Jooolia's Reign

Give any reasonably smart investor the assets she inherited and they'd make a lot of money (especially given the rising mineral prices). People will find any measure possible to make it look like she is some kind of genius.

I have much more respect for small business owners than manipulative rich people who started out insanely rich in the first place. There's no risk involved in the latter.

The prime minister is unbelievable.
I can't remember the last time I thought the ACTU had more sense than the government:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...ver-rinehart-workers-deal-20120527-1zd7a.html


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I didn't say I was happy with it, of course I would rather aus workers, however I doubt the government would grant this so freely if there was available Australian workers. And you ignore my point about this happen 2 or 3 times over, every single year, but on a smaller scale (a few at a time). What is the difference? Why arent you complaining about all those skilled migrant visas that are issued every year?

You guys really have no idea about the development of entrepreneurs like Reinhart! Yes, she got a great leg up, but to suggest it is easy to get into her position (can you conceive the scale of 29B?) is ridiculous. Plenty of people have large inheritances - why do you think so little of them increase the value of it?

Unless you can prove to me that her wealth isn't down to her hard work and skills, but rather just luck, I will continue to define what you are saying as tall poppy.

you fail to acknowledge that there was no real growth in the business until the recent mining boom.From where I sit all she has done is to try and nick the kiddies inheritence and entered into joint ventures where big well run companies have developed land her daddy bought eons ago.
She has ridden the mining boom, steered by some good senior mining people.
This would have happened regardless of who was in her chair.
this is totally different to say James Packer, who has sold out of most of the businesses his daddy passed on to him and is starting new businesses around the world.He has not sat on his hands watching the businesses just tick over.

You are all failing to admit that in reality, you don't know anything about her or her business. She has worked her whole life in and around the industry, but for some reason you think she is completely reliant on 'well run companies' and 'good senior mining people' without input anything herself. You are appearing to suggest that anyone could do it. You are appearing to suggest she has had nothing to do with her success.

You are failing to admit that she has grown her $ worth by 30x. But I'm sure you would have done a better job and be swimming in at least $50B by now.

You are failing to admit that James Packer has actually managed to decrease his $ worth that he inherited. So it wasn't the best argument, was it?

Once again, I call tall poppy. You are all making judgement about a person's skills that you know little about, and in contrary to all evidence.

Maybe one day she can write a book on how to successfully manage mining companies so we can appreciate her vast intellectual abilities.

Scotty, I really don't want to argue with you. Call us what you like, but you are trying to get out of acknowledging the central point that the mining industry has not suddenly become 1000% better run and managed. It's a flukey run and good luck to them. While it's on, the government needs to parlay some of the action into nation building.

They are not able to do that because the mining industry has more money to advertise than the government, and the Murdoch Press will turn any policy intiative into an attack on this government.

If you see all of this as tall poppy syndrome, that's absolutely fine with me.

its not just the Murdoch press, now: fairfax seems to be very keen to turn this into a leadership issue

So how was she travelling before this boom? what was her net worth in 2006?
OK I know nothing about her business, but which bits am I wrong about?
If she was so instrumental in the growth of the empire, what was her vision?
What has she done that goes against the common thinking of the industry, because if there isn't one then by definition anyone else sitting in the chair would have had the same result.
The point about packer is not that he is genius, he has never been accused of that. The issue is he is not maintaining the status quo, he has changed the business he inherited to one that matches his vision, the merits of this vision is not the point.

That was a bit of twisting of what I was saying. The tall poppy bit is the denial of Reinhart being a skilled and hard working operator. The tall poppy is the suggestion that she just got lucky with her wealth. There is always an element of luck to the super wealthy, but every single one of them is backed up by hard work, belief and persistence. All billionaires take decades to get there (except maybe zuckerberg).

Ps Do you all think that everyone that has gone into the mining industry is now rich?

Her vision is how she has gone about her investments. Her companies are still privately owned, rather than going the public float option she has gone down the JV model, which has been a lot better an idea since the gfc. She hasn't sold off her company like many do in her position, she has instead partnered with companies whereby they can each add value to the operation. She is clearly able to sell the idea very well - a trait that is shared by the likes of Branson, Trump and Buffet.

It is something that not all people can do. You assume you have to be ground breaking to become a billionaire. That isn't correct, you just need to be able to sell the vision that you have.

It's a very hard industry to enter, you need all the right expertise and most attempts to enter the industry fail, it is very high risk. So anyone who has it handed to them on a plate doesn't really score any points there.

But once you do make it, the risk pays off and money should be fairly easy to make (for the shareholders).

Cyclo,

She didn't actually turn a company worth nothing into $10 Billion, it was just that BRW had not ever valued that holding previously (I believe it is Roy Hill you are talking about). Basically she struck and agreement to sell 30% to a South Korean company and to begin production on the mine. By selling a certain % for a certain $ this allowed BRW then to value her proportion of the holding. It didn't really jump $10B in a year, it was just too hard for them to value it before, so they didn't.

PS

I also understand that Hancock prospecting was going down hill at a rapid rate, and that Reinhart arrested this decline to build it to where it is now.

She didn't have to ground breaking to becoming a billionaire, she just had wake up every morning and decide not to sell anything,not that much of an ask given her annual income was more she could spend for the rest of her life.
The JV model was the only game in town after the GFC, which is when these agreements were executed.
but anyway i think we are just debating points for the sake of it. I accept she works hard, I accept she has followed good corporate advice to ride the boom.
I think you should also accept that $28B of her wealth is due to the boom.
which of course was the major premise in all this.

And is of course incorrect, as it assume she has had no input into the companies she runs. Of course the boom has increase the value of her assets, but she had to get into the position to exploit that in the first place.

You didn't specifically say all her increase in her fortune was down to luck, but you certainly implied that is what it looked like. But clearly you weren't really looking for someone to 'correct your ignorance', so it is a little difficult to interpret exactly what you were saying!

Anyway, you guys can keep on believing that it is mainly luck that makes people grow their wealth and I will keep believing it is mainly hard work and acumen. This is my last post on Reinhart.