Slashdot Mirror


Larry Ellison Buys His Own Hawaiian Island

First time accepted submitter nrozema writes "Oracle co-founder and billionaire Larry Ellison is buying the Hawaiian island of Lana'i, the sixth-largest island in the U.S. archipelago. Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie confirmed in a written statement that the current landowner filed a transfer application with the state's Public Utilities commission Wednesday to sell its 98 percent share of the 141-square-mile island to Ellison."

25 of 398 comments (clear)

  1. Never thought.... by Bloody+Bastard · · Score: 5, Funny

    ....tsunamis could be a good thing.

    1. Re:Never thought.... by dintech · · Score: 5, Funny

      98 percent share

      It's a shame the Google Trial didn't pay out. He could have bought the last 2%...

    2. Re:Never thought.... by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not "people",subjects. Probably experimental subjects; fetch the frikkin' lasers.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:Never thought.... by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, about 2% of the island is owned by (if I recall correctly) descendents of Hawaiian natives.

      The rest was owned by Dole for a long time, I was unaware it was no longer a pineapple plantation.

      Interesting story: While the island was a pineapple plantation, it was nearly impossible to find fresh pineapple on the island in any restaurant or store. This was apparently because the natives were all sick of eating pineapple, and when they did want pineapple they would just sneak onto the plantation and steal one...

      (My family went to Lanai when I was in middle school or high school, back when Dole owned most of it.)

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    4. Re:Never thought.... by tnk1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Bond: Do you expect me to talk, Ellison?

      Ellison: Hahahaha! No Mr. Bond, I expect you to *buy*.

  2. Uh-oh. by RevWaldo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Larry Ellison also owns a MIG fighter jet. This cannot be good.

    .

    1. Re:Uh-oh. by stevencbrown · · Score: 5, Funny

      And he looks like Hank Scorpio!

      All we need is oracle to open up a germ warfare division, though think he'll have to settle for the western seaboard rather than the eastern, if he's based in Hawaii?

    2. Re:Uh-oh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not one of those idiots who whines and bitches about how someone makes more money than other people and how they should somehow give it all back to them or something. However, it's strange thinking that I've worked here for fifteen years and the biggest purchase of my life is my $200k house that I'll be paying off until I die . . . while my boss/CEO is buying fighter jets, billion dollar yachts, appearing in Iron Man 2, buying massively expensive houses all over the place, and buying a 141sq mile Hawaiian island. It's kind of demoralizing to realize that Larry probably spent more in this one purchase than every single person *combined* in my entire division will earn (after taxes) in three or four life-times. Or as much as I would earn in take-home if I continued working from today until the year 17,000.

    3. Re:Uh-oh. by tgd · · Score: 5, Interesting

      people in africa have been starving since i was a kid. too bad when you send them food the government takes it

      Right, and beyond that, this implies that the kids our food and money saved in the 80's turned around and had another generation of even more kids... that still couldn't be fed.

      Not sure what the end game of that process is.

    4. Re:Uh-oh. by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I disagree. What exactly is wrong with the German form of capitalism and socialism blended? What about the Nordic nations?

      Pure anything is garbage, no single system is without flaws.

    5. Re:Uh-oh. by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Informative

      We send rice directly to Haiti. All that did was destroy their rice farms. Meaning more poor people to go on food aid. We destroyed one of the larger parts of their economy with this aid.

    6. Re:Uh-oh. by fearofcarpet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not one of those idiots who whines and bitches about how someone makes more money than other people and how they should somehow give it all back to them or something. However, it's strange thinking that I've worked here for fifteen years and the biggest purchase of my life is my $200k house that I'll be paying off until I die . . . while my boss/CEO is buying fighter jets, billion dollar yachts, appearing in Iron Man 2, buying massively expensive houses all over the place, and buying a 141sq mile Hawaiian island. It's kind of demoralizing to realize that Larry probably spent more in this one purchase than every single person *combined* in my entire division will earn (after taxes) in three or four life-times. Or as much as I would earn in take-home if I continued working from today until the year 17,000.

      I am one of those idiots. Not because we shouldn't award innovation and hard work, but because your boss/CEO is getting richer at your expense. I know that the libertarians around here like to say that free markets lead to meritocracy, but it just isn't the case. Your wages, my wages, and 99% of people on Slashdot have stagnated over the past 30 years. Instead, we are supposed to "earn" money by investing in a house. How has that worked out? Gen X, the generation to which I happen to belong, has lost around 40% of its wealth since the housing bubble burst. But Larry Ellison is buying a Hawaiian island. Where did that money come from? Thin air? Where did our lost wealth go? Thin air? No, of course not. It never existed except as debt on a bank balance sheet. And now that the debt has gone bad, we get to pay to de-leverage banks. The economy is zero sum. We can collectively only increase our wealth by the amount that the economy grows each year. Likewise, when the economy shrinks, we must collectively shed wealth. But somehow Larry gets rich when the economy grows and gets richer when it shrinks. That is the policies of the government actively transferring wealth from you and I to Larry Ellison so that he can buy a f***ing Hawaiian island during a prolonged, global economic contraction that has turned home ownership into Russian roulette for the rest of us. And it will continue like this until perception and reality converge.

      Also, WTF does one person need with an entire Hawaiian island? Or a fighter jet? Why do we allow one person to accumulate so much wealth that they have to find new, unnecessary extravagances to blow it on while the rest of us can barely afford to educate our kids? Shouldn't there be some level of comfort that we allow the middle class to achieve before letting people like Larry Ellison skip ludicrous and go straight to plaid? Right now it seems that we have to wait for the benevolent "job creators" to toss some coin our way, but not until there is "more certainty" in the markets. Fortunately for us there are still enough billionaires to buy the White House for someone that understands their plight.

      --
      Actually, I wrote my thesis on life experience.
    7. Re:Uh-oh. by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 5, Informative

      not trying to be a smart*ss

      Why the fuck did you censor your shit there? Slashdot's a free fucking speech zone, you can fucking say all the shit you fucking want to.

      But doesn't a free speech zone imply that I can censor myself, if I choose to?

    8. Re:Uh-oh. by istartedi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I see the Libertarian and Republican view of money as being analagous to Newtonian physics and relativity.

      From the right PoV, money is a measure of hard work, perhaps talent; but no more. In every day life that makes sense. Money looks like a fair measure. Now, how much talent and hard work can you have? How much money can you have? By definition, nobody can have more than 100% of the money. That's like the speed of light. Just as in physics, non-Newtonian things start happening as you approach the speed of light.

      The first sign that you have "relativistic money" is that you have un-earned income. For most of us this is a very small thing (interest, maybe some dividends). Faster, faster... you are going fast enough to live on your un-earned income. Faster still... you seek to protect your sources of income by currying favor with local politicians. Faster, FASTER. You seek national laws that work in your favor. FASTER, FASTER, RUN--for high office, or else enter the space-time continuum of those who hold high office. Attend $30k/plate dinners as a matter of routine. Effectively make policy, which feeds back into the hyperdrive of your ever accelerating fortunes.

      Close to the monetary speed of light, the Newtonian world of talent and hard work are of minimal impact, whereas for most of us the relativistic impact of unearned income and influence are negligible, or just a dream.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  3. Units by Thanshin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the 141-square-mile island

    I can't comprehend that size. Could we have the area in asteroid passing distances? Earth radiuses works too.

  4. he's like Dr. No by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Funny

    With these billionaires also starting their own private space programs too, all we need is a suave british agent and a hot local chick going to raid the compound threatening megalomaniacal schemes

    "do you expect me to talk?"

    "no mr. bond, I expect no SQL to this movie, I expect you to join that table with this collate, and then drop"

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  5. Re:What a flake Ellison is by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think Ellison is used to investing with rats, just his kind of folks.

    That was mean, rats are actually no where near as bad as this asshole.

  6. Next year: Oracle secedes by AbominousSalad · · Score: 5, Funny

    Next year's follow-up story - Oracle secedes, and couches itself as fully as possible in its total reality distortion field.

    Then it sues Greece for having had oracles 2000 years ago.

    --
    Every trollism an AC posts is prefixed, in my mind, with "A. Coward whined, in a weak and cowardly voice:"
  7. Re:What a flake Ellison is by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know, I kept them as pets for years. I had to stop since they don't live long enough for as attached as I got. I trained some to fetch, they liked to be petted, very much like little dogs.

    Far smarter and kinder than Mr.Ellison.

  8. Re:Real plan by GIL_Dude · · Score: 4, Informative

    With something like this, he owns the land, not the island. That may sound stupid, but the island itself is part of Hawaii. For example - if the governor or legislature decides to build a highway across the island, they simply declare eminent domain and seize the land they need (paying for it at some "going rate"). However if he really owned the island, the government couldn't legally do that. So he is like any other landowner. The only difference is that he owns 98% of the land. All of the normal laws about land use still apply. If they have zoning there, it still applies. If they have laws like California does about maintaining free access to certain parts of beaches and waterways, those still apply. That's a far cry from what most people think of when they say someone owns an island. They generally think of it as the person being basically the sovereign there. And that is not true in this case. Larry isn't the king.

  9. Re:so what? by mjr167 · · Score: 5, Funny

    So... shooting trespassers is ok if we eat them afterwards?

  10. He's going to plant coffee by rs79 · · Score: 5, Funny

    So he can finally make money off Java.

    --
    Need Mercedes parts ?
  11. Re:Real plan by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If all of the landowners in an area vote to secede, they can secede.

    Then again there was that whole Civil War thing, which suggests that not everyone agrees about that principle.

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  12. Re:Real plan by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 4, Funny

    If all of the landowners in an area vote to secede, they can secede.

    Then again there was that whole Civil War thing, which suggests that not everyone agrees about that principle.

    Now wait. Everybody knows the US Civil War had to do with vampires. There's even a new documentary coming out in theaters about it.

  13. Re:Taxes by phriedom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can't give him a tax cut, he already doesn't pay taxes. He doesn't exercise his options, because that would be a taxable event, he just borrows money against them, which isn't taxable income. But if you claim that the rich aren't on a level playing field, then you're engaging class warfare.

    --
    Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.