IS BONO REALLY rock music’s first billionaire? The status of becoming the first sterling billionaire was long thought to be heading Paul McCartney’s way. He’s worth about £850 million (€1.05 billion), give or take, and would have been the first over the line in a few years or so thanks to a steady royalty stream and big touring revenue.
Despite what you may have read, though, McCartney is still on track, with Bono trailing behind. True, in terms of hard cash in the bank (or wherever they keep it) Bono is now slightly richer than McCartney, but he’s no billionaire. And even if his Facebook shares did make him a billion (which they didn’t), he still couldn’t be called rock’s first billionaire because that title belongs to the person who makes the billion from musical activities, not business investments.
The Elevation investment group, led by Bono, invested $90 million (€70.3m) in Facebook in 2009. That 2.3 per cent of the company is now worth an estimated $1.5 billion (€1.17bn), but Bono isn’t the only person in Elevation, and it’s believed his share of the social networking site loot is “only” around the $750 million (€586m) mark.
You have to dig into the paper trail to see how much McCartney and U2 have made from music, and that’s when all the trouble begins. Most everyone in the media now turns to the Sunday Times’ annual Rich List to get a figure for the world’s richest rock stars, but that list is only an educated guess. In Paul McCartney’s case, some of the quoted figures of his wealth in various rich lists include the £170 million (€210m) his wife Nancy Shevell brought to the marriage, which skews the picture.
In U2’s case they’re widely quoted as being worth £500 million (€618m), but is that between the four members or between the band plus manager Paul McGuinness? Also, the figures don’t seem to take into account the real earning potential of royalties over coming years. U2 are in a far stronger position to McCartney in this regard as their recent albums outsell McCartney’s recent albums by a large amount; also, U2 own their entire back catalogue whereas most of The Beatles’ songs are owned by Sony and the Michael Jackson estate.
Accurate reporting of wealth in the music industry is a minefield because of the “spiv” nature of the business. A band can be number one all around the world and still be in huge debt to their record label. When you go from zero to hero in a few weeks, as can happen in the music world, deals are flying around and it’s near impossible to know which box to tick on which contract. The costliest mistake ever made in the music industry was when Beatles manager Brian Epstein signed away the band’s image rights (merchandising income, basically) for just 10 per cent of their gross. In 1964 the band’s merchandising sales in the US alone were estimated by the Wall Street Journal to be over $100 million.
The headlines proclaiming Bono as rock’s first billionaire are incorrect on two points: a) he will only become rock’s first billionaire when that billion comes from music-related sales; and b) he’s not even a billionaire (although he’s close) from his Facebook dealings.
Music and money are an inflammatory combination. Hundreds of millions are routinely squandered/misappropriated/
unaccounted for due to the myriad nature of revenue streams across different worldwide territories, be they mechanical royalties, publishing income, merchandising sales or tour revenue. All things considered, there probably never will be a true rock music billionaire. And if there is, natural justice suggests it should be Paul McCartney – and most definitely not Simon Cowell.
Mixed bag
On his rider for a gig in Italy, Axl Rose demanded a “square watermelon”. Such a thing does exist but apparently had to be specially imported from Japan just for Axl.
Despite being offered the headlining slot at next year’s Glastonbury, Adele is saying “No way”.
