#1080

[Donald D. Markstein]

I wonder if this list of fictional billionaires is related in some way to an
e-mail I got at the Toonopedia(tm) address several months ago, apparently
from a financial writer of some sort. He said he'd seen conflicting reports
about Daddy Warbucks and Richie Rich, some claiming they have millions and
some claiming they have billions, and he wanted an accurate accounting for
both.

I told him they have zillions, and added, "Jeez, the questions people ask!"

I mean, this is kind of like kids in the school yard debating over who's
stronger, Superman or The Incredible Hulk. (Only in my day, it was Superman
or Captain Marvel.)

Scrooge is the richest because he is defined as being the richest. The
others are fabulously wealthy, but none of them are defined by their writers
as being absolutely the wealthiest person in the entire world -- nor did any
of them prove it by unrolling miles of string across Africa.

But all of them are as wealthy as they need to be in any given story.

And by the way, he didn't even mention Andy Gump's Uncle Bim.

Whatever specious "knowledge" they used for their data, I have one final
word for the people who figured all this out: GET A LIFE!

Quack, Don

----- Original Message -----
From: "Anders Christian Siveb¾k" <anders_sivebaek at nns.dk>
To: <dcml at stp.ling.uu.se>
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 2:39 AM
Subject: Re:#1080


> Hi all
>
> (Danes, keep an eye out for the issue of Familie Journalen which I will
> soon tell you the issue number of. Today from 2.15 to 3.30 a journalist
> and photographer came her to interview me about our donaldist society. The
> journalist had seen me in the regional newpaper where a 3 page article
> about the society was published some weeks ago.)
>
> Sigvald
> >
> >Have you seen this?
> >http://www.forbes.com/2002/09/13/400fictional.html
> >
> >Today Norwegian Text-TV reffered to this list from a so-called serious
> >American economic magazine called Forbes have somehow managed to put
> >together this stupid list over the world's 15 richest fictional
> >billionaires - which should make us all laugh:
> >
> >Rank  Name               Net Worth
> >==========================================
> >1.  Santa Claus              $ ?
> >2.  Richie Rich              24.7 billion
> >3.  Oliver "Daddy" Warbucks  10.0 billion
> >4.  Scrooge McDuck            8.2 billion
> >5.  Thurston Howell III       8.0 billion
> >6.  Willie Wonka              8.0 billion
> >7.  Bruce Wayne               6.3 billion
> >8.  Lex Luthor                4.7 billion
> >9.  J.R. Ewing                2.8 billion
> >10.  Auric Goldfinger         1.2 billion
> >11.  C. Montgomery Burns      1.0 billion
> >12.  Charles Foster Kane      1.0 billion
> >13.  Cruella De Vil           875 millon
> >14.  Gordon Gekko             650 millon
> >15.  Jay Gatsby               600 millon
> >==========================================
>
> We talked about the same thing today in Science -
> Batmans alter ego Bruce Wayne was mentioned.
>
> >Thirdly - how the he.. can they estimate Uncle $crooges fortune to ONLY
> >$8.2 billion. That's completely ridiculus.
> Comnpletely - in danish stories he usually has 25 fantaticatillions or
> something the like..
> >
> >Fourthly - where the he.. is Flintheart Glomgold and Rockerduck?
> They aren't known by the amateuers who made the list.
>
> >My conlusion: the Forbes list of fiction billionaires is completely
> >non-scientific and totally worthless.
> It is - it's made by someone who just wanted to be fun, cause comics can't
> be taken serious by some people.
> >
> >I'll say
> >#1 - Scrooge McDuck
> >#2 - Flintheart Glomgold
> >#? - John D. Rockerduck
> Hear hear
> >
> >And please forgive me for being a bit upset over this matter, but I hate
> >it when stupid people neglects facts about our dear Ducks.
> I understand you and I count the times that I've been annoyed of articles
> with wrong facts. I've written letters to the reader column about
> Timboktou not being placed in Faraway-satn as some insane traveller's
> columnist claimed. - I've complained to the Norwegian journalist who used
> egmonts press material for the blueprint-story where some experts made fun
> about the bin. I felt ridiculed by the letter she send back.
> But our job, as fans here and in out society, Sigvald is to inform these
> media how things are. - The article in the newpaper about me was serious -
> so will the next one be.
> Let us neglect these amateurs and enjoy the comics and be postiviely
> surprised when once in a while something is published which comes from an
> actual comic fan who knows how many money this rich old scotsman has!
>
> Hilsen/Yours
> Anders Christian Sivebæk
> Donaldist
>
>
>
>