DSince the Lumière brothers, cinema has always fascinated the wealthy. Like castles or works of art, it is a fun way to spend your hard-earned money, but rarely a good investment. It is also a way to please your children, who are often more fascinated by the seventh art than by dad’s job.
Take Larry Ellison, 80. He built his fortune in computing by founding Oracle in 1977, which became one of the world’s leading database management companies. He is now one of the ten richest people in the world, with a fortune exceeding $174.7 billion (157 billion euros), according to Forbes. But his two children, David and Megan, are not fascinated by their father’s computers. They prefer the movies.
And the easiest thing to do when you have money is to become a producer. Megan founded Annapurna Pictures, and the eldest, David, founded Skydance. The latter, encouraged by the success of the films Mission impossible which he produces, took the entrepreneurial leap by negotiating the acquisition of a Hollywood giant, Paramount, in July. To acquire the producer of Titanicalso owner of the national television channel CBS and many others, such as Nickelodeon and MTV, will therefore pay nearly 8 billion dollars.
Read also | Article reserved for our subscribers Paramount merges with Skydance to take on streaming giants
Add to your selections
A very indebted business
That’s where Larry comes in. The approval documents provided to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), required for the deal to close, reveal that Mr. Ellison Sr. will be the owner, not his son. Through a myriad of personal companies, the Oracle founder will own 77.5 percent of Paramount and its parent company National Amusements, with the remainder going to a private investor, Gerry Cardinale.
It is not certain that Tom Cruise’s acrobatics, MTV clips and CBS magazines are enough to make this very indebted business profitable at a time of disruption in the audiovisual sector, with the rise of streaming channels. The billionaire is used to spending his money extravagantly on palaces, boats and spectacular planes. But the question that observers are asking is that of his deep motivation.
Like his friend Elon Musk, who has reportedly already lost more than $30 billion in the acquisition of Twitter, will he be tempted to use it as a tool of influence for candidate Trump, whom he ardently supports? Or is it just to please his offspring? One does not preclude the other, as shown by the example of Vincent Bolloré, an industrialist who has become a major player in the media in France. Influence and family cohesion are clearly priceless.
