Bono's Facebook investment

[phommel]

But equally Bill Gates' direct charitable donations have been well-documented and reported in the press whereas Bono's not-so. Plus Bono/RED incurred all that stick last year for wasting donations money. I'm not suggesting that Bono needs to make his donations public, just that the fact that he doesn't clearly makes it easier to be cynical about his humanitarian work when coupled with investments such as this, whilst similarly Gates receives no criticism.

but that also has to do with the difference between the 'american mentality' and the 'Irish/european mentality' towards charity issues

 

[corianderstem]

But equally Bill Gates' direct charitable donations have been well-documented and reported in the press whereas Bono's not-so. Plus Bono/RED incurred all that stick last year for wasting donations money. I'm not suggesting that Bono needs to make his donations public, just that the fact that he doesn't clearly makes it easier to be cynical about his humanitarian work when coupled with investments such as this, whilst similarly Gates receives no criticism.

It was the One campaign that got the criticism, and it was bullshit, because they're not a charity.

And Bill Gates receives LOADS of criticism. I know a lot of people have a lot of issues with the way he made his money but feel he's "making up for it" with his philanthropy, but there are plenty of others who feel it doesn't outweigh the dirty work that went into Microsoft's success.

Just saying that it's not a great comparison for that reason as well.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

But equally Bill Gates' direct charitable donations have been well-documented and reported in the press whereas Bono's not-so. Plus Bono/RED incurred all that stick last year for wasting donations money. I'm not suggesting that Bono needs to make his donations public, just that the fact that he doesn't clearly makes it easier to be cynical about his humanitarian work when coupled with investments such as this, whilst similarly Gates receives no criticism.

what donations were wasted? not doubting you or anything, i just don't follow this stuff as much as i should.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

yahoo.com

COMMENTARY | As the social media giant Facebook filed a prospectus with the Securities and Exchange Commission this week in anticipation of its first public share offering, the company's founder, Mark Zuckerberg, is poised to become one of the 50 richest people in the world.

His shares will have a net worth of $16 billion at the company's initial public offering price. What isn't as well known is that U2's lead singer, Bono, owns 1.5 percent of the shares in Facebook through his private equity firm, Elevation Partners. That makes his stake in the company worth just shy of a billion dollars. He would have to sell a lot of albums to make that kind of dough.

Bono's firm invested in Facebook in 2009, paying around $90 million for its shares. At the time, the financial media was skeptical of the investment due to the fact that the social media company was still more of a concept than a money-maker and the firm paid market price for its shares. Elevation's other investments at the time also made it ripe for ridicule. Elevation had already pumped large amounts of cash into Forbes Media, Palm, and Move.com.

According to the online publication, 24/7 Wall Street, Elevation invested $300 million in Forbes in 2006. Forbes value had dropped seven fold by 2010. A $100 million investment in Move.com resulted in a 50 percent loss, and Elevation only recovered its investment in Palm when the tech company was sold to Hewlett Packard. These sketchy investments landed Bono the title of world's worst investor in 2010. But who's laughing now?

To give some idea as to how rich this makes Bono -- at least on paper -- the richest rock star on the planet today is Sir Paul McCartney, with a wealth estimated at around $600 to $750 million. Bono is currently worth around $105 million, so he will top out at over $300 million above McCartney. The question is: what is Bono going to do with all the coin?

There isn't going to be a lot he can do with it all at once. The estimate of the value of his shares are based on the IPO price, which can rise or fall instantaneously upon release. He can't sell all of his stake in Facebook all at once or risk driving the valuation into the ground. One can suspect that he will cash out in tiers, monetizing at least a part of his stake. While part of the capital gains will likely be injected into diversifying Elevation's investments, part is likely to go to some of Bono's pet charities, most of which are focused on humanitarian aid in Africa.

It may be months before the IPO takes place, and valuations may change in the meantime, but Bono will still be the richest rock star on the planet when the dust settles.

 

[digitize]

Wow. That's more than a 1000% return on investment.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Bono being a legitimate billionaire will likely, unfairly, just lead to more cynicism about his causes.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I don't think its too much of a stretch of the imagination to envisage the mentality of 'make as much money as we possibly can' being inherent in the bankers who instigated the economic collapse though, do you?

There's a huge difference between wanting to be successful and being a dick.

 

[Popmartijn]

His shares will have a net worth of $16 billion at the company's initial public offering price. What isn't as well known is that U2's lead singer, Bono, owns 1.5 percent of the shares in Facebook through his private equity firm, Elevation Partners. That makes his stake in the company worth just shy of a billion dollars. He would have to sell a lot of albums to make that kind of dough.

[...]

It may be months before the IPO takes place, and valuations may change in the meantime, but Bono will still be the richest rock star on the planet when the dust settles.

And again the media are confusing Bono with the entity he's part of (as they also often do by implying that Bono = U2 (and U2 = Bono)). The investment by Elevation Partners is valued to be about $1 billion. But Bono isn't the only person in/investor of Elevation Partners. I believe there are three or four of them (and it might be even more). So not all of that valued worth is his, though even if it's a quarter then it's still a nice addition to his wealth of $250 million.

 

[Montrose]

This makes very little to no sense... It was his riches that allowed him to do his humintarian work, if he stopped making money he would have to stop or at least slow down his good works...

How many living in poverty are making a difference with the poverty stricken?

That's like asking how many cancer victims are making a difference to those stricken with cancer. You can do plenty to make a difference w/out money, especially if you're right there in the middle of the problem.

 

[digitize]

That's like asking how many cancer victims are making a difference to those stricken with cancer. You can do plenty to make a difference w/out money, especially if you're right there in the middle of the problem.

No, actually, it's not like that. First-world cancer victims have resources that victims of extreme poverty do not. Extreme poverty is a cycle and those suffering don't really have the resources to stop suffering or to lobby the developed world to help them.

 

[hand0lotion]

Bono has more zeros in his bank acoounts than I have in total dollars, yet we fans can still connect with him in the music making and on-stage. Like he once said during the 360, "We try to avoid the us and them in the songwriting."

Well, except perhaps "I've money now it's me that's spent" -North Star