The Wilsons - 875 buy to let property empire

Generali

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

I guess it's all about ambition and ego. Some people are happy to work all their lives as a bank clerk and some want to be the bank manager, others want to be regional manager and a few want to be the CEO. We all find our natural level and then are happy there.

I think I'd be the same as Conrad, my home paid off and 10 mortgage-less rental properties bringing in a nice little income would be my natural level.

I've got mates that just carry on despite having pretty much all the money they'll ever need. Nice guys too, just driven.

Dithering_Dad

Generali wrote: »

I've got mates that just carry on despite having pretty much all the money they'll ever need. Nice guys too, just driven.

I guess how you make your money is also a big factor. If you really enjoy the work you're doing and making a huge amount of money is just a side-effect or benefit, then I guess I'd be happy to earn millions. I've always felt that Richard Branson has a lot of fun making his money. Hugh Heffner too

Conrad

I can why people would enjoy the work they do but I would still see most of it as pointless, when compared with the possibilities.
Why for example does Paul McCartney need £800m in personal wealth when there are 800m people right this very second starving?

Why would Alan Sugar want an even biggesr collection of atoms that floats (a yatch) than the one he already has?

In the main I see money ticket collecting as a method for gathering peer respect. As for the buzz, the challenge, well fine, but what at the end of the day does that add up to?
I would deem a challenge being to create a new coral reef, or plant a new forest with volunteers. not to try and proove how great you are by cutting yet another deal to make more money tickets, yawn.

Rabiddog_2

I dunno about berezovsky but I have heard rumours that abramovich is one of that great bunch of capitalists from Old, The Mafia (Russian Branch). Thats how they acquired all the share certs, people were "encouraged" to sell. As to the Wilsons, I doubt very much they are in financial difficulty, having lots of equity in theirs houses bought from 90 to 2004? Even then they might be down to their Last £10 million *sob* *sob*.
The Russo's get a Yurt, and the Sugars get a Yatch ..so what

Dithering_Dad

Conrad wrote: »

I can why people would enjoy the work they do but I would still see most of it as pointless, when compared with the possibilities.
Why for example does Paul McCartney need £800m in personal wealth when there are 800m people right this very second starving?

Why would Alan Sugar want an even biggesr collection of atoms that floats (a yatch) than the one he already has?

In the main I see money ticket collecting as a method for gathering peer respect. As for the buzz, the challenge, well fine, but what at the end of the day does that add up to?
I would deem a challenge being to create a new coral reef, or plant a new forest with volunteers. not to try and proove how great you are by cutting yet another deal to make more money tickets, yawn.

Its probably more simpler than that, they simply gain wealth as their companies grow. They retain the wealth because they want to retain control of their own companies. I don't see much wrong with this, or for being rewarded for their hard work. It's not as though Alan Sugar or McCartney were toffs who inherited it.

The USSR tried to distribute wealth evenly and it doesn't work. People have no incentive to work harder than others if they all get paid the same. Communism simply doesn't work.

baby_boomer

brit1234 wrote: »

The prophet [sic] is then laundered through the football club

I assume you mean Abromovitch, pbuh :rotfl:

Chelsea FC isn't going to make any any profit in the next ten years AFAIK.

Football is nearly as good a way to lose money as loans on the UK property market 2007->

SouthCoast

Interesting names mentioned.

Sir Paul is #2 in the Sussex wealth list @ £725m.

Ex Mrs Abramovich is #7 @ £155m.

Source: Sussex Life Feb 2008.

Alan_M_2

brit1234 wrote: »

Or international investigative journalism:beer:





So to conclude he privatized Sibneft selling off cheap to himself and partners well below its value and then sold it on to the Russian government at a price hugely inflated from what he bought it at.

And this is money laundering or fraudulent in what way exactly?

It's not is it.....immoral, unethical maybe........but show me a Billionaire that isn't.

mewbie_2

Alan_M wrote: »

show me a Billionaire that isn't.

er. any Zimbabwean?

Alan_M_2

Rabiddog wrote: »

I dunno about berezovsky but I have heard rumours that abramovich is one of that great bunch of capitalists from Old, The Mafia (Russian Branch). Thats how they acquired all the share certs, people were "encouraged" to sell. As to the Wilsons, I doubt very much they are in financial difficulty, having lots of equity in theirs houses bought from 90 to 2004? Even then they might be down to their Last £10 million *sob* *sob*.
The Russo's get a Yurt, and the Sugars get a Yatch ..so what

During the 90's there was an element of the wild west about Moscow business, many company principals were shot dead as capitalism and good old fashioned criminal activities clashed with each other...this has reduced substantially but not totally gone.

I explained how they acquired the share certificates, my ex wife is Russian, I spent a reasonable amount of time in Moscow visiting friends and family and their family was one offered a package deal (cash) in return for their shareholdings, they were free to choose, not press ganged into anything.

The cash was offered in US Dollars, which was far more valuable than the Rouble
and hard cash being waved in the face of people used to living in a single room with not much to eat is very tempting indeed, even if they are aware the shares are worth more.

They were guilty of profiteering, but of nothing illegal. Ironically the Russians have tried to change their law to encompass profiteering as a crime against the state, which is one of the reasons why Beresovsky is here on a claim of political asylum.