The Sunday Times 2010 Rich List

[Colossal Squid]

They'd still have to find record of some of his income or assets though and a single transaction of money spent won't really give them anything to go on.

I like to think Bloom is just a clever guy who's not into public showboating and chooses not to make his wealth obvious

 

[Pondicherry]

It is just a guide, which sells a few more papers - it can be in no way seen as a definative study of every individuals wealth.

I agree. However I would think its extremely likely that the ST researchers did look at Tony Bloom given the publicity surrounding the funding of the stadium.

He does not make the list. So either:
a) he is not wealthy enough to make the list (this would mean the stadium money is coming from somewhere else)
b) his assets are not very visible

The stadium build is consuming lots of cash so I would have thought it would be difficult to realise that much cash without it showing up somewhere (property sales etc).

As an aside - you can nominate people to be included in the list (at least you could in 2009 for the 2010 list). Did anyone nominate Tony?

 

[STERNS AND SURVIVED!!]

You are asked if you want to go on the list, Mr Bloom has said no.Simples

 

[Göttingen gull]

werent that gambling website thingy he made all his money from based abroad (asia methinks) anyway. in which case, no wonder they cant figure out what hes worth.

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

You are asked if you want to go on the list, Mr Bloom has said no.Simples

Is correct.

 

[Bigtomfu]

Is correct.

Through my professional alter ego I have categorical proof that you are not asked whether you want to go onto the list.

 

[beorhthelm]

You are asked if you want to go on the list, Mr Bloom has said no.Simples

yeah right. im sure people like the Barclay Brothers say go ahead with an entry. theres quite a few reclusive and secretive people on that list which would probably rather not be. but its based on information in the public domain so their nothing can be done.

 

[STERNS AND SURVIVED!!]

yeah right. im sure people like the Barclay Brothers say go ahead with an entry. theres quite a few reclusive and secretive people on that list which would probably rather not be. but its based on information in the public domain so their nothing can be done.

You are asked that i know google it.Barcalays Brothers only submit what there willing to, for what ever reasons they have.

 

[beorhthelm]

You are asked that i know google it.Barcalays Brothers only submit what there willing to, for what ever reasons they have.

google for what? have you ever read it, theres lots of acknowledged guessing and interpretation, not the product of people submitting their details for inclusion. or do you work for the Times and are telling us differently?

 

[STERNS AND SURVIVED!!]

google for what? have you ever read it, theres lots of acknowledged guessing and interpretation, not the product of people submitting their details for inclusion. or do you work for the Times and are telling us differently?

Its a f***ing paper.Think what you want.And yes i work for the Times.

 

[Bluejuice]

There's no way the Times contacts EVERY entry on their published list to ask for permission to include them. Basically they just don't need to, so why would they?

Reporting somebody's wealth, a lot of which will be a matter of public record, is perfectly legitimate.

But if they can't get enough information on somebody's wealth it would be pretty irresponsible to make something up from scratch and so I would suggest they have omitted TB simply because, like us, they don't know his worth

 

[beorhthelm]

And yes i work for the Times.

well i stand corrected then. where does one submitt their request to be included? so this suggests the list is only for those that want to brag about thier wealth. though i still have question why many secretive persons would volunteer info to be published.

 

[Notters]

Surprised noones mentioned it but Bloom's said himself he didn't understand how they write these lists or why he's not on them.

 

[Pondicherry]

It is compiled like this. At least in 2009 it was.

1 This list is based on our estimates of the minimum wealth of Britain’s 1,000 richest people or families. The actual size of their fortunes may be much larger than our figure. The valuations were carried out at the beginning of January 2009. As with last year, with volatile stock markets in February and March, some fortunes based on shares in quoted companies may be much lower or higher. We have taken account of this but stick broadly with our January valuation date to give consistency with past Rich Lists and with other people in today’s list.

2 We measure identifiable wealth, whether land, property, racehorses, art or significant shares in publicly quoted companies. We exclude bank accounts — to which we have no access — and small shareholdings in a private equity portfolio.

3 We have been even more cautious than normal this year in giving due consideration to liabilities. The stock exchange has forced directors of quoted companies to reveal when they have used their shares as collateral for loans. We have been severe in excluding almost all these shares from our consideration of wealth. Similarly, where companies have been involved in talks with banks over debt levels, we have been brutal and removed the owners or large stakeholders until their position is resolved.

4 Many individuals in the list have generated their personal wealth from the sale of successful businesses. In valuing them, we have to take account of the tax paid on the sale proceeds. Until the beginning of the current tax year, a company sale could reasonably attract a 10% rate of tax on the proceeds under long-standing Treasury rules known as taper relief. The increase in tax here to 18% has hardly made any impact as there have been very few company sales in the current climate.

5 On inheritance tax, we have again taken advice and, while tax is payable on assets held at death at the rate of 40%, no tax is paid on assets transferred by gift seven years before death or on those assets that pass to a surviving husband or wife. We assume foreign nationals will have taken advantage of non-UK domicile status to avoid an inheritance tax liability.

6 In valuing privately owned hedge funds in the City, we have tended to value them much lower than last year’s 10% of their funds under management, sometimes at half that level or less. Our valuation here depends on the strength of their accounts and reputation in the market. Some hedge funds have disappeared from the list this year simply because of adverse publicity in the press that could have destroyed investor confidence. We have relied on excellent work in valuing hedge funds by Martin Tomkinson, a leading financial investigative reporter. Also, we acknowledge excellent and pioneering work by Peter Koenig, a former Sunday Times business reporter, in analysing the returns achieved by private equity companies and the impact on the wealth of their leading partners.

7 We have torn up all our old models for valuing private companies. In the past we valued them on a multiple of their profits depending on their sector, track record and strength of their balance sheets. But as all the accounts of private companies are at least six months, and possibly up to 18 months out of date, the profit figures are too historic. We have certainly looked at the profits, but much more we have looked at the net asset figure in the balance sheet, the level of borrowings, the amount of cash available to the owners to tide over the company in these difficult times and the credit rating of the business. Even then we have cut our valuations by as much as 25% below the net asset figure to be even more conservative.

Family shareholdings are agglomerated where the family obviously acts together to defend the company’s interests. We usually name and picture the leading family member to represent the whole family’s interests, although in one or two low-key families we have not highlighted a family member but just called the entry the Thomson family, for example.

8 Family trusts are also aggregated and included. We have distinguished between trusts held on behalf of family members, usually children and grandchildren, which we include as family wealth, and charitable trusts, which are not included.

9 Land is valued on what and where it is. Most valuable is London land with planning permission, then other urban land, then good farming, forestry, poor farming and finally desolate land. We take account of shooting and fishing rights. Estimates of agricultural land values have been given by Strutt & Parker, the land agency and chartered surveying group, which shows the declining price of much rural land in the past year. Click here for the agricultural land values table.

10 Valuations of pop stars’ wealth are based on research by Cliff Dane, author of the Rock Accounts books. These incorporate detailed analysis of published accounts and disclosed earnings, catalogue valuations and estimates of income from current activity and retained earnings from music.

11 The art treasures have been valued by an expert who wishes to remain anonymous. We have devised a formula that seeks to take account of the huge tax liabilities faced by the British aristocracy when they sell Old Masters and similar treasures. We have generally assumed that about half the sale proceeds would disappear in one form or another to Revenue & Customs. Similarly, if huge art collections were to be put up for sale at once, they could flood the market, depressing any proceeds.
12 Many new private companies run by millionaire owners have been unearthed this year through the sophisticated computerised searches and analysis of company accounts and directors’ shareholdings from Bureau van Dijk Electronic Publishing (020 7549 5050). Hemscott.com has also been helpful in identifying millionaire directors in quoted companies with stakes worth more than £25m.

13 The 1,000 include people who may not be British citizens, such as Hans Rausing from Sweden, but who live and work in Britain. In this age of globalisation, where London is regarded as the centre of a financial elite, we also include people who are married to Britons, who have strong links with Britain, estates and other assets here, or who have backed British political parties, institutions and charities and often seem more British than the British. We also include British citizens abroad but we exclude Rupert Murdoch, chairman and chief executive of News Corporation, parent company of The Sunday Times, as he is an American citizen and is based in America. Forbes, in its March 2009 list of world billionaires, reckons Murdoch — as the 132nd richest person in the world — has actually seen his fortune fall from £4.2 billion to just under £2.8 billion. If he were in this list, he would be ranked eighth.

14 We include citizens of the Irish republic only if they have extensive UK business interests or were born here.

15 We have used a large network of local correspondents. Jon Beveridge has provided at least 100 names of the “secret rich” included in recent lists. His company Magellan is compiling the Global Rich Database (jr.beveridge@btconnect.com). We also offer special thanks to Balfour News in Ealing.

16 Anybody with suggestions for names that could be included in future can write in confidence to Philip Beresford, c/o The Rich List, Business Section, The Sunday Times, 1 Pennington Street, London E98 1ST, or e-mail philipberesford@aol.com. The deadline for candidates for next year’s list is early in January 2010.

17 Reference sources we have used include the national and regional press plus a host of other publications:

Forbes List of World Billionaires 2009, Canadian Rich List (Canadian Business Online), Australian Rich List (Business Review Weekly), Quote 500 (Holland), Bilan, Bilanz (Switzerland), Finans Rich List (Russia), Manager (Germany), Challenges (France), New Zealand Rich List (National Business Review), Kapital’s Norwegian Rich List, Forbes.com, Greek Rich List, Veckans Affarer (Sweden), North West Business Insider, Yorkshire Business Insider, Midlands Business Insider, Wales Business Insider, South West Business Insider, Real Business, Management Today, Director, Estates Gazette, Fortune, Business Week, Investors Chronicle, The Economist, Who’s Who, Debrett’s Distinguished People of Today, Labour Research, The Corporate Register, Who’s Really Who, Debrett’s Peerage & Baronetage, Directory of The Turf, The Fastest Growing Private Companies, The Treasure Houses of Britain, Who Owns Scotland, Who’s Who in the North, David Cannadine’s The Decline and Fall of The British Aristocracy, Brian Masters’ The Dukes, The Sunday Times Fast Track, The Sunday Times Profit Track, Wills Information News Service, Andy Wightman’s Who Owns Scotland, Asian Directory and Who’s Who International, Sunrise Asian Rich List, The Midland Millionaires by the Birmingham Post, Northern Ireland’s Top 100 Companies by The Belfast Telegraph, The Sunday Times Rich List 2006-07 (published by A&C Black, acblack.com). WealthWatch, produced by Sunrise Publishers (01208 832 272, wealthwatch.co.uk) has been invaluable in providing intelligence on the rich and many new leads.

 

[beorhthelm]

It is compiled like this. At least in 2009 it was.

1 This list is based on our estimates of the minimum wealth of Britain’s 1,000 richest people or families. ...

no no, thats all wrong, Sterns fella above has told us those on the list submit their details for inclusion.

 

[drew]

Hasn't Bloom spent most of the year in Oz? Also, aren't most of his business interests in Oz as well.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I would suggest they have omitted TB simply because, like us, they don't know his worth

Or possibly because no-one has bothered to mention him to the compilers.

16 Anybody with suggestions for names that could be included in future can write in confidence to Philip Beresford, c/o The Rich List, Business Section, The Sunday Times, 1 Pennington Street, London E98 1ST, or e-mail philipberesford@aol.com. The deadline for candidates for next year’s list is early in January 2010.

 

[Rookie]

Or possibly because no-one has bothered to mention him to the compilers.

an aol email address bit unprofessional for someone compiling that sort of list I would have thought

 

[Mellotron]

Don't think so. Otherwise I think a lot of those who appear would opt out.

It's a definitely an option. Noel Gallagher has spoken about it. He is always contacted and asked, and always opts out, as he was talking about having a LOT more money than James Blunt, despite old Blunty appearing on the Rich List and him not.

 

[surrey jim]

an aol email address bit unprofessional for someone compiling that sort of list I would have thought

that was my thought too. And the global rich list person's email is a btconnect one

15 We have used a large network of local correspondents. Jon Beveridge has provided at least 100 names of the “secret rich” included in recent lists. His company Magellan is compiling the Global Rich Database (jr.beveridge@btconnect.com). We also offer special thanks to Balfour News in Ealing.