Remix.run Logo
jodrellblank 2 hours ago

Off topic, but I am boggled that Larry Ellison came back to “richest man in the world” this year.

For all the enormous Reach of Facebook adverts, Apple, Microsoft breadth of products, Tesla and SpaceX and Twitter, Amazon’s massive cloud dominance, the AI boom for nVidia…

Oracle?!

On September 10, 2025, Ellison was briefly the wealthiest person in the world, with an estimated net worth of US$393 billion.

In June 2020, Ellison was reported to be the seventh-wealthiest person in the world, with a net worth of $66.8 billion

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Ellison

georgeecollins 29 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

He also really doesn't do much (almost any?) charity so far in his life. And he never had to split assets in a divorce. So he's like a dung beetle of money.

eirikbakke 2 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

"Larry Ellison has been involved with two philanthropic organizations. First he made a $300M donation to Stanford, in exchange for not admitting wrongdoing in an options backdating scandal. All other philanthropic work is to the Larry Ellison institute for prolonging of life--namely his." -- Bryan Cantrill

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc

fastball 9 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

dung beetle of wealth

Which is kinda irrelevant. Him selling Oracle shares does not fundamentally change the world in any way. Sure you can say "he should sell shares and do charity", but you could make the same argument that whoever would be buying those shares* could be doing charity instead.

mNovak an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

People don't seem to realize that Oracle is deep in the AI play, taking on a bunch of debt to make speculative leases and buildout of datacenters to rent to other players.

It's been great for them so far, but if there's an AI winter, Oracle will be the first to freeze.

unsui an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> Oracle will be the first to freeze

one can hope

xattt an hour ago | parent [-]

Will this somehow liberate ZFS?

legitronics 38 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

It’ll just make their auditors and legal team desperate for money, which is kinda horrifying to consider.

throw0101d 29 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

How does ZFS need to be liberated?

an0malous 28 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Isn’t that all from the one OpenAI deal they made 5 months ago?

MikeCapone 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

He still owns over 40% of Oracle, that's a much bigger equity stake than most founders, and most of these other trillion-dollar companies don't have founders in charge anymore.

hinkley 36 minutes ago | parent [-]

Back when he was in competition with Gates for #1, I recall him changing his contract so he was getting paid in stock options instead of salary so he could get rich faster.

ndjeosibfb 4 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

oracle cloud is a thing and it has some pretty big customers

erikpukinskis an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

In addition to Oracle, he owns 1.5% of Tesla and 77% of Skydance/Paramount but those are <10% of the value of his Oracle stake.

notatoad 23 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

being the tech industry's conduit to the US president pays well.

shadowgovt an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Oracle is still the company that does database for everyone with money to spend, and the percentage of companies (and governments, and NGOs) that discover a meaningful percentage of their very purpose is "moving data around" only grows over time. Their market is essentially constrained to "entities that use computers and want to sort data," which may as well be unconstrained. And in spite of all the ways they can be criticized, they still compete at the top of their game; many cheaper or free alternatives are going to ask you to trade a lot of labor (and added risk of data loss and destruction).

In contrast, of the list of companies you highlighted,

- Apple makes hardware, which is lower margin

- Microsoft is under stiff competition (they are selling a product, an operating system, that is a commodity competing with free) and unlike Oracle is struggling to define why they should be the best choice (ads in the OS?!).

- Meta doesn't actually have a monetization strategy beyond ads that is revenue-positive, and the reliability of ads turns out to be dicey (Google built their nest-egg on ads earlier than Facebook, and even Google has been thrashing about to find tent-poles besides ads; they see the risk). In spite of that, Zuck is currently above Ellison in the Fortune 2025 rankings.

- AI is ghost money (behind the scenes, a lot of companies paying themselves essentially)

- SpaceX is in a tiny market ultimately (each launch costs a fortune; a handful of customers want to put things in space)

- Tesla suffers strong competition. In spite of the above, Musk is currently the top of the Forbes ranking.

- Amazon is... Actually wildly successful and Bezos is #3 on the Forbes ranking. I think the only reason Bezos might not be higher is he spends his money.

No, it's often the quiet ones nobody talks about that are the real leaders. Lions don't have to roar to be noticed.

TeMPOraL 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Everyone else is too busy spending everything they have on GPUs, DRAM and power plants?

Joking. Honestly, the only thing that surprises me more than seeing Larry Ellison at the top of the list, is seeing Netflix buying Warner Bros, and not the other way around. Maybe I'm too old, but the very notion somehow does not compute.

jibal an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Yeah, that headline struck me as backwards too, but I acknowledge it's based on an old framework that doesn't match the modern facts.

P.S. punished for what, honest self-deprecation? By "it" I meant my expectation, not the headline ... is that really not clear?

hateful an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It felt the same way when AOL bought Time Warner.

shadowgovt an hour ago | parent [-]

In business, it's sometimes more about people's expectations for a company's future than their past performance.

We must never assume the market is rational, and enough people getting hyped at the same time can give a company enough short-term cash to make an unexpected move.

adventured 38 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

It's a combination of the over-valuation of Oracle - popping on the late stage of the AI bubble - and Ellison owning so much of Oracle.

Even after the recent drop, Oracle is trading for ~33 times last four quarters operating income. With their meh growth rate, fair value is closer to half that. Except we're in an AI bubble. Oracle is riding the tail of the AI bubble just as they popped to the moon toward the end of the dotcom bubble. Oracle will contract afterward accordingly. The stock probably won't see this era's highs again for another 20 years, if ever.