DSLRUsers.com

...... will all the business venture's continue or be sold ??..... will PBL continue in it present form or be split up......... and is James ready to take over..........

More importantly Bernie, at 68 his 7 billion didn't keep the inevitable at bay for any longer than many less fortunate in our society. Money can't guarantee health it seems.

big pix wrote:...... will all the business venture's continue or be sold ??..... will PBL continue in it present form or be split up......... and is James ready to take over..........

Who cares???!!!!!!!!

Birddog114 wrote:

big pix wrote:...... will all the business venture's continue or be sold ??..... will PBL continue in it present form or be split up......... and is James ready to take over..........

Who care???!!!!!!!!

...... a lot of employe's .........

But nothing last!

I wonder what the affect on the market would be... will it throw some uncertanty into it and make it move?

I bet there will be a lot of speculation over the next few days!

Give it a couple days and it will be business as usual... From the comments I heard he might not have been as happy as we'd think he could have been. As Stubbsy says, with money or not we are just humans.
Cheers,
Gerard

I would hazard a guess that he did not have too many unfilled ambitions when he died. I also think that it is a great reminder that you cannot take it with you.

MHD wrote:I wonder what the affect on the market would be... will it throw some uncertanty into it and make it move?

I bet there will be a lot of speculation over the next few days!

I'm sure, all planned before his due date! and his family knew all once he got his new replacement kidney. His departure wasn't a suddenly and all set!!!!
The news of his disappearance won't change this world. I'm no surprise with what will happens later!

stubbsy wrote:More importantly Bernie, at 68 his 7 billion didn't keep the inevitable at bay for any longer than many less fortunate in our society. Money can't guarantee health it seems.

what Stubbsy ^ said

I think his death is sad, but that doesn't make ME sad. I feel some kind of empathy to his family as 68 is not an 'old' age to pass away these days. He lived a fairly active life and had loads of success, I think if he was able to contemplate what he did during his lifetime he'd be reasonably satisfied. The take home message though, as already stated here is that money cannot buy you (good) health.

There will be a few casinos who will mourn his passing....

Bob.

.

Lust and lust now! Otherwise you'll regret
Once you were boxed, people don't put real money into the wooden box and real money means nothing as at that time. I said many times on this board!
Then, the fighting is starting over your assets left behind within your loves.

I echo Birdys sentiments: "who cares?"

I am impartial to his passing in that it doesnt effect me in any way whatsoever. I sympathise with has family because the passing of a loved one is sad. I didnt know him so I am not sad.

From all accounts he was used to getting his own way and it is interesting that will all his money he couldnt buy a longer life. The reaper comes for us all at some stage. I wonder did the pressure of having all those business interests and all that money contribute to his passing.
if so, I am sure I have nothing to worry about in that regard.
Steve

A great man and a great loss .Who will miss him many Australian Charities that who. When Kerry spoke, people listened a great visionary

MOREOVER, ONE HELL OF A BUSINESS MAN.

Mr Kerry Packer R.I.P.

To be a Billionare you need to be a complete and utter bastard. Kerry Packer was no exception.

LOZ wrote:Who will miss him many Australian Charities that who

Tax office and tax payers won't.

Perhaps if he'd paid some tax those charities might not have been needed so much.

pippin88 wrote:

LOZ wrote:Who will miss him many Australian Charities that who

Tax office and tax payers won't.

Perhaps if he'd paid some tax those charities might not have been needed so much.

Spot on!!!!!!

Exactly. To get to the riches KP had requires a ruthless attitude and i am sure he has his fair share of skeletons in his closet.

There is no doubt his business strategy was to increase the family wealth handed from his father, Sir Frank, and no doubt James will likewise continue the fine tradition of wealth collection. Anything Kerry Packer did was for himself and his family, never for shareholders or any other Australians, even his donations to charities, if he ever did, would have been for tax reduction, advertising or suchlike.

There are very few rich and benevolent people in this world. Benevolance is not compatible with wealth. (see footnote)

Goodbye Kerry packer. Your passing is not without leaving a legacy that has shaped in some way, modern Australia. Certainly Australian sport is very much different than it was before you got your hands on it.

Does his personal pilot get his kidney back now?

Of course my comments are my own opinon and are not related to the 'tall-poppy' syndrome this country seems to have.

I feel for his family. They have lost a father and husband. My condolences to them as i would for any loss of life.

(The Sultan of Brunei is arguably the most benevolent rich person in the world.)

This thread illustrates well that no matter how hard I try to avoid news and current events, I can never escape it.

I guess the snipper I heard on the radio of Johnnie Howard saying something about someone that prompted me to question "who died?" makes more sense now. Somebody did die. A loss of life is always sad, and with each death I come to know, it's a growing reminder for me that life is so temporary.

But in this case while the man may have gone, his empire will remain.

With regards to charity, Kerry Packer would only contribute to charities after the fact that a disease affected him or someone close. Hence the donation to victor chang and the funds for organ transplantation.

I would truely respect a business man that would donate something for the sake of helping man kind. Not just after the fact.

Oneputt wrote: I also think that it is a great reminder that you cannot take it with you.

You cannot take it with you but you can take the numbers to the Swiss bank accounts!


Sorry, No sympathy and no sadness for the man, he was ruthless in life, he had everything and wanted more he spent far more on polo ponies than on charity.

Who said the " first generation makes it, the second consolidates it, and the third loses it" ?

. I am very surprised with those here that know jack shit of Kerry’s life please get all your facts right before you criticise. When your turn comes, I hope that nobody puts shit on you so much for been a fair-minded group. If you or your family need an ambulance and I hope not guess who fitted it out:?? LOZ

LOZ
The tall poppy syndrome is alive and well in OZ!

LOZ wrote:If you or your family need an ambulance and I hope not guess who fitted it out:?? LOZ

Excuse me! who will pay the bills for the service of an ambulance when we need it? It's not free! It's just liked another service from a computer store or service station, you pay for your uses!!!!!

Hi dslrusers,

this thread is completely off topic, isn't it ?
Well, I mean, what does it have to do with dslrusers ?

My 20 cents.

Regards,
CD

Loz wrote:I am very surprised with those here that know jack shit of Kerry’s life please get all your facts right before you criticise. When your turn comes, I hope that nobody puts shit on you so much for been a fair-minded group. If you or your family need an ambulance and I hope not guess who fitted it out:??

Loz

I guess my knowledge of him is small - but in terms of getting facts right, I'm sure your brevity has lead to what I read as a factual error of your own. My understanding is he bought defibrillators for all the NSW ambulances, but he certianly didn't fit them all out with the other important paraphernalia in them.

I also think we are a generally fair minded group notwithstanding the fact that, like any group, we won't always agree on things.

christiand wrote:Hi dslrusers,

this thread is completely off topic, isn't it ?
Well, I mean, what does it have to do with dslrusers ?

My 20 cents.

Regards,
CD

Christian - Not off topic since the topic WAS KP, but certainly not anything to do with photography as many other posts on the forum (eg Nerd corner, Food & Drink etc).

I'm guessing it's the photographic equivalent of a slow news day

Packer put defibrillators in all NSW ambulances once, AFTER one saved his life.

I live in Queensland I pay an ambulance levy to put equipment into ambulances.

he was into tax minimization if he had paid 30% tax we could all have new ambulances ever year.

I think the estimate was his companies paid about 7% tax

Besides if friends cannot argue what is the point ?

Matt. K wrote:LOZ
The tall poppy syndrome is alive and well in OZ!

Thank you MATT " It just so happens I do know the facts "

LOZ wrote:

Matt. K wrote:LOZ
The tall poppy syndrome is alive and well in OZ!

Thank you MATT " It just so happens I do know the facts "

That's great Loz. Any you'd care to share since I'd be quite interested to learn more about KP.

Loz from one who never denigrated Packer in his post, I find your attitude to other people having an opinion which obviously differs from yours, very hard to understand.

Your bolded statements add a certain vennom to your post which is not very friendly. People are as entitled to their opinion as you are to yours. Why don't you play the ball and not the man.

stubbsy wrote:

LOZ wrote:

Matt. K wrote:LOZ
The tall poppy syndrome is alive and well in OZ!

Thank you MATT " It just so happens I do know the facts "

That's great Loz. Any you'd care to share since I'd be quite interested to learn more about KP.

no

He gave a lot more to the community than I will ever hope to give. I don't it against him that he gave to certain charities that affected him personally - I know plenty of people do. I don't hold it against him that he tried to minimise tax: as he said at the Print Media Inquiry: "Anyone who doesn't seek to minimise tax needs their head read!" I been involved with one of the charities he donated to and he really helped them out. I also know some of his employees and they can't speak highly enough of him.

I am not saying he was an angel, but this type of stuff really makes me sad about Australian attitudes:

To be a Billionare you need to be a complete and utter bastard.

and

Benevolance is not compatible with wealth

It's not as if he killed people or anything, he was just a businessman. There's something in the letters page of smh.com.au which I think sums it up:

(attributed to Kerry Packer) wrote:"If a working class Englishman saw a bloke drive past in a Rolls-Royce, he'd say to himself 'Come the social revolution and we'll take that away from you, mate'. Whereas if his American counterpart saw a bloke drive past in a Cadillac he'd say 'One day I'm going to own one of those'. To my way of thinking the first attitude is wrong. The latter is right"

thaddeus you too know the facts DITO DITO LOZ

pippin88 wrote:

LOZ wrote:Who will miss him many Australian Charities that who

Tax office and tax payers won't.

Perhaps if he'd paid some tax those charities might not have been needed so much.

Can you explain in a bit more detail what you are trying to insinuate with this comment?

The wealthy in all countries, in particular high taxing ones like Australia will do as much as possible to minimise their tax burden. By far the majority do this legally.

Charities usually provide services which the government or other organisations are not able or willing to provide.

I don't know much about K. Packer so my post is a bit off topic, I was just intrigued by the above comment...

christiand wrote:Hi dslrusers,

this thread is completely off topic, isn't it ?
Well, I mean, what does it have to do with dslrusers ?

My 20 cents.

Regards,
CD

I think he had a D200 on preorder at B&H. Who gets it now?

There is a bit too much agro here - please remember that debate is OK, attacks on other posters - not OK

cheers

It is awfully hot in here...a lot warmer than it usually is. Not a nice tone...chill people...chill

Makes you wonder what people will say when we are gone, not that we will care much... To some a nice guy, to others a bastard . Such is life, you can't please everyone!
Cheers,
Gerard

I may as well give my view on this,
The way I see it, he was just a wealthy man. He made his fortune as far as I know legally. Wether he gave to charity or not was his decision but it's no reason to crucify him.
Let's face it, it's all about the money because if he didn't have it we wouldn't be talking about him.

Gary hasn't even landed in the US and look what's happened. Bloody KP did it on purpose

oli wrote:

pippin88 wrote:

LOZ wrote:Who will miss him many Australian Charities that who

Tax office and tax payers won't.

Perhaps if he'd paid some tax those charities might not have been needed so much.

Can you explain in a bit more detail what you are trying to insinuate with this comment?

The wealthy in all countries, in particular high taxing ones like Australia will do as much as possible to minimise their tax burden. By far the majority do this legally.

I'm not really insinuating, more out right saying: Packer didn't pay his fair share of tax, and in my opinion that instantly excludes him from the ranks of great, or even good men.

I certainly don't put him on the level of rapists and murderers and so on, but I think he was a bit of a prick.

pippin88 wrote:I'm not really insinuating, more out right saying: Packer didn't pay his fair share of tax, and in my opinion that instantly excludes him from the ranks of great, or even good men.

I certainly don't put him on the level of rapists and murderers and so on, but I think he was a bit of a prick.

Well you're entitled to think that.

I suspect he didn't do anything different to any other sensible Australian by minimising his tax. He just did it on a far bigger scale.

What is considered a "fair share" of tax is completely objective anyway. I wish I could pay as much tax as he did!  PS. Think about the huge amount of tax that the government made through Packers voluntary taxation offices (casinos).

He paid every cent he legally had to pay . As Packer said himself. Anyone who pays more than they have to needs there head read.

As a former employee of the ATO I must point out one thing about the tax debate. The more money you have the easier it is to "minimise" your tax since you have the dollars to buy the best tax advice and challenge the tax office rulings. Could you afford to spend thousands of dollars challenging the tax office?

Let's be clear here. I believe you should pay your fair share of tax - which is the amount set by the ATO. I don't think you should pay more than this.

I do think minimisation by ways of tricky loop holes, shuffling money, buying things in company name etc. is not on. If you are actively spending money on an accountant for the purposes of reducing your tax (not for working out what you owe etc, but one employed to work those loopholes) then you are avoiding tax and IMO are a lesser person for it.

If Packer was such an upstanding tax paying champ, why have there by numerous media reports about his avoidance?

I'm in two minds as to whether his tax monkeying or his public encouragement that all others do it is worse.

Does legal equal right, morally and ethically?

I think your being unrealistic .Since when has ethics or morality come into paying tax? Everyone and i mean everyone fudges there tax return any way they can . Be it car claims and allowances , offshore bank accounts , shell companies , wives as company directors who never worked there etc. family trusts and on and on ,. We all bend the line as far as we can without over stepping it .I don't begrudge anyone paying as little as they can no matter how much they earn.

Hopefully after his death the media industry is more independant in discussions instead of bowing to its masters. No sympathy for a bloke who uses casino money for charity works. Gambling money is dirt money...there is no two ways about it.