"...The billionaire founder of the outdoor fashion brand Patagonia has given away his company to a charitable trust.
Yvon Chouinard said any profit not reinvested in running the business would go to fighting climate change.."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62906853
Wow, that's pretty altruistic!
He's still a billionaire though isn't he?
Yes it's an amazing contribution, but does he really sacrifice anything?
Yes, the circa 3 billion dollars he could have gained by selling or floating the company.
Is this a case of ‘fecked if you do, and fecked if you don’t’?
The interesting thing (to me) would be the terms of reference of this trust. Whilst it was his company, he controlled its 'mission' and could change it to suit circumstances. A trust is likely to be much less flexible or be subject to the whims or opinions of the trustees (whoever they are at any given time). Tricky situation, but given his age I can't think of a better approach.
Well my comment was unpopular.
To clarify, I'm happy he's done it, it protects Patagonia from being purchased by other companys and funds so they can protect their core values which is great. I'm glad he's done it, it makes him fantastic compared to all the other greedy capitalist corporations and fund managers. It's wonderful to have those investments in climate action. I wish more companies did this.
He's still flipping minted, I can't see it impacting his life one iota so to claim altruism and that it's a great act of generosity? It's like Bill Gates giving away his money to get off the rich list. It's wonderful and can impact mankind in a wonderful way, but it's no greater an act of altruism than someone on the dole buying a homeless person a cup of tea. In fact it's probably less.
I think you're confusing altruism and generosity.
Generosity is measured by the heart, so yes giving when you're skint could show more heart than the same gift from someone ultra rich.
But altruism is measured more in overall monetary value (and tax deductables, social brownie points, political kudos, favours earned, etc) but that's not to say that it can't sometimes come from the heart as well. It's just publicly scored by different rules.
Probably in Choinard's case he's wise enough to know he can't take it with him and he should do something good. Sure it's not going to cause him hardship but that company was a big piece of his life and many people wouldn't have been able to do what he just did. Respect to him
Altruism should be selfless. Its not a selfless act (you've listed lots of reasons why it's not selfless), but I think this is going to end in semantics very quickly so I'm happy not to get sucked into this
> It's like Bill Gates giving away his money to get off the rich list
Ir seems Bill is struggling with that; his worth has increased to $115Bn, so he's having to give away another $20Bn...
> > It's like Bill Gates giving away his money to get off the rich list
> Ir seems Bill is struggling with that; his worth has increased to $115Bn, so he's having to give away another $20Bn...
Could you imagine the same of Zuckerberg or Bezos? Credit where it's due, and huge respect to Yvon Chouinard for not getting sucked into the 'more is always better' fallacy.
> He's still a billionaire though
What, apart from some personal problems you obviously have, makes you say that?
jcm
I recommend everyone reads Chouinard's autobiography Let My People Go Surfing. In my view, it's a very inspiring account of how one boss has tried to run an ethical company in which products are responsibly sourced and staff are well treated- not as easy as it sounds.
Indeed. I was going to say the same thing. This guardian piece reports accurately the Chouinard I have learned to respect over the years. I think he has sold it off for the right reasons and I don't think he is a billionaire from what I know. There are some good people in this world and there even some good successful people in this world. Being good at making money doesn't necessarily make you evil.
https://www.theguardian.com/global/2022/sep/15/yvon-chouinard-the-existenti...
That's possibly a first a UKC commenting that the Guardian is accurate 😛
Again I've not said he's evil, earlier in the thread I've even stated that I like him/Patagonia and their ethos/core values.
What I questioned was the way it's being portrayed, and also the need to accumulate such wealth in the first place. Maybe my posts lacked to nuance and explanation needed.
I
@JCM , thanks for your concern, it's probably a long list of problems.
So this article in the NYtimes gives good detail on the Trust and also the Taxes that Chouinard will pay.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/14/climate/patagonia-climate-philanthropy-c...
> Indeed. I was going to say the same thing. This guardian piece reports accurately the Chouinard I have learned to respect over the years. I think he has sold it off for the right reasons and I don't think he is a billionaire from what I know. There are some good people in this world and there even some good successful people in this world. Being good at making money doesn't necessarily make you evil.
He hasn't sold it off, that's the whole point.
That's fair. I'll take the criticism, it wasn't meant as sniping, but is the way it reads.
> I think you're confusing altruism and generosity.
> But altruism is measured more in overall monetary value
I think you're misunderstanding the definition of altruism: 'disinterested and selfless concern for the wellbeing of others'. Thus, for example, choosing to volunteer for a charity could be altruistic or going out of your way to help a mate, or putting a quid in a collection tin. Nothing at all to do with monetary value.
Can you think of another $bn company that would do the same?
And what could YC do that would be better? If he sold Patagonia to Mike Ashley and gifted the proceeds to Greenpeace, the Patagonia brand would still be making money for Mike Ashley, just less ethically.
> He's still a billionaire though isn't he?
> Yes it's an amazing contribution, but does he really sacrifice anything?
He was estimated to be a billionaire ($1.1bill) due to his Patagonia shares, which he has now given all away, so no, he’s not still a billionaire.
You're right, sorry, my mistake, I think his net worth is 1.5billion (from a BBC report yesterday) so that leaves him with 400million....
Anyway I've invested too much time in this thread, I've come across poorly and articulated my points badly. Apologies I'm out.
Does Yvon Chouinard still have any stake in Black Diamond
> Does Yvon Chouinard still have any stake in Black Diamond
Black Diamond is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Clarus Corporation
Clarus Corporation also own Sierra Bullets and Barnes Bullets. Since I found this out I no longer buy Black Diamond stuff.
> Altruism should be selfless. Its not a selfless act (you've listed lots of reasons why it's not selfless), but I think this is going to end in semantics very quickly so I'm happy not to get sucked into this
Altruism is rarely selfless... If you take into account the positive influences it has on your own state of mind etc. Certain 'altruistic' people are actually selfish but not in terms of money but in terms of their own self-image.
Mother Theresa is a good example where, if you track the whole story, she was acting in her own self interests most of the time (although those self interests sometimes aligned with the gestalt definition of 'caring').
Given this, you can't define 'altruistic' by how much the person has to suffer in order to be generous. "it's only caring if it hurts you in the process" seems a silly idea. However, there is a definition of caring based on self-sacrifice which is more interesting I suppose.
Let's say Chouinard had a particular passion for a place or group of places and would loved to have seen them saved for all time. But he realised that this was selfish of him and his own 'control' was not the 'best' way to work with the money his company had created. Then we can see that his donation to a set of trustees to manage in the best interests of the environment in the way they see fit is actually more selfless than merely donating money to a cause that interests you.
I vote for the fact that he is very aware of what philanthropy means and has put his best interests (which are certainly not monetary at this point in his life) second.
I've waffled - sorry...
Tim
In reply:
I'm a bit surprised that this thread hasn't been unbridled admiration at the man's generosity. (Even aiming off for a public forum.) When I heard the news yesterday morning it really brightened up my day with renewed optimism towards the human spirit. Anyways, here's more details on the transfer with a FAQ.
https://www.patagonia.com/ownership/?utm_source=em&utm_medium=email&...
I think what he's done here also sets a new benchmark of philanthropy for the wealthy. Obliviously there are a great deal of other philanthropists that have given away far more in dollar value than Chouinard who, though a billionaire, hasn't anything like the means of Gates, Buffet and Soros, but what he's done is different.
He's given away a huge company, the source of his wealth, to a charitable cause so that it can continue to generate wealth for that cause long into the future.
I'm sure this isn't the first time this has been done (though I don't know of any precedent) but it's eye catching, has generated news stories and has probably made others wonder if they can't do the same.
I too am surprised at the lack of enthusiasm and praise for what he's done... A climber gives away a $3 Billion to fight climate change. And the response from climbers? Meh. (that's more aimed at those who haven't contributed at all to this or the other thread, rather than those who have).
Not even worthy of a news story on one of the biggest (apparently) climbing websites. Weird.
Also we shouldn’t forget that he is an absolute climbing legend as well as being a remarkably successful businessman, amongst lots of other interests it seems. An extraordinary life.
Absolutely, he's a ***** legend!
> In reply:
> I'm a bit surprised that this thread hasn't been unbridled admiration at the man's generosity. (Even aiming off for a public forum.) When I heard the news yesterday morning it really brightened up my day with renewed optimism towards the human spirit. Anyways, here's more details on the transfer with a FAQ.
UKC, where no good deed goes unpunished 😂😂
> Can you think of another $bn company that would do the same?
> And what could YC do that would be better? If he sold Patagonia to Mike Ashley and gifted the proceeds to Greenpeace, the Patagonia brand would still be making money for Mike Ashley, just less ethically.
Playing the devils advocate slightly and ready to get shot down in the likes/dislikes.
We don't know what the trust looks like, we only know that the profits will be given to charity.
So by my very rough calculations, selling the company at current value and giving it to charity would be the equivalent of giving away around 400 years of the profits after tax based on the profits for the year ending 2021.
Would the money be more effective if front loaded rather than dripped in over time? Who could ever know what the world will be like in a few decades let alone 400 years. And he won't have any say in where much of the charity donations that will go from this endeavour as he's not immortal.
Yes you could risk losing the company to a Mike Ashley type figure but a good chunk of the Patagonia market is their benevolent/environmental responsibility image so they would lose customers big time.
Alternatively, YC could keep a controlling stake, sell a load of the company, maybe an employee share offer, and still pile a massive lump sum into something that he'd actually get to see.
I suspect YC and his and Patagonia's advisors have looked at all of the options you've mooted, and weighed them up in order to reach the decision they have, given the vast amount of wealth involved in this.
In any case, that a successful 3 Billion dollar now sits as an asset in the charitable foundations possession, that does rather change things in what they can do in terms of credit and borrowing, so it may not be the case that they only benefit from the drip feed of profits.
> > It's like Bill Gates giving away his money to get off the rich list
> Ir seems Bill is struggling with that; his worth has increased to $115Bn, so he's having to give away another $20Bn...
Apparently old Bill made $20 billion from a timely investment in Pharma companies and vaccine manufacturers just before the Rona kicked off. His best investment to date apparently so read into that what you will! Bill also has a 'foundation' into which he donates a lot of money.
Shame these charitable foundations seem to be mostly set up as jolly big wheezes to avoid paying tax. I wonder if Mr Chouinard has better morals than this:
https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10115020/1/Brehm_PDFsam_Brehm_norrag-...
and this:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/sep/08/how-philanthropy-benefits-t...
This
Nobody is buying any company for a valuation that pays itself back over 400 years
The equity value transferred to trust = ~$3bn.
Estimated annual profit after tax not required reinvested in business = $100m
$3000m/$100m = 30 years
That's still a pretty high valuation/earnings ratio. If I suddenly become an investment billionaire, it wouldn't attract my investment (if it was an ordinary publicly traded company). The valuation must include a whole heap of intangibles stuff to vanity/cook the figure upwards. I'm not likely to become a billionaire investor this week... so that let's them off the hook
A quick bit of Googling suggests it's high but not wildly so. Presumably boosted by the way it's grown and set expectations for future growth. And that earnings figure seems to be both estimated, so uncertain, and after tax, not sure whether that's the normal way of assessing the ratio or not.
What like the hundreds of thousands of acres of patagonia that he bought and gave to the chilean government. Imagine being able to do that having started with literally nothing.
The second BMC Members Open Forum webinar took place on 20 March. Recently-appointed BMC CEO Paul Ratcliffe, President Andy Syme and Chair Roger Murray shared updates on staff changes, new and ongoing initiatives, insurance policy changes and the current...