Latest on MJJC

Janet Jackson joins billion dollar club

billyworld99

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
2,021
Points
0
1330660850791_ORIGINAL.jpg


Janet Jackson has joined the billion dollar club.

The All For You hitmaker has boasted a multi-million dollar fortune for years, but now she has joined her new husband, retail entrepreneur Wissam Al Mana, and the elite group of moneymakers whose bank balances top $1 billion, according to industry publication Variety.

The singer has raked in a total of $260 million in album sales thanks to the success of Control, Janet and Rhythm Nation 1814, and she has also taken in another $81 million from music and book publishing fees.

Jackson's multiple sold-out world tours have contributed another $458 million to her net worth, with an additional $81.5 million coming from tour sponsorships and licensing fees.

The 47 year old has also banked an impressive $304 million from her box office roles in 2000's The Nutty Professor II: The Klumps, Poetic Justice and For Colored Girls.

The superstar's whopping personal fortune puts her in good company – Madonna, filmmakers George Lucas and Steven Spielberg, and media mogul Oprah Winfrey have all made the ultra-exclusive list.


http://www.torontosun.com/2013/05/21/janet-jackson-joins-billion-dollar-club

BK0VzgfCIAAjMoC.jpg:large
 
Is that factoring in her living expenses? The way they calculated it makes it sound like she never spent a dime of the money she earned lol.
 
The Brown Gangsta said:
Is that factoring in her living expenses? The way they calculated it makes it sound like she never spent a dime of the money she earned lol.
Click to expand...

cause it's not talking about what she has in her bank acoount it's talking about her projects has made or earned though out the years . ( well the variety article was)
 
Last edited:
billyworld99 said:
The 47 year old has also banked an impressive $304 million from her box office roles in 2000's The Nutty Professor II: The Klumps, Poetic Justice and For Colored Girls.
http://www.torontosun.com/2013/05/21/janet-jackson-joins-billion-dollar-club
Click to expand...

No offense, but there in NO way that Ms. Jackson has "banked an impressive $304 million from her box office roles." That by itself is laughable.

I don't think even Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Anniston, or Sandra Bullock have earned that type of money from only THREE movies. Tom Cruise and/or Will Smith, now that's another story.

In my opinion, amfAR went TOOfAR with this announcement. LOL!
 
That Amfar Award has to be fake .. Where did that come from ?? It isnt even on the article
 
i think this is all earning not what shes spent she has been working for 3 decades you all find a billon hard to believe
out of my own poket she has likely earned 100 bucks over the last 2 decades so i have no problem beliving it now what she has in personal wealth
 
Last edited:
So everyone who marries a billionair becomes one too

Imagine it bein a PR stunt for real, i hope she does come out with somethin new ths time
 
billyworld99 said:
The 47 year old has also banked an impressive $304 million from her box office roles in 2000's The Nutty Professor II: The Klumps, Poetic Justice and For Colored Girls.
Click to expand...

That is 3 movies listed there for Janet, right? How is it that for example the most high profile actors/actresses gets paid about $ 20million per movie but Janets gets little over $100 million per movie (304 million/3 movies) :hysterical:

Even at most Denzel Washington got $ 40 million/movie, but he is so far behing of Janet.:smilerolleyes:
He and Will Smith, Tom Cruise and other other so called high paid actors should change their agents:)


Ps to Janet, don't tell Jermaine and Randy.
 
Last edited:
here is the Variety article ( where people are reporting it from) people are not understanding what it is saying , It's saying throguhout her career her projects have made a billion it's not saying Janet has billion dollars in her bank there is a difference , the moveis she has been have grossed 304 million dolloars Janet was not paid 304 million



http://variety.com/2013/music/features/janet-jackson-3-1200482629/#!1/control/


http://variety.com/2013/music/features/janet-jackson-has-all-the-right-moves-1200483147/


http://variety.com/2013/music/features/amfar-1200484249/


the amFar thing came from the ad they took out next to the article along with other ads just congradualating Janet on her career.
 
The Nutty Professor 2 was Janet Jackson's 'project'? I assumed she was merely cast in it.
 
This is a clear indication of the problems with journalism today. I read article and understood immediately that it was saying projects she was involved in grossed a billion dollars.

But I see that some have decided to make her a billionaire.

And normally this sort of thing would annoy me and I would shrug it off. But on the Huff Post page it has (or had) 'Janet a billionaire?' as a headline and immediately below it 'Michael a freak'. For me that says it all about the media's agenda.
 
Last edited:
Michael Jackson WAS in fact the BILLIONAIRE, at least, his 50% share of Sony/ATV Music Publishing (consisting of more than 2 millions songs) was valued at 1 billion in 2007, now its more than 1.5 billion (the investments have been more than 700 million dolars since 2000 in buying 5 huge music catalogs), plus his all earnings throughout the 40 years of career + everything after 2009, which is now more than 600 million....
The thing is that in fact all relevant financial media, including Forbes totally IGNORED the facts that Michael Jackson reached the billion dolar wealth..., how can Janet BE a billionaire, if Michael Jackson has been the best selling male artist, with the biggest selling albums (Thriller, Bad, Dangerous and HIStory) + his 3 huge world tours (BAD, Dangerous and HIStory), ok... some can keep on twisting facts...

Madonna has never been selling so many albums, she just can earn only from world tours, so if Maggie is now a socalled billionaire, MJ was loooooooooooong time ago!!!!!!
 
According to Forbes she’s not a billionaire:


Here's Why Janet Jackson Is Not On Our Billionaires List

The Internet is abuzz with news that singer Janet Jackson is a billionaire. In fact several news outlets are saying she is “officially” a billionaire.

There’s just one problem: it isn’t true.

The reports stem from a story in Variety this week about Jackson titled “Behind the Velvet Rope.” The story is connected to Jackson’s work with the charity AmFAR and is surrounded by full-page ads congratulating Jackson on being “a billion dollar entertainer.”

To be fair, the story does not specifically say that Jackson is a billionaire. It just lays out the money that her work has brought in over the span of her career including $81 million from music and book publishing, $260 million in album sales and $458 million from touring. Together with other areas of business, the revenues add up to $1.2 billion.

But that’s very different than a net worth. Net worth is based on the value of the cash and assets you have at the moment, not on how much your work has brought in over a lifetime. When we evaluate whether people will make our annual list of the World’s Billionaires, we look at things like stock holdings, real estate and art collections. Oprah Winfrey is a billionaire because of the value of her holdings in things like Discovery and Harpo Productions, not because of the ad revenue her show generated over the years.

This isn’t the first time the general press has mistaken the money brought in by someone’s business for the net worth of that individual. Jessica Simpson has been called a billionaire. My colleague Clare O’Connor did an excellent take down of claims that the Kardashians are billionaires. Madonna is also rich, but not a billionaire.

This is the same kind of situation. The word “billionaire” generates plenty of hits (we know) and so reporters, who don’t obsess about people’s wealth 12 months out of the year, don’t bother to check the facts, they just regurgitate.

Jackson owns a lot of valuable songs, likes to take ownership stakes in the products she endorses and is married to reported billionaire Wissam Al Mana (who has also never shown up on our billionaire list). She certainly may be sitting on $1 billion worth of assets. But her net worth is not at all clear from what’s being reported.

While we’re on the subject, poor Julia Louis-Dreyfus is getting pulled into this story. Several outlets have reported that Jackson’s new (fake) billionaire status puts her in the same strata as Steven Speilberg, Oprah and Louis-Dreyfus. While Louis-Dreyfus’ father is certainly extremely rich, that doesn’t mean the actress is worth the same amount of money. A source says that when Louis-Dreyfus dies, his money is set to go to hundreds of people, not just his daughter.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/dorothy...heres-why-janet-jackson-is-not-a-billionaire/
 
Janet isn't a billionaire. End of story.
She does have her own money though and I congratulate her on that. But we know she certainly isn't a billionaire, otherwise Randy and Jermaine would be hot on her toes.
 
Net worth is based on the value of the cash and assets you have at the moment, not on how much your work has brought in over a lifetime. When we evaluate whether people will make our annual list of the World’s Billionaires, we look at things like stock holdings, real estate and art collections. Oprah Winfrey is a billionaire because of the value of her holdings in things like Discovery and Harpo Productions, not because of the ad revenue her show generated over the years.
Click to expand...

What a hypocritical statement.

I should write: MICHAEL JACKSON was/is a billionaire because of the value of his holdings in things like Sony/ATV/EMI Music Publishing (1.5 billion dollars), not because of the album sales!/(3) tours revenue he generated over the years (800+ million dollars).

WHY FORBES JOURNALISTS HAVE IGNORED FOR YEARS THAT MICHAEL JACKSON HAS GOT THE BILLION DOLLAR FORTUNE (when he was alive)???..., they do ignore it even now...
 
Last edited:
^^We can make the same claims about Michael--that all his world tours, albums, & projects taken together have grossed in the billions before he got his share of the money. Maybe that is the way they should judge if you are a billionaire or not--if your activity could pull in a billion, then you are a billionaire.

Forbes reporters love to say who is not a millionaire/billionaire when their salaries do not come close to the person's actual wealth. Their reporters irritate me with their snobbish attitude. They remind me of some hotel staff in the 5 star hotels, who think they are supposed to act snobbish to guests, when their own salaries make it impossible for them to book a room at the same hotel they are working in.
 
soulmum said:
Chinese whispers from the media again.
Click to expand...

Well I just saw some foolish journalist copy and paste this news in the AEG trial thread, so I guess they are not investigating facts. Janet is now a billionaire according to Vanity.
 
I just love the billionaire story blew up in people's faces. :lol: Poor Janet lol

Of course she has a lot of money but a billion dollars? No.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top