|
Celeb Photos: Madonna officially has the highest annual earnings EVER.
Banned
Member Since: 2/6/2014
Posts: 4,224
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Quietly Trek
He works for Forbes. His article has to be approved before it's published if he's going to give an explanation as to why Forbes did not include Madonna on their billionaires list. It's a statement from Forbes, lol.
|
A statement from forbes would be an official spokesperson reading a statement to the media.
You're smater than that. You know editors publish stories by their writers that are not necessarily the view of the organisation though, I do believe forbes actually do believe he's correct.
I doubt they did their research but it's certainly not a statement.
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/2/2011
Posts: 9,459
|
Queen of Pop
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 2/6/2014
Posts: 4,224
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Quietly Trek
It's a Forbes article explaining what Forbes calculated to come up with the $125 million estimate. Why does it matter what other information is stated in the article? It has nothing to do with the $125 million estimate. Everything else in that article is trying to explain why she was not included in their list of billionaires.
How are we not going to trust that source about what Forbes used to come up with the $125 million number when it's published by Forbes?
HOWEVER, I'm glad you agreed that what the article lists as calculation for the $125 million estimate is correct, which is the only part of the article I sourced.
If you "talk" to him or not, that's irrelevant. His article was approved by other Forbes employees before it was published, which can only mean that Forbes acknowledges the article.
|
Again, that's saying "Oh this part is correct and this part isn't and over here is"
If there's but one part of a story that's incorrect the credibility of it all comes into play.
If that's how you want to roll though, that's how you roll. I mean, we're at the point now where it's just going to be agree to disagree.
We havn't attacked each other personally which is great but the discussion is heading towards nothing.
You're going to believe what you want to believe, so will I. I guess that's where it has to end though, I do admire your ability to not throw in the personal insults. Seldom happens here.
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/4/2012
Posts: 4,435
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
Just out of curiosity, did you know Madonna (like Michael Jackson) owns the rights to all of her music and distributed her merch through her own companies Webogirl and boytoy inc
So to get my head around your frame of mind what do you think the royalties on 300million records would be, and her companies webogirl and boytoy moving merch make, per year?
|
Just like Madonna, Beyoncé has her own company: Parkwood Entertainment. Her company handles her tours, merchandise, films, music, etc.
Considering that record sales have declined tremendously, it's unlikely that Madonna's (or any other artist's ) back catalogue is selling at a high rate. Royalties on album and single sales are therefore negligible. The point here is Madonna's biggest source of income is from her tours.
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/4/2012
Posts: 4,435
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
Again, that's saying "Oh this part is correct and this part isn't and over here is"
If there's but one part of a story that's incorrect the credibility of it all comes into play.
If that's how you want to roll though, that's how you roll. I mean, we're at the point now where it's just going to be agree to disagree.
We havn't attacked each other personally which is great but the discussion is heading towards nothing.
You're going to believe what you want to believe, so will I. I guess that's where it has to end though, I do admire your ability to not throw in the personal insults. Seldom happens here.
|
If what Forbes calculated to give the $125 million estimate was incorrect, the article would have been corrected before it was published. This is not up for debate. Forbes is a respected media outlet despite your personal feelings. Articles aren't published without some sort of copy editing and fact checking at respected media outlets.
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/19/2011
Posts: 5,270
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Quietly Trek
It's a Forbes article explaining what Forbes calculated to come up with the $125 million estimate. Why does it matter what other information is stated in the article? It has nothing to do with the $125 million estimate. Everything else in that article is trying to explain why she was not included in their list of billionaires.
How are we not going to trust that source about what Forbes used to come up with the $125 million number when it's published by Forbes?
HOWEVER, I'm glad you agreed that what the article lists as calculation for the $125 million estimate is correct, which is the only part of the article I sourced.
If you "talk" to him or not, that's irrelevant. His article was approved by other Forbes employees before it was published, which can only mean that Forbes acknowledges the article.
|
Madonna earned over 300 million dollars from the tour ALONE (not including merchandising) with the MDNA tour. she has all the branding, MG line etc going on and owns a HUGE stock with Live Nation. (meaning she'd actually not only make even more money from her own tours, she'd make money from other pop artists' tours AND their merchandising AND their CD releases as well!)
Forbes is very well aware of the Live Nation deal but doesn't include it. Why do you think? - Why do you think they cut Madonna's earnings in half (for her tour alone!) and added a bunch of ridiculous taxes they didn't include for other popstars?
Why do you think Forbes felt the need to respond to a GOSSIP article in a TABLOID stating madonna is a billionaire? (like if it's such a serious magazine, why would they give a **** about a gossip piece and personally call out MADONNA when she doesn't want to be seen as a rich millionaire (or billionaire) in the first place? (because as a madonna fan you should know that they put her on the cover as smartest business woman of all time in the early 90s, with nothing but praise, only to have Madonna shade them back big time. so she obviously doesn't want to be associated with them even when they say good things. Let that sink in.)
And most importantly: why do you think all of this negative reporting from Forbes suddenly happened right after they hired FOX-journalist Roger Friedman? (if you're a Madonna fan like you claim you are, you should know all about him)
Have you ever heard of the term "agenda-setting" in media?
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/10/2010
Posts: 4,708
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Quietly Trek
Just like Madonna, Beyoncé has her own company: Parkwood Entertainment. Her company handles her tours, merchandise, films, music, etc.
Considering that record sales have declined tremendously, it's unlikely that Madonna's (or any other artist's ) back catalogue is selling at a high rate. Royalties on album and single sales are therefore negligible. The point here is Madonna's biggest source of income is from her tours.
|
let it go, u got clocked with sources in 10+ posts and u still are going on?
Madonna actually FORBID forbes to look on her earnings some time ago as she found their sources laughable. It's a long time ago that M reached a billionaire status so yeah.
Nobody discredits Beyonce's earnings, you're the one who discredits Madonna's!
Everyone knows Bey gets lot of cash, but to simply compare her power with Madonna's - it's funny.
Now, if you have nothing better to do, as it seems for the past 12 hours, please stop spamming the thread. THIS IS ABOUT MADONNA.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2011
Posts: 37,539
|
Congrats to her
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/4/2012
Posts: 4,435
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
A statement from forbes would be an official spokesperson reading a statement to the media.
You're smater than that. You know editors publish stories by their writers that are not necessarily the view of the organisation though, I do believe forbes actually do believe he's correct.
I doubt they did their research but it's certainly not a statement.
|
It's a statement explaining why Forbes doesn't consider Madonna a billionaire. It's not the writer's opinion alone. If that were the case, it wouldn't be published on Frobes's media and entertainment page.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 2/6/2014
Posts: 4,224
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Quietly Trek
If what Forbes calculated to give the $125 million estimate was incorrect, the article would have been corrected before it was published. This is not up for debate. Forbes is a respected media outlet despite your personal feelings. Articles aren't published without some sort of copy editing and fact checking at respected media outlets.
|
It's no secret that forbes bases their numbers on estimates. It's no secret that Madonna and her people don't cooperate. - It's factual that they're wrong. We just don't know by how much and in what direction.
Who do you think forbes are? They're not accountants. They're not mind readers. They're journalists that talk to industry insiders that won't cooperate with them or GUESS based on what others in the industry do.
We already know forbes is incorrect. You yourself even acknowledged the only source you wanted to take from the article you linked was their calculation, are you now willing to take everything mentioned as fact, even though it can easiy be proven incorrect in a few seconds?
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/4/2012
Posts: 4,435
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ale-Alejandro
let it go, u got clocked with sources in 10+ posts and u still are going on?
Madonna actually FORBID forbes to look on her earnings in 1995 as she found their sources laughable. It's a long time ago that M reached a billionaire status so yeah.
Nobody discredits Beyonce's earnings, you're the one who discredits Madonna's!
Everyone knows Bey gets lot of cash, but to simply compare her power with Madonna's - it's funny.
Now, if you have nothing better to do, as it seems for the past 12 hours, please stop spamming the thread. THIS IS ABOUT MADONNA.
|
What, lol? No one has provided a credible source to backup their claims except for me. No one has clocked me, but I did clock you several times here.
I'm not arguing if Madonna is a billionaire or not, so why are you mentioning that?
It's not funny. She's only $10 million behind in earnings from published numbers.
If someone quotes my post, I will reply, lol.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 2/6/2014
Posts: 4,224
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Quietly Trek
If what Forbes calculated to give the $125 million estimate was incorrect, the article would have been corrected before it was published. This is not up for debate. Forbes is a respected media outlet despite your personal feelings. Articles aren't published without some sort of copy editing and fact checking at respected media outlets.
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Quietly Trek
What, lol? No one has provided a credible source to backup their claims except for me. No one has clocked me, but I did clock you several times here.
I'm not arguing if Madonna is a billionaire or not, so why are you mentioning that?
It's not funny. She's only $10 million behind in earnings from published numbers.
If someone quotes my post, I will reply, lol.
|
While you provided noteworthy sources
The main source under debate here is one that contains obvious errors in the majority of its body of work.
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/4/2012
Posts: 4,435
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wanderlust
Madonna earned over 300 million dollars from the tour ALONE (not including merchandising) with the MDNA tour. she has all the branding, MG line etc going on and owns a HUGE stock with Live Nation. (meaning she'd actually not only make even more money from her own tours, she'd make money from other pop artists' tours AND their merchandising AND their CD releases as well!)
Forbes is very well aware of the Live Nation deal but doesn't include it. Why do you think? - Why do you think they cut Madonna's earnings in half (for her tour alone!) and added a bunch of ridiculous taxes they didn't include for other popstars?
Why do you think Forbes felt the need to respond to a GOSSIP article in a TABLOID stating madonna is a billionaire? (like if it's such a serious magazine, why would they give a **** about a gossip piece and personally call out MADONNA when she doesn't want to be seen as a rich millionaire (or billionaire) in the first place? (because as a madonna fan you should know that they put her on the cover as smartest business woman of all time in the early 90s, with nothing but praise, only to have Madonna shade them back big time. so she obviously doesn't want to be associated with them even when they say good things. Let that sink in.)
And most importantly: why do you think all of this negative reporting from Forbes suddenly happened right after they hired FOX-journalist Roger Friedman? (if you're a Madonna fan like you claim you are, you should know all about him)
Have you ever heard of the term "agenda-setting" in media?
|
Forbes felt the need to respond because other sites were picking up on a gossip site and people were then wondering why Forbes kept her off their list. It's that simple.
Madonna doesn't take home the entire tour gross, which is why they don't include it. Madonna has to pay taxes, which is why they deduct certain earnings. They do the same for Beyoncé.
Investments aren't factored in when Forbes publishes their lists. Beyoncé's investments aren't factored in, Bono's investments aren't factored in, etc. It's not an agenda against Madonna. Enough with these conspiracy theories...
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/28/2012
Posts: 19,176
|
so according to quietly trek it's legit to say that forbes have direct access to madonnas bank accounts?
well if that isn't thread worthy i don't know what else is.
and what about coconut water? was it mentioned already?
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/4/2012
Posts: 4,435
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
While you provided noteworthy sources
The main source under debate here is one that contains obvious errors in the majority of its body of work.
|
According to who? You? Madonna shares her finances with you?
Again, the explanation about her billionaire status is irrelevant here. The source was used to prove you wrong regarding what Forbes calculated to come up with the $125 million estimate, which you agreed was correct. So what is your purpose now?
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 2/6/2014
Posts: 4,224
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Quietly Trek
Forbes felt the need to respond because other sites were picking up on a gossip site and people were then wondering why Forbes kept her off their list. It's that simple.
Madonna doesn't take home the entire tour gross, which is why they don't include it. Madonna has to pay taxes, which is why they deduct certain earnings. They do the same for Beyoncé.
Investments aren't factored in when Forbes publishes their lists. Beyoncé's investments aren't factored in, Bono's investments aren't factored in, etc. It's not an agenda against Madonna. Enough with these conspiracy theories...
|
Forbes responded with a writer whom was about to release a biogrpahy on Michael Jackson where he compares money making to Madonna (in a negative way)
Put all this non sense bickering aside for a moment.
Do you honestly believe the media operates without agendas?
The conservative and liberal meida (fox news, billboard forbes huff post) all take part in perpetuating their own agendas. Like i said all nonsense aside, I hope you don't believe that the media (even forbes) is this altrustic being that relies on fact.
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/2/2012
Posts: 26,226
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Quietly Trek
According to who? You? Madonna shares her finances with you?
Again, the explanation about her billionaire status is irrelevant here. The source was used to prove you wrong regarding what Forbes calculated to come up with the $125 million estimate, which you agreed was correct. So what is your purpose now?
|
Someone ban ha
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/4/2012
Posts: 4,435
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
It's no secret that forbes bases their numbers on estimates. It's no secret that Madonna and her people don't cooperate. - It's factual that they're wrong. We just don't know by how much and in what direction.
Who do you think forbes are? They're not accountants. They're not mind readers. They're journalists that talk to industry insiders that won't cooperate with them or GUESS based on what others in the industry do.
We already know forbes is incorrect. You yourself even acknowledged the only source you wanted to take from the article you linked was their calculation, are you now willing to take everything mentioned as fact, even though it can easiy be proven incorrect in a few seconds?
|
Forbes never claims to know the exact amount. However, they try to come close as possible, and they don't factor in investments.
Forbes is a media outlet with a large sum of money and wide-ranging connections. Their predictions are far more accurate than, let's say, the New York Post.
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/19/2011
Posts: 5,270
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
It's no secret that forbes bases their numbers on estimates. It's no secret that Madonna and her people don't cooperate. - It's factual that they're wrong. We just don't know by how much and in what direction.
Who do you think forbes are? They're not accountants. They're not mind readers. They're journalists that talk to industry insiders that won't cooperate with them or GUESS based on what others in the industry do.
We already know forbes is incorrect. You yourself even acknowledged the only source you wanted to take from the article you linked was their calculation, are you now willing to take everything mentioned as fact, even though it can easiy be proven incorrect in a few seconds?
|
I wonder why some people think Forbes has some kind of magic bowl where they can see all the exact earnings of each famous person. It's not even realistic at all. The more help they get from the celebrity the more they'll be able to report and visa versa the less help they get the more hard work they'll have to do to find out earnings of a celebrity who shields all of that info in the first place.
Her Art collection alone is worth over $500 million. She has hundreds of paintings and collections. Apparantly she has a HUGE share with Vita Coco as well. Again, we're not even counting the Live Nation share she holds and the huge royalties she must receive.
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/2/2012
Posts: 26,226
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wanderlust
I wonder why some people think Forbes has some kind of magic bowl where they can see all the exact earnings of each famous person. It's not even realistic at all. The more help they get from the celebrity the more they'll be able to report and visa versa the less help they get the more hard work they'll have to do to find out earnings of a celebrity who shields all of that info in the first place.
Her Art collection alone is worth over $500 million. She has hundreds of paintings and collections. Again, we're not even counting the Live Nation share she holds and the huge royalties she must receive.
|
+ ha investments that are not public
|
|
|
|
|