We require only 56 additional Power Stone donors, only 7 more reviews, and 900 more collections and newly added Discord 47 more members to unlock the next bonus chapters.
Get those stones going boys and tomboys, we need to get those numbers up!
Join my Patreon
GodofPleasure
(dot)com/GodofPleasure
****
> "Meyers' music career may be even more remarkable. His latest Columbia Records single, *That Girl*, released recently, has become one of the year's fastest-selling records, with estimated worldwide physical sales already measured in the over 900 thousand."
"His earlier releases continue to generate substantial sales, while his debut EP remains an extraordinary commercial performer despite having already achieved certification levels normally associated with the careers of established international stars."
The article broke down the numbers.
*That Girl* still remains at the top in Billboard Hot 100, while simultaneously performing strongly in overseas markets. *My Heart Will Go On* and *Unstoppable* continued selling, giving Marvin multiple active commercial properties rather than the typical one-hit spike.
The Times then turned to the number that seemed almost absurd.
> "Meyers' debut EP has continued selling even after reaching Diamond status and fifteen-times-platinum-equivalent certification in the markets where his releases have been certified."
The paper pointed out that Marvin's unusual sales pattern had created another advantage.
He wasn't dependent on a single release.
Every new song sent listeners back toward his older catalog.
Every film appearance brought attention to his music.
Every major story about his books generated another wave of curiosity about the rest of his work.
The three businesses were beginning to reinforce one another.
Then came Hollywood.
> "In film, the numbers become considerably larger."
"The three pictures with which Meyers has written and acted have generated more than $1.3 billion in worldwide theatrical ticket sales, according to studio reports and international box-office estimates reviewed by the Times."
The paper immediately inserted a qualification.
> "That figure should not be confused with Meyers' personal income. Box-office receipts are divided among exhibitors, distributors, production companies, investors, talent participants, and other contractual partners. Nevertheless, Meyers' ownership positions, acting participation, writing compensation, music rights, and negotiated backend arrangements give him an unusually large financial interest in the success of his pictures."
That distinction was exactly what made the next figure so startling.
The Times had spent weeks examining contracts, corporate filings, publishing arrangements, recording agreements, production investments, and estimates of Marvin's retained interests.
Its conclusion was cautious.
But unmistakable.
> "Our investigation estimates that the various entertainment enterprises associated with Marvin Meyers have generated more than $1.9 billion in gross global revenue and consumer spending across publishing, recorded music, theatrical film, and related rights."
"The number is expected to increase substantially. *The Others* alone continues to produce extraordinary daily theatrical receipts of $7 to $9 million, while its international earnings remain on fast track."
Then the article finally reached the number everyone wanted.
> "More difficult to calculate is the amount actually belonging to Meyers personally. Unlike a conventional young entertainer paid primarily through salary, Meyers retains ownership interests across several of his businesses and has negotiated unusually favorable participation in his creative properties."
"After accounting for production expenses, distribution fees, taxes, contractual obligations, reinvestment, and other liabilities, the Times estimates that Meyers' personally accessible liquid wealth has now surpassed $300 million."
The article paused there.
Then came the sentence that would be quoted everywhere.
> "At thirteen, Marvin Meyers appears to have achieved something without modern American precedent: becoming a self-made centi-millionaire while still legally a child."
The Times wasn't entirely comfortable with the phrase.
It explained that Marvin's family background made the word self-made complicated.
He had been born into extraordinary wealth.
He had access to resources most aspiring writers, musicians, and filmmakers could never dream of.
But the money described in the investigation was not simply an inheritance sitting in a trust account.
It had been generated through properties Marvin himself had created, owned, written, performed, produced, or financed.
The distinction mattered.
> "Meyers did not begin from nothing. He began from an extraordinary position of privilege. But the fortune described in this investigation is not simply the Meyers family fortune wearing his name. It is a separate commercial empire built around the thirteen-year-old's creative properties."
And that, more than the sensational headline, was what had Wall Street interested.
Marvin was no longer merely a successful author or an unusually popular recording artist.
He was becoming an owner.
Every book sold generated another stream of royalties. Every record created another catalog asset. Every successful film increased the value of the rights he retained.
And unlike most young stars, Marvin wasn't spending his newfound fortune simply to maintain a celebrity lifestyle.
He was putting it back into companies. Into production facilities. Into film rights. Into music infrastructure. Into people. Into the next project.
The Los Angeles Times ended its investigation with a line that sounded almost deliberately old-fashioned:
> "America has always been fascinated by the self-made millionaire. Marvin Meyers presents a stranger variation on that familiar story—a child who appears to have discovered how to turn imagination itself into an asset class."
"Whether his extraordinary run can continue remains the unanswered question. But one thing is no longer in doubt."
"The boy from Los Angeles is no longer merely making headlines."
"He is making fortunes."
Of course, in the deeply cynical ecosystem of the media, where glowing praise inevitably brought vicious counterattacks, there were always publications willing to bet against the golden boy.
Marvin's old adversary, Britain's News of the World, was more than happy to oblige.
Its headline screamed across the page: MARVIN'S $300 MILLION MADNESS!
BOY WONDER BETS FORTUNE ON FANTASY FLOP
The article began with a grudging admission.
> "Marvin Meyers may be Hollywood's most astonishing young success story, but even genius can lose its mind when surrounded by too much money."
The tabloid acknowledged that Marvin had already made himself extraordinarily wealthy through books, music and film. By every conventional measure, the teenager had accomplished something almost incomprehensible.
But then came the question the paper wanted readers to ask.
What was he doing with all that money?
Apparently, betting $300 million on *The Lord of the Rings*.
> "Three hundred million dollars. Not three hundred million in imaginary Hollywood accounting. Three hundred million in real money."
That, the paper argued, was the truly insane part.
Hollywood had spent years regarding Tolkien's masterpiece as one of the most difficult properties in existence to bring to the screen. The books were enormous, the mythology was dense, the characters were numerous and the world contained creatures and cultures that would require extraordinary amounts of money merely to portray convincingly.
And then there were Tolkien's readers.
> "These are not ordinary moviegoers. They know Middle-earth. They know the languages, the histories, the characters and the smallest details of Tolkien's world. Give them too little Tolkien and they will revolt. Give them too much and audiences unfamiliar with the books will wonder what on earth is happening."
Then the paper turned its guns on the director.
> "And who exactly is Peter Jackson?"
According to News of the World, Jackson was hardly the obvious choice to direct one of the most expensive productions Hollywood had ever contemplated.
He was a young filmmaker from New Zealand whose reputation had been built largely on bizarre independent horror and splatter movies.
Bad Taste. Meet the Feebles. Braindead.
> "This is the man Marvin Meyers has entrusted with Tolkien's Middle-earth?"
The article sneered at the apparent absurdity.
> "A director famous for making audiences wince at buckets of blood has now been handed elves, dwarves, wizards, kings and armies—and $300 million with which to do it."
But the most vicious part of the article concerned Marvin himself.
The tabloid pointed out that the $300 million commitment represented an enormous portion of his reported personal fortune.
If the project succeeded, Marvin could emerge with another spectacular victory.
If it failed, however, the consequences would be painful even for someone as wealthy as him.
> "Marvin has spent two years convincing the world that he is a financial genius. Now he has placed one of the biggest bets in Hollywood history on a director whose biggest previous pictures could have been financed with the change found beneath a studio executive's sofa."
The paper couldn't resist the obvious punchline.
Marvin was born into a billionaire family.
> "Should his fantasy empire collapse, he needn't worry too much. Somewhere, presumably, his billionaire parents still have a telephone."
And News of the World wasn't finished.
It suggested that Marvin's confidence had finally crossed the line into arrogance.
> "The boy genius believes he can succeed where Hollywood has repeatedly failed. He believes he can tame Tolkien. He believes he can turn an obscure New Zealand director into a household name. Most of all, he apparently believes $300 million is an acceptable price for proving everyone else wrong."
The final sentence was practically a dare:
> "If Marvin Meyers is right, he will look like a visionary. If he is wrong, Middle-earth may become the most expensive lesson a teenager has ever learned."
The tabloid's argument was hardly impartial.
Peter Jackson might not have been a household name in Hollywood yet, but calling him an unknown was ridiculous. He had already built a reputation within the industry, and New Line Cinema clearly hadn't decided to put its name behind a $300 million undertaking because some kid had found an obscure filmmaker nobody had heard of.
The paper simply didn't care about that distinction.
It made for a better story to portray Marvin as a reckless teenager throwing an obscene amount of money at a director famous for horror films.
And, frankly, even the worst possible outcome wasn't going to leave Marvin destitute.
If every dollar of that $300 million disappeared, Marvin would still have the security of the Meyers family fortune behind him. Roughly $2.7 billion in family assets were expected to pass to him eventually.
To Marvin, losing $300 million would be catastrophic as a business decision.
It wouldn't mean sleeping under a bridge.
That was precisely why the News of the World story irritated people in financial circles more than it impressed them. The paper had taken a complicated business decision and reduced it to an easy punchline: spoiled rich kid gambles $300 million on fantasy.
The story sold.
But it wasn't particularly good analysis.
And the next day, a very different publication decided to examine the same question.
Fortune.
Where News of the World had gone looking for ridicule, Fortune went looking for numbers.
And what it found was considerably more interesting.
Unlike the tabloids and entertainment magazines that had spent the past two years obsessing over Marvin's age, clothes, love interests, awards and increasingly absurd list of creative accomplishments, Fortune was interested in something far less glamorous:
Where was the money?
Its reporters followed the ownership structures, royalty arrangements, publishing contracts, music rights, film participation, private investments and holding companies surrounding Marvin's growing empire.
The result was a portrait of a teenager whose wealth was considerably more complicated—and considerably larger—than the public had realized.
The magazine's cover story was blunt.
> "Marvin Meyers' explosive rise through the global entertainment industry is impressive enough. But our examination of his finances suggests that the entertainment empire may only be the most visible portion of his wealth."
Fortune began by separating the numbers most newspapers had been carelessly mixing together.
Box-office grosses were not Marvin's income.
Book sales were not his royalties.
Record-company revenue was not his personal fortune.
And the $300 million he had reportedly committed to *The Lord of the Rings* was not money he had simply thrown into a hole.
His financial structure was considerably more sophisticated.
His publishing interests generated royalties and retained rights. His music operations gave him ownership positions extending beyond the records bearing his name. His film companies retained participation in projects that outsiders assumed belonged entirely to distributors. And profits from successful ventures were being redirected into new companies, new productions and new investments rather than simply sitting in a personal bank account.
Then Fortune reached the part that made Wall Street pay attention.
> "The most striking discovery is how aggressively Meyers has been deploying his liquid capital."
According to the magazine's sources, Marvin had been accumulating substantial positions in technology companies during the preceding two years, particularly Yahoo!
The timing was extraordinary.
Yahoo! had already become one of the most visible companies of the Internet boom, and its soaring valuation had transformed early shareholders into paper millionaires almost overnight.
But Marvin had reportedly been buying long before the public fully understood what the Internet economy was becoming.
The investments were not necessarily held directly in Marvin's name, either.
Fortune traced portions of the positions through private holding companies and investment vehicles connected to his broader financial structure, making the exact size difficult to establish.
That uncertainty, rather than reassuring the magazine's reporters, made the numbers more intriguing.
> "Our analysts believe Meyers' publicly reported fortune substantially understates his actual net worth."
The magazine's estimate was startling.
The widely circulated figure of roughly $300 million represented only the wealth that could be reasonably attributed to Marvin's readily identifiable personal earnings and liquid assets.
****
Join my Discord...
(Discord dot gg slash 2MfM9J7dBj)
Join my Patreon
GodofPleasure
(dot)com slash GodofPleasure