J.K. Rowling - First Billionaire Author
I was browsing through one of Forbes' latest issues concerning the worlds richest people, and to my surprise, J.K. Rowling was on the list of billionaires. It's hard to believe that in under 10 years someone can go from surviving off of government assisted living to becoming one of the richest people in the world. Truely amazing, it makes me want to pursue changing the world through film that much more, not for the monetary value, but the essence that someone can rise from the burrows of society to become one of the most recognized figures of our time.
Comments
PS Who is she?
Didn't mind the boks, bordered on trite. Having trouble getting through the last one. It's a case of 'good God, what shenanigans will they get up to on the next page...."
But really $1B is way too much money for one person no matter how good their product is (or in the case of Billy Boy - how bad their product is!)
Why do people reward pop cuture with so much money - for a product that is so ephemeral?
ahhhhggghh....the cynic in me come out again......'
Originally posted by bunge
Quick! Let's get rid of government assisstance!
PS Who is she?
She's the author of the Harry Potter books.
Originally posted by orange whip
really...... who is worth $1B.
Didn't mind the boks, bordered on trite. Having trouble getting through the last one. It's a case of 'good God, what shenanigans will they get up to on the next page...."
I agree, but this: People are reading her books. Young people are actually reading something for fun. I don't personally care for the books, but if they will get more people reading and less people watching TV, then I applaud her.
Originally posted by Naderfan
I agree. And it's not like she's writing for the college educated. She's writing for young readers and she does a fantastic job with that. I say she deserves the money, much more than many other billionaires.
Actually if there is anyone who DOESN'T deserve to be millionaires, it is those who exploit copyright for financial gain.
If this were a drug patent instead of a book copyright, you would likely call her a crook. Yet we could pay someone much less to turn out junk equal to the Potter books than we could to produce a drug that can save lives.
Listening to Britney Spears might get some kids to sing, but that doesn't mean her "music" is any better than most. It is just marketing and network effects.
The millionaires and billionaires that deserve it most are those who add true value to raw materials. Yet homebuilders are evil for causing "sprawl." Autobuilders, and gas companies are destroying the planet.
But those that take pretty pictures, tell pretty stories and sing happy songs. They "deserve" their billions.
Nick
Originally posted by Existence
No single human being should have so much wealth when billions of people around the world live day to day. There should be no such thing as billionaires.
For the vast population, where then is the motivation to succeed?
Originally posted by BR
For the vast population, where then is the motivation to succeed?
I would imagine a large portion of the population wouldn't consider becoming a billionaire succeeding, just getting rich.
Originally posted by Gilsch
She's the author of the Harry Potter books.
Makes sense.
Do we have a breakdown of dollars from books and dollars from movie rights and residuals?
I'm not a big fan of the Potter phenomenon since they went to movies. A movie can take the imagination out of a good book and limit its effect. Harry now has a face while he didn't before and that's too bad.
Originally posted by Gott der Maschine
...but yes, billionaire is a bit much, if I had her status I would be very happy with $70-80k a year and giving the rest to charity and scholarships in reading.
If you were looking at replacing all of the windows in your house, repaving your driveway, and remodeling your kitchen -- like I'm considering right now, all at once -- you wouldn't be so quick as to judge everything in excess of $80K/year as income that should be completely destined for charity.
Originally posted by jesperas
With all of the moives and books Steven King has done, I'd thought he'd be on the billion $ list.
or, as scott mentioned, tom clancy. I mean, all the books, movies, AND games.
But then again, Steven King and Tom Clancy have a fairly limited appeal in their reader demographics. Whereas Harry Potter has been thoroughly enjoyed by *lots* little kids, teens, adults, girls, boys, republicans, democrats..etc.
I'm sure the same groups of people ahve enjoyed steven king and tom clancy, but in lesser numbers.
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
Whereas Harry Potter has been thoroughly enjoyed by *lots* little kids, teens, adults, girls, boys, republicans, democrats..etc.
I'm surprised any Republicans would like the Harry Potter books. Not only would a bunch of them write off the books as being a Satanic influence, but Voldemort and the Malfoys are clearly a parody of the Republican Party.
Originally posted by orange whip
really...... who is worth $1B.
Didn't mind the boks, bordered on trite. Having trouble getting through the last one. It's a case of 'good God, what shenanigans will they get up to on the next page...."
But really $1B is way too much money for one person no matter how good their product is (or in the case of Billy Boy - how bad their product is!)
Why do people reward pop cuture with so much money - for a product that is so ephemeral?
Damn, hop off her ovaries. She wrote the books, and people bought the books, i don't see a problem here.