Tag Archives: bill gates

C.R.E.A.M. – 2014’s Top 10 Billionaires With Most Cash On Hand


money_wallpaper_by_samuelcool8-d57dmyd

This group of billionaires is redefining “Cash is King” in cash allocation to their portfolio. Who loves cash the most? See Russians, again. They love their cash and comprise half of the list. Bill Gates is a surprise on this year’s list holding as much cash as the next four on the list combined. Despite a horrible interest rate environment for cash with real interest rates being virtually negative around the world this group believes their is value in keeping their powder dry.

1. Bill Gates
Cash On Hand: $46.8 Billion
Cash As A Percentage of Portfolio: 53.6%
The world’s wealthiest billionaire is the king of cash among the top 100 billionaires in the world. His cash alone would make him the world’s seventh richest man.

2. Ernesto Bertarelli
Cash On Hand: $13.5 Billion
Cash As A Percentage of Portfolio: 90%
A Switzerland citizen who attributes the majority of his wealth to a drug manufacturer he and his sister inherited, and then sold to Merck.

3. Hans Rausing
Cash On Hand: $12 Billion
Cash As A Percentage of Portfolio: 96%
The cash king in terms of portfolio percentage inherited his 50% stake of the world’s largest maker of juice and milk cartons over three decades ago. Sold his stake in 2013 and now raises deer in Britain.

4. Mikhail Prokhorov
Cash On Hand: $10.1 Billion
Cash As A Percentage of Portfolio: 80.8%
Prokhorov holds a sizeable stake in the world’s largest aluminum producer and an eighty percent stake in the America’s Brooklyn Nets basketball franchise.

5. Michael Dell
Cash On Hand: $9.5 Billion
Cash As A Percentage of Portfolio: 55.9%
The man whose company started in his college dorm room has seen his company recently go from one of America’s largest public company back to being privately held.

6. Roman Abramovich
Cash On Hand: $8.7 Billion
Cash As A Percentage of Portfolio: 63%
Russia’s third wealthiest man owns a stake in the world’s largest nickel producer.

7. Mikhail Fridman
Cash On Hand: $8.6 Billion
Cash As A Percentage of Portfolio: 63.2%
Fridman has control of Russia’s largest closely held bank and second biggest food retailer.

8. Alisher Usmanov
Cash On Hand: $7.3 Billion
Cash As A Percentage of Portfolio: 48.3%
Arguably Russia’s technology finance guru. Has ownership stakes in Twitter, AirBnB, and Spotify. He invested in Facebook before ever meeting Mark Zuckerberg.

9. Viktor Vekselberg
Cash On Hand: $7.2 Billion
Cash As A Percentage of Portfolio: 50%
He controls Russia’s largest power supply company.

10. Phil Knight
Cash On Hand: $6.2 Billion
Cash As A Percentage of Portfolio: 27%
Mr. Just Do It, also known as the owner of Nike and sometimes labeled eccentric billionaire. Still pays Michael Jordan $60 million annually in royalties for Nike’s ownership of the Jordan brand that brings in revenues north of $500 million for the company.

Source: Bloomberg Billionaire Index

 

Advertisements

What If Warren Buffett Or Bill Gates Donated $2 Billion To HBCUs?


Many people are liberal in principle but reluctant in practice. – John M. Burgess

tumblr_m2u189kdug1rrww62o1_500

Warren Buffett just recently made a donation of $2 billion to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. A foundation it should be noted with a larger endowment than Bill Gates’ alma mater Harvard. This was after it was reported by Bloomberg that Buffett had earned $12.1 billion over the past twelve months. Now, to be clear I firmly believe that nobody should tell another man what they should or are obligated to do with their resources. However, I have real issues with European American liberals always having solutions to fix African American issues and yet interestingly enough none of those solutions ever involve them relinquishing resources to our control and allowing us to become institutionally equitable. Instead, their solutions are often presented more in a manner resembling the savior complex.

In 2006, Warren Buffett made a $31 billion pledge to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He stated that he was good at making money and that essentially the Gates Foundation would know how to best use it help the masses. That the Gates Foundation does major “philanthropy” in Africa which arguably given Europe and America’s medical history in Africa always raises red flags. There is also the sidebar of research being funded at the University of Pennsylvania on HBCUs and at Rice University on the history of African American towns. The two schools have a combined endowment value of $10.3 billion. An amount over five times the size of all 100 plus HBCUs combined. Have either suggested that the way to help the institutional issues of HBCUs or African America institutionally is to release some of the assets under their control? No, not once. Just 5 percent of that $10.3 billion endowment would allow a $5 million infusion to all 100 HBCUs.

The current net worth of Gates & Buffett is a combined $134 billion according to Bloomberg’s Billionaire Index. Yes, you read that number correctly. They have pushed for the wealthy to sign the “Giving Pledge” where the wealthiest billionaires pledge to give over fifty percent of their wealth to charity. Ironically, in all of that warm and fuzziness not once does it say that any of the wealth will go into the hands of African American controlled charity or institutions. Again, a donation of $2 billion would be equivalent to 1.5 percent of their combined net worths and yet would double the size of HBCU endowments in a single sign of the pen and allow for all 100 plus HBCUs to receive an infusion of $20 million per school. Again, just 1.5 percent.

I want to make it clear that I do not believe these men should or have to give their money to HBCUs or any African American institution. However, I am simply tired of hearing how much equality is desired in this country when we all know equality is an equity of power and power is derived from institutional control of resources. It is also not to say that these men would not give substantially to HBCUs if they were asked which I have no way of knowing whether or not they have or have not been. However, if the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is so in touch with the problems going on in the world it bewilders for me to believe they are not aware of the systematic poverty that impairs African American institutions themselves and how empowering them with actual resources would allow them to greatly impact the social and economic fates of millions of African Americans that HBCUs and their communities serve directly or indirectly.

Instead, what has happened and what will continue to happen is HBCUs will get six-figure grants and such from institutions like the Gates’ Foundation or get a report promoting increasing “diversity” as a means of stopping the flow of African Americans from our institutions as the answer to fix revenue shortfalls. In reality, the reason which seems to be often ignored that so many African Americans started having to choose HWCUs was because they had to go where they were offered the most financial assistance which HBCUs were never in position to do given historical funding discrepancies from the public and private polices of European Americans. There is one segment of European American that would gladly just crush African American institutions into oblivion but at least they are honest about it. The other segment seems intent on ignoring the fact that our situation is what it is because of them but are more than willing to help so long as we acknowledge them for saving us. The Great White Hope who talks a good game but when it comes time to really put their money where their mouth is, I have found more noise in an abandoned cemetery at four in the morning in rural West Virginia.

Dr. Clarke once said that in the early 20th century African Americans were debating between their alliances to the Soviet Union or United States. In the end, they realized that the Soviet Union wanted them to be free no more than the United States but they wanted them under their domination. He went on to say that they realized they were not in a battle between an oppressor and liberator but two oppressors with different methods of oppression. I contend much of the same could be applied on a micro scale as it relates to the relationship African Americans have to European American conservatives and liberals. It often pops up when we use the term of choosing between the “lesser of two evils” when deciding whether to vote Democrat or Republican. Maybe, just maybe it is time stop trying to separate the lot and simply view the situation for what it is.