Although Sir Mick Jagger (81) is one of the most famous rock stars in the world and has amassed a considerable fortune, lately it seems that he will not pass on his huge money to his descendants.
Since the formation of the Rolling Stones in London in 1962, the frontman has been part of the music industry.
The band has since released 31 studio albums, 122 singles, and 77 music videos. The result of all this is that the group has sold over 200 million records worldwide and is listed on Billboard as the second biggest artist of all time, behind The Beatles.
They lasted an incredible 61 years together, making them one of the longest-running music groups ever!
So it should come as no surprise that the band members – including Jagger – were able to make a lot of money.
But, as the Wall Street Journal recently said, that doesn’t guarantee his kids will grow up rich.
The father-of-eight says he has no immediate plans to sell back the band’s post-1971 back catalogue, despite the fact that it’s a recent trend among established acts. The process essentially means that depending on the terms of the contract, the artist will sell the copyright to the songs, recordings, or both.
Performers like Katy Perry and even Bob Dylan decided to sell the rights to their songs, which led to multi-million dollar deals. Dolly Parton has reportedly said she wants to follow in the footsteps of Bob Dylan, who made $300 million by selling his entire discography to Universal Music.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Jagger stated that he would not transfer the proceeds to his children even if the Rolling Stones sold their discography. “Kids can live comfortably without $500 million.
“Come on,” he urged.
However, if a deal is reached, Jagger would prefer to donate the funds to a good cause. “Maybe you’re doing some good in the world,” he added.
The ‘You Can’t Always Get What You Want’ singer has five wives and eight children ranging in age from six to fifty-two. Jagger and his partner at the time, Marsha Hunt, welcomed their eldest, 52-year-old Karis, into the world in 1970.
During his time with Bianca Jagger, whom he married from 1971 to 1978, Jagger had another daughter, 51-year-old Jade.
Actress Jerry Hall, who dated Jagger from 1977 to 1999, had four children with the musician: sons James, 38, and Gabriel, 25, and daughters Elizabeth, 39, and Georgia May, 31.
Jagger’s eighth child Lucas, 24, was born while he was dating model Luciana Gimenez Morad. Then, in 2016, Jagger gave birth to her youngest child, Deveraux, who is six, with her current partner Melanie Hamrick, a former ballerina and choreographer.
Oh my goodness, that’s a big family and there are a lot of individuals to split a huge fortune between!
How do you feel about Mick Jagger’s decision to keep his wealth a secret from his children?
Would you follow suit? Tell us in the comments below!
Mick Jagger’s decision not to pass on his vast fortune to his children has attracted considerable attention, especially given his legendary career with The Rolling Stones and the vast wealth he has amassed over the years.
While many may assume that a rock star of his stature would ensure his children inherit a substantial sum, Jagger has made it clear that he doesn’t believe in simply passing on wealth. Instead, he is more inclined to use his wealth to contribute to charitable causes than to create a financial legacy for his descendants.
Although Jagger is the father of eight children from various relationships, ranging in age from six to fifty-two, it seems that his children can do without a massive inheritance. His opinion is in line with a growing trend among wealthy individuals, especially musicians, who choose not to sell large sums of money. Jagger’s attitude reflects his belief that wealth should not guarantee a comfortable life, but that his children should learn to make it in the world.
Instead of giving his children his fortune, Jagger expressed an interest in donating any potential proceeds from the sale of the Rolling Stones catalog to causes that would have a positive impact. This decision speaks to his desire to leave a different kind of legacy—one that benefits others and potentially contributes to making the world a better place. It’s a choice that might not sit well with everyone, but it certainly underscores Jagger’s unconventional approach to wealth and family.
Whether or not others would follow in his footsteps remains a personal question. Some may see this as a responsible, prudent decision, while others may see it as harsh or even unfair. Ultimately, Jagger’s choice is a reminder that how one chooses to use their wealth — and the legacy one wants to leave behind — is a deeply personal decision, and not everyone chooses to distribute it in the same way.