How James Packer plans to avoid passing the succession poison chalice to his kids
Eschewing this kind of drama, Packer has divulged in an interview with The West Australian that he will simply pass on his fortune equally between his two currently teenage children and their 12-year-old sibling.
His plan is greatly enabled by the way his fortune is constructed. Most of Packer's money is invested in shares – largely tech companies that he doesn't control.
While it has been a lucrative endeavour for Packer, it has also provided him with an opportunity to remain largely under the public radar.
Loading
The public inquiries into poor governance of Crown Resorts that uncovered money laundering and relationships with organised crime, for which Packer provided testimony, would have been a particularly bruising experience.
Piecing together public snippets about Packer's post-Crown investment strategy suggests he has been a significant beneficiary of the relentless charge of AI and has done well from the foray into, for example, Nvidia. It will have been particularly lucrative if he held his nerve in April when the market turned temporarily sour on technology stocks.
The stress of public life and the self-imposed pressure to grow the legacy left by his father was ultimately a curse for the billionaire who has spoken publicly about his mental health issues.
Packer's willingness to publicly discuss his emotional frailties has certainly added to the sense that he has become sufficiently enlightened that he wants to avoid the succession curse for any of his children.
Loading
Free from the shackles of the public glare has enabled Packer to spend more cruising the Mediterranean or South Pacific on his super yacht and allowed him to move between his luxury properties in the ski fields of Aspen, Los Angeles, Argentina, Mexico and Sydney.
He told The West Australian: 'In regard to what will happen when I'm gone, unlike people like Kerry Stokes or [Canadian tech guru] Daniel Nadler, I inherited my money.
'Whatever difficulties I've had in my life, I'm incredibly grateful to my father for being as generous to me as he was.
'And, in that regard … I'm going to leave the majority of my wealth to my kids, just like Dad did with his children.'
Packer told The West Australian that he planned to pass on his business learnings to all three children as they grew older, but would be equally supportive if they chose to devote themselves to philanthropic causes like their mother, Erica, a long-serving ambassador for humanitarian group UNICEF.
It feels like the end of an era.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Did Donald Trump just give China a major advantage on AI?
Last month, the Trump administration quietly reversed one of its own policies by lifting a ban on US tech giant Nvidia's H20 microchip exports to China. For anyone who has followed Donald Trump's erratic record on trade, another U-turn might not sound like a notable development. But this time, the stakes are much higher because these microchips are critical to powering the next generation of artificial intelligence. Whichever country dominates microchip production will likely lead the global AI race, with massive implications for military strategy and economic output. For nearly three years, the US has tried to keep these powerful chips out of China's hands. Now, by reopening the door, has Mr Trump handed Beijing a major advantage on AI? We spoke to three experts to explain how we got here. Back in April, the Trump administration banned H20 microchip exports to China, toughening restrictions put in place by the Biden administration. It has since reversed that decision. According to Jason Van Der Schyff, a fellow at Australian Strategic Policy Institute's technology and security program, this backflip may be in response to the booming black market demand for high-powered US chips in China. "Over a billion dollars worth of restricted chips were smuggled into China in just a few months," he said. "The reversal may be a pivot by the administration, recognising if you don't offer a legal channel for the slightly degraded chips, buyers will simply go around you." Professor Shahriar Akter, who specialises in the study of advanced analytics and AI at the University of Wollongong said this move seems to follow "a philosophy in Silicon Valley that if you sell more" it will pour more back into "your research and development". Associate Professor in Information Systems at Curtin University, Mohammad Hossain, suggested the Trump administration is trying to kill two birds with one stone. The US is trying to maintain leverage in a broader geopolitical trade-off involving China's critical exports, rare earth elements, while "keeping China dependent on US technology", he said. Nvidia is the tech giant behind these highly sought after microchips and it is led by CEO Jensen Huang who is the ninth-richest man in the world. The H20 is a step-down from Nvidia's top-tier chips (H100 and B200) and was specifically designed to comply with US export restrictions while catering to the Chinese market. "Basically, [H100 and B200 chips] can do things much faster than the H20," Mr Van Der Schyff said. "If we consider how quickly AI is moving any impediment that could be brought to time more than anything is going to maintain that US strategic advantage." While the H20 is less powerful, Mr Van Der Schyff warns that "these aren't toys … even slightly downgraded chips still enable model training at scale". "If you're concerned about national security, letting an adversary access chips that are only one rung down the ladder still poses a strategic risk." While the US hopes to stall China's progress in artificial intelligence, experts warn this strategy may have the opposite effect. China's push to dominate AI is already underway and restricting exports to only H20 chips incentivises them to accelerate domestic developments. "At present in the world, 50 per cent of AI researchers are being produced by China alone," Dr Akter said. Chinese tech giants like Huawei and Biren Technology have been ramping up their own AI accelerators. "Huawei's chips are already being deployed in major training clusters," Mr Van Der Schyff said. Still, China's domestic developments trail behind industry leaders like Taiwan's TSMC and South Korea's Samsung when it comes to cutting-edge manufacturing. "There isn't necessarily a danger that China catches up overnight but these restrictions do however give Beijing a clear incentive to sort of go all in on industrial policy for their own semiconductors to accelerate domestic progress," Mr Van Der Schyff said. "We've seen this play out previously with 5G and also with aviation." All three experts cautioned that it's difficult to gauge China's true AI capabilities. "Given the closed nature of China's systems and their propensity to not always tell us the truth", it's unclear how much China's artificial intelligence has developed, Mr Van Der Schyff said. Dr Akter used an analogy to explain the uncertainty: "There are two types of AI technologies", one is called glass box and the other is called black box. "Glass box technology is basically explainable AI, which is open source and we can explain where data is coming from and how it is being used to develop AI models and what would be the outcome." Whereas, black box technology is the opposite, we cannot trace back to the source of the data and we cannot tell what models have been used. That opacity makes it difficult for the rest of the world to assess whether Beijing is playing catch-up or quietly pulling ahead. The country that has the upper hand in microchip production will likely lead the global AI race and that has significant repercussions, experts said. "The country that dominates compute will dominate AI, and AI will shape everything from military planning to economic productivity."
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Trump's crypto mania poses a risk for our super
This distinct lack of guardrails, and the well-known volatility of crypto – data shows that over the past decade the cryptocurrency market has been almost five times as volatile as the US sharemarket – is one thing when it's young investors who are eager to take high risk for possible high reward. But it's another when people's retirements are involved. One of the most likely reasons for this loosening of regulations (gold and private investments are also set to be added to what US funds can invest in) is that the industry is under increasing pressure globally to find new investment options and maximise returns because of our ageing population. The pension system in the UK, for example, is expected to reach a crisis point within the next two decades, with many people predicted to retire with less than they may have expected. Loading You can see, then, why cryptocurrency suddenly looks promising. But here is where another likely reason for this shift also arises and, depending on your politics, is either a problem so glaring it might as well be an entire herd of elephants in the room, or is simply shrewd business ingenuity. The US government is currently led by a man who, along with his family, has a bitcoin mining farm and reserve. They have launched their own crypto coins, stablecoin and crypto trading app. It's estimated that $US2.9 billion ($4.5 billion) of the Trump family's wealth – roughly 40 per cent – is tied to their digital investments. And on Wednesday, the White House launched a 160-page document outlining how the government will bring to life the president's promise to bolster digital assets. Trump isn't just pro-crypto, he's driving the pro-crypto bus. Again, investing and being hungry for risk is one thing. But when the money being invested is retirement funds, it's a different ball game. Considering cryptocurrencies are still such a new asset class, there's no long-term performance data to assess their suitability for super investments. But already, there is a cautionary tale to look to. In 2022, a Canadian pension plan for teachers that invested in crypto lost $147 million in invested funds following the collapse of digital currency exchange FTX. While retirement funds are worth billions and $147 million might not sound like all that much in the grand scheme of things, try telling that to the hardworking teacher who was a year away from retirement and suddenly faced working longer due to bad investments. Currently in Australia, the only way to invest in crypto using superannuation is through a self-managed fund. But two things are worth noting here. The first is that there are more than 600,000 self-managed funds, and that with more than $750 billion in assets, they represent roughly a third of our national super sector. The second is that in February, soon after Trump's return to the White House, Australia's industry leaders and Treasurer Jim Chalmers travelled to the US for a 'super summit', in an attempt to try to win over American financial executives and the US government. Loading Currently, about $US400 billion of our super is invested in US assets, which translates to roughly 14 per cent of all Australian investments. However, that's expected to grow to more than $US1 trillion over the next decade. Whether these assets will one day include crypto remains to be seen. But the fact that American funds – which have the biggest pool of money in the world – now can more freely look to crypto than ever before, and that Australia is so hungry to remain economically close to the US, is something that should make us sit up and pay attention. Victoria Devine is an award-winning retired financial adviser, bestselling author and host of Australia's No.1 finance podcast, She's on the Money. She is also founder and director of Zella Money.
The Age
12 hours ago
- The Age
‘Wolf in cashmere': Billionaire's luxury empire is facing a crisis
LVMH's market value has fallen by more than a quarter over the past year, to less than €250 billion. Hermes, a luxury brand Arnault tried and failed to buy, and has eyed with envy ever since, has taken LVMH's crown as the most valuable company in the industry, despite generating only €15 billion in sales last year. Adding insult to injury, the Arnault family, which has topped France's rich list since 2017, has also been dethroned by the Hermes clan. Can Arnault turn the ship around? Loading LVMH can't blame the economic environment for all its woes. It raised prices enormously in the post-COVID 'revenge shopping' boom, irking some customers. The price of Louis Vuitton's Speedy 30 canvas tote bag has more than doubled since 2019, for example, while the average price of personal luxury goods in Europe has increased by just over 50 per cent, according to HSBC, a bank. Only a handful of designers, including Chanel and Gucci, have raised prices more. A series of scandals have also damaged the image of some of its brands. Moet Hennessy, LVMH's drinks division, has recently faced accusations of sexual harassment, bullying and unfair dismissal by former employees (which it denies). On July 14, an Italian court placed Loro Piana, an LVMH label that sells cashmere sweaters for more than $US1000 ($1500) a piece, under judicial administration for using suppliers that allegedly violate labour rights. Dior faced similar investigations last year. LVMH's response has been half-hearted: 'Transparency, control and management of this whole ecosystem can sometimes prove a bit difficult,' it said recently. Arnault is attempting to steer towards calmer waters. New bosses have been put in charge of the booze, watches and retailing units. The appointment of Jonathan Anderson as the new creative director of Dior has been cheered by fashionistas. Some investors, however, worry that the companies' problems are deeply rooted. One concern is that decades of pushing fancy clothing and accessories not just to the super-rich but also the merely well-off has made LVMH's brands more vulnerable to economic cycles and dented their image of exclusivity. Even Louis Vuitton, the company's crown jewel, has not been immune. Analysts at HSBC term the brand 'schizophrenic' for its attempt to peddle entry-level products like chocolate and make-up alongside ultra-pricey handbags and luggage. Loading The outlook for Moet Hennessy is more worrying still. As profits have shrunk, the division has announced thousands of job cuts. Analysts point out that young consumers aren't drinking as much as older generations, and when they do, they tend to shy away from spirits such as cognac, which make up a big chunk of LVMH's booze business. The wine and spirits division now contributes less than 10 per cent of LVMH's operating profits, down by roughly half over the past decade. By contrast, Hermes, which has remained focused on selling fashion to the exceedingly wealthy, has continued growing handsomely. Its market value as a multiple of its net profit is now more than twice as high as for LVMH. Brunello Cucinelli, another purveyor of ultra-luxe fashion, is valued at a similar multiple to Hermes. If Louis Vuitton were to be valued at such a multiple, it alone would be worth significantly more than the entirety of its parent company. That has led some to call for LVMH to break itself up. On July 25, reports emerged that it was exploring a sale of Marc Jacobs, a fashion label founded by a former creative director of Louis Vuitton. A bolder move would be jettisoning the troubled drinks business. Diageo, owner of tipples from Guinness to Johnny Walker, already controls a third of Moet Hennessy and has in the past expressed interest in taking the rest of it off LVMH's hands. The British company is currently grappling with its own slump in profits and recently parted ways with its chief executive, but analysts speculate that it could make a deal work by selling off its beer business at the same time. Arnault, aged 76, is navigating all this while making plans for a transition at the helm. He clearly intends to keep the enterprise under family management. All five of his children work in different corners of his empire under the tutelage of experienced executives. His daughter, Delphine, who has been tasked with turning around Dior, is his eldest and the only of his offspring on the executive committee of LVMH, making her the most likely candidate to succeed her father. Yet, there are other possibilities. In February, Alexandre was parachuted in as the deputy head of Moet Hennessy. In March Frederic was put in charge of Loro Piana.
