Comments on: Paul Allen’s finances don’t look so hot for a billionaire

By: Koo

Koo — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 03:06:10 +0000

Paul Allen is the classic case of “ It’s not what you know, is whom you know”. He befriended Bill Gate in the 70s and that was like winning the powerball jackpot several times.

By: Marc

Marc — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:39:07 +0000

Well, if nothing else, it makes it less likely he could afford to move the Blazers to Seattle.

By: Decaf

Decaf — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:13:14 +0000

It could be that his surfacing business issues are what prompted him to make it clear to the Blazer front office to push forward despite luxury tax risk. I imagine any time a move like this is made it’d make those responsible with spending his money hesitate.

By: f5

f5 — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:23:29 +0000

I’m not expert, but I like to play one on the innernet.

From what I’ve read in that expose that was written about him a couple years ago (I forget which paper or sports rag it was), Allen’s business decisions have essentially all lost money. MS stock is what has made him what he is, and had he held on to it and done simply absolutely nothing, he would have had far far more money today, or even during his richest period when he was worth his record most.

By: PLM

PLM — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:06:42 +0000

Will someone please name a Paul Allen business other than Ticketmaster (he still owns Ticketmaster, right?) which has turned a decent profit. I have been hearing nothing but bad business news about Paul Allen for years. Let’s hear about his successes, please!

By: Matty

Matty — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:51:33 +0000

C’mon Dwight, we all know that Paul Allen stumbled into his riches. He is super intelligent with one thing-computers.

Its a miracle that he isn’t living in his Mom’s basement…

By: GRAHAM

GRAHAM — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:43:09 +0000

Dwight, all I can say is, I wish I had his problems…

Charter has been the squaking albatross around his neck for a long time now, I’m sure he’s glad to be done with it.

By: usmcr3049

usmcr3049 — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:40:20 +0000

“he sold them to take the tax loss. His basis would have been several hundred million dollars, if not billions. He has to actually sell the worthless shares to get the tax loss.”

This was a comment I found on the link you provided. I know from my tax law classes, (who knew i would ever use that stuff 10 years later!) that you can not claim a loss until it is realized, so this makes sense. But since I am not a tax attorney I don’t know for sure, but it could be the reason he sold these shares to get a nice tax write off while losing none of his stake in Charter.