive super deluxe box set reissues...that's where the money's at.
Paulie prolly has more money than the Rolling Stones combined.
The closest I can think of is "Clogs to clogs in 3 generations"
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: October 12, 2018 20:03
Man, do you have any idea how much Beatles merchandise gets sold worldwide every year, not to mention residuals on albums, songwriting credits, etc.? That's why Ringo is worth $350 million.Quote
24FPS
Keith was in TWO Pirates movies. I'm sure he got paid more to return for the second. I would never underestimate Keith. He might be quite canny when it comes to his wealth. Mick appears to have a much higher overhead.
Okay, what I want to know is how the hell Ringo amassed $350 Million? What's he got, one, two songwriting credits on Beatle albums? Certainly his little All Starr jaunts don't bring in a lot of dough. His solo career was more successful than the others, but that was the early 70s. The band he used to make money with hasn't toured since 1966, and doesn't appear to be regrouping soon. He had a few acting gigs, also in the 70s. He gets some mechanical royalties from Beatle albums, but $350 Million!!!!????
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: October 13, 2018 00:43
Does it matter? You can't take anything with you where you go. Before death we're all the same. Of course, Sir Michael has a lot of more people to support. But I guess there is enough wealth
to support hundreds of people for generations to come. But there is also the saying "förvärva, förvalta, fördärva" (aquire, administer, ruin). I don't know if there is an English eqivalent to that?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-10-13 00:48 by Stoneage.
to support hundreds of people for generations to come. But there is also the saying "förvärva, förvalta, fördärva" (aquire, administer, ruin). I don't know if there is an English eqivalent to that?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-10-13 00:48 by Stoneage.
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
marianna
()
Date: October 13, 2018 01:25
Quote
keefriff99Man, do you have any idea how much Beatles merchandise gets sold worldwide every year, not to mention residuals on albums, songwriting credits, etc.? That's why Ringo is worth $350 million.Quote
24FPS
Keith was in TWO Pirates movies. I'm sure he got paid more to return for the second. I would never underestimate Keith. He might be quite canny when it comes to his wealth. Mick appears to have a much higher overhead.
Okay, what I want to know is how the hell Ringo amassed $350 Million? What's he got, one, two songwriting credits on Beatle albums? Certainly his little All Starr jaunts don't bring in a lot of dough. His solo career was more successful than the others, but that was the early 70s. The band he used to make money with hasn't toured since 1966, and doesn't appear to be regrouping soon. He had a few acting gigs, also in the 70s. He gets some mechanical royalties from Beatle albums, but $350 Million!!!!????
Who knows how Forbes compiles the list? Ringo may have a high net worth from real estate or other items in the public record. Forbes may also be estimating what these people are worth based on what they would get if they sold everything, including publishing and merchandising. What they would sell for would be several times what they earn in a year.
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: October 13, 2018 02:50
I agree, and these lists are known to be inaccurate, sometimes wildly so.Quote
mariannaQuote
keefriff99Man, do you have any idea how much Beatles merchandise gets sold worldwide every year, not to mention residuals on albums, songwriting credits, etc.? That's why Ringo is worth $350 million.Quote
24FPS
Keith was in TWO Pirates movies. I'm sure he got paid more to return for the second. I would never underestimate Keith. He might be quite canny when it comes to his wealth. Mick appears to have a much higher overhead.
Okay, what I want to know is how the hell Ringo amassed $350 Million? What's he got, one, two songwriting credits on Beatle albums? Certainly his little All Starr jaunts don't bring in a lot of dough. His solo career was more successful than the others, but that was the early 70s. The band he used to make money with hasn't toured since 1966, and doesn't appear to be regrouping soon. He had a few acting gigs, also in the 70s. He gets some mechanical royalties from Beatle albums, but $350 Million!!!!????
Who knows how Forbes compiles the list? Ringo may have a high net worth from real estate or other items in the public record. Forbes may also be estimating what these people are worth based on what they would get if they sold everything, including publishing and merchandising. What they would sell for would be several times what they earn in a year.
My only point is that IF Ringo is worth $350MM, it certainly wouldn't surprise me...the commercial reach of the Beatles far exceeds any other act (with the exception of Elvis at his peak, perhaps).
The residuals on the music and merchandise alone would make him a very wealthy man, never mind his other endeavors.
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
StonedAsia
()
Date: October 13, 2018 08:56
Doesn't matter. They go more than any of us 
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
djgab
()
Date: October 14, 2018 04:25
I first read "is Keith healthier than mick?"
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
Greg
()
Date: October 14, 2018 11:21
Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
Keith has the lemons.
But Mick the courgettes. I would prefer those, they're more nutritious.
----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."
"Shit!... No shit, awright!"
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-10-14 11:22 by Greg.
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
Manofwealthandtaste
()
Date: October 14, 2018 13:51
Quote
keefriff99Man, do you have any idea how much Beatles merchandise gets sold worldwide every year, not to mention residuals on albums, songwriting credits, etc.? That's why Ringo is worth $350 million.Quote
24FPS
Keith was in TWO Pirates movies. I'm sure he got paid more to return for the second. I would never underestimate Keith. He might be quite canny when it comes to his wealth. Mick appears to have a much higher overhead.
Okay, what I want to know is how the hell Ringo amassed $350 Million? What's he got, one, two songwriting credits on Beatle albums? Certainly his little All Starr jaunts don't bring in a lot of dough. His solo career was more successful than the others, but that was the early 70s. The band he used to make money with hasn't toured since 1966, and doesn't appear to be regrouping soon. He had a few acting gigs, also in the 70s. He gets some mechanical royalties from Beatle albums, but $350 Million!!!!????
The Cirque du Soleil LOVE show is now in its 12th year in Vegas. A steady earner for Ringo.......
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
ab
()
Date: October 15, 2018 06:57
Mick has all those solo hits. 
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: October 15, 2018 08:02
...he's hit on quite a few solos tooooooooooooooo
ROCKMAN
ROCKMAN
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
Send It To me
()
Date: October 15, 2018 09:12
Quote
MisterDDDDForbes has them fairly close.. likely fairly accurate.Quote
Send It To me
Richest musicians lists seem to put Mick ahead of Keith by a bit. Assuming they have made the same from the Stones, however, you figure...
*Keith's never been divorced and has fewer kids
*Keith's one film project (Pirates of the Caribbean) did better than anything Mick ever did (Freejack, Elysian Fields, etc.)
*Mick never cashed in on a solo career, although he probably has sold few more solo records admittedly since STB went platinum
I dunno.
Paul McCartney-Net Worth $1.2 billion.
Bono-Net Worth $600 million. ...
Jimmy Buffett-Net Worth $550 million.
Elton John-Net Worth-$480 million.
Mick Jagger-Net Worth $360 million.
Ringo Starr-Net Worth $350 million.
Bruce Springsteen-Net Worth $350 million.
Keith Richards-Net Worth $340 million.
Man, how did Bono get so much? Mick had a 20 year head start on him accumulating wealth.
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
tioms
()
Date: October 15, 2018 11:08
Top 10: Richest rockstars:
[www.youtube.com]
Top 10: Richest bands:
[www.youtube.com]
Greets,
Forgotten: Charly Watts:
[www.youtube.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-10-15 11:12 by tioms.
[www.youtube.com]
Top 10: Richest bands:
[www.youtube.com]
Greets,
Forgotten: Charly Watts:
[www.youtube.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-10-15 11:12 by tioms.
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: October 15, 2018 11:14
Quote
Send It To meQuote
MisterDDDDForbes has them fairly close.. likely fairly accurate.Quote
Send It To me
Richest musicians lists seem to put Mick ahead of Keith by a bit. Assuming they have made the same from the Stones, however, you figure...
*Keith's never been divorced and has fewer kids
*Keith's one film project (Pirates of the Caribbean) did better than anything Mick ever did (Freejack, Elysian Fields, etc.)
*Mick never cashed in on a solo career, although he probably has sold few more solo records admittedly since STB went platinum
I dunno.
Paul McCartney-Net Worth $1.2 billion.
Bono-Net Worth $600 million. ...
Jimmy Buffett-Net Worth $550 million.
Elton John-Net Worth-$480 million.
Mick Jagger-Net Worth $360 million.
Ringo Starr-Net Worth $350 million.
Bruce Springsteen-Net Worth $350 million.
Keith Richards-Net Worth $340 million.
Man, how did Bono get so much? Mick had a 20 year head start on him accumulating wealth.
Klein...
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
jlowe
()
Date: October 15, 2018 13:58
Bono and U2 have been very canny, business wise. I believe they have tax exemptions
via Ireland's preferential arrangements for high earners in the 'creative industries'.
They share the same Financial Manager (Jan Favie) who is based in The Netherlands.
They seem to avoided the high cost litigation cases that seem to envelop most successful (or rather rich) bands eventually.
And yes, them seem to have had Managers (and perhaps Record labels and Publishers) who haven't screwed them, financially.
via Ireland's preferential arrangements for high earners in the 'creative industries'.
They share the same Financial Manager (Jan Favie) who is based in The Netherlands.
They seem to avoided the high cost litigation cases that seem to envelop most successful (or rather rich) bands eventually.
And yes, them seem to have had Managers (and perhaps Record labels and Publishers) who haven't screwed them, financially.
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
EJM
()
Date: October 15, 2018 14:29
Doesn’t Bono have early shares in face book ?
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: October 15, 2018 15:09
Yeah, I believe so...plus they got in on the ground floor with Apple launching the iPod and all that...Quote
EJM
Doesn’t Bono have early shares in face book ?
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 15, 2018 15:28
Quote
Spud
You'd think so wouldn't you .
But it's live performance that brings the money in these days ...largely why the Stones are still on the road if you ask many folks
But, when you have hundreds of millions already, the performance of investments probably becomes just as important as your core income in terms of how much money you're making.
actually it's moving those massive super deluxe box set reissues...that's where the money's at.
Paulie prolly has more money than the Rolling Stones combined.
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
xke38
()
Date: October 15, 2018 17:31
Must be Mick - to quote Keith:
"Never kept a $ after sunset, it always burned a hole in my pants"
"Never kept a $ after sunset, it always burned a hole in my pants"
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
vertigojoe
()
Date: October 16, 2018 10:03
Quote
Stoneage
Does it matter? You can't take anything with you where you go. Before death we're all the same. Of course, Sir Michael has a lot of more people to support. But I guess there is enough wealth
to support hundreds of people for generations to come. But there is also the saying "förvärva, förvalta, fördärva" (aquire, administer, ruin). I don't know if there is an English eqivalent to that?
The closest I can think of is "Clogs to clogs in 3 generations"
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: October 16, 2018 20:32
Thanks, Vertigojoe. Come to think of it, the second generation will be the true aristocracy in the sense that they will live solely on inherited money. Poor Sir Michael had to work for his money. Like a commoner!
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
dadrob
()
Date: October 17, 2018 01:07
The Beatles don't get much offa merch,.. Epstein had no idea about such things and the boys signed away 95% of that revenue stream. It is consider among the greatest business errors of all time.
Re: Is Keith wealthier than Mick?
Posted by:
MizzAmandaJonez
()
Date: October 17, 2018 01:36
Healthier maybe, wealthier definitely....less expenses
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Asgard60 , ChrisL , frankotero , fzv98d , Handova , JDSAM1994 , liddas , marclaff , ohmercy61 , pg592003 , quarkie , RollingFreak , sonnystitt , TumblinDice76 , wiredallnight
Guests:
1354
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10