Santa is out and Tony Stark is in.
Jolly Ol’ St. Nick topped Forbes magazine’s list of the 15 richest fictional characters last year, but this year he’s been replaced by defense contractor Daddy Warbucks, who raised his worth through the Iraq war. Though Forbes still considers Santa’s worth as infinite, they excluded him from the list after getting “bombarded by letters from outraged children insisting that Claus is ‘real,’ ” according to a statement from Forbes.com.
Bruce Wayne, ranked number 7, is the richest superhero on the list with a net worth of $6.8 billion. Batman’s alter ego is followed by fellow superhero Tony Stark, aka Iron Man. Tony’s made his money through defense contracts, like Wayne, but his net worth is only $3 billion. Plumber Mario makes his debut on the list with a net worth of a cool billion dollars, earned by collecting those gold coins.
Other new additions to the list are Mr. Monopoly, spam entrepreneur Prince Abakaliki of Nigeria, and Tony Montana.
Forbes says, “Net worth estimates are based, when possible, on known commodity and share price movements. All prices as of market close, Nov. 17, 2006. In the case of privately held fictional concerns, we sought to identify comparable fictional public companies. Final net worths were calculated using a tiny grain of common sense and a large dose of salt.”
Forbes’ Fictional 15 List:
1. Oliver “Daddy” Warbucks $36.2 billion
2. Montgomery Burns $16.8 billion
3. Scrooge McDuck $10.9 billion
4. Richie Rich $10.7 billion
5. Jed Clampett $7.7 billion
6. Mr. Monopoly $7.1 billion
7. Bruce Wayne $6.8 billion
8. Tony Stark $3 billion
9. Prince Abakaliki of Nigeria $2.8 billion
10. Thurston Howell III $2.7 billion
11. Willy Wonka $2 billion
12. Lucius Malfoy $1.3 billion
13. Tony Montana $1 billion
14. Lara Croft $1 billion
15. Mario $1 billion
lol, i think that is funny that they did that.
Comment by flaakmonkey — November 23, 2006 @ 4:01 am
How could “Daddy” Warbucks and Monty Burns beat Scrooge McDuck? Not only does McDuck have an entire building full of money but he also own businesses throughout the world.
Scrooge McDuck worth only $10.9 dollars? Bah, humbug!
Comment by Old Miser — January 7, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
I agree. Scrooge McDuck is richer then everyone else, there’s no doubt about it. And how did Monty Burns get so rich, he only ownes a half-ass power plant, right?
Bah, Humbug!
Comment by Scrooge?!?!!?111+ — February 1, 2007 @ 8:45 am
wat happen to lex luthor wat number is he at something is wrong with with this list coz he is partners with Wayne Enterprises so it has to be wrong
Comment by sirsands — January 14, 2008 @ 12:10 pm
i think tony stark is the richest of them all?
Comment by april — May 9, 2008 @ 7:59 am
the richest at least in the comic book world is t’challa… the black panther. and the fact that he is not listed on the forbes list means they didn’t really research their article. t’challa is king of wakanda, a fictional african kingdom that has resisted western influence and retained its wealth. they are the sole source of vibrainium in the marvel universe, and estimated at being worth hundreds of trillions in gnp. ha… take that dick cheney.
Comment by cool herc parks — December 25, 2008 @ 12:12 pm
Well, Going by this list, the new #1 should be Longfellow Deeds, from Mr. Deeds. He tops them all at $40 billion, until the butler, Emillio gets the money.
Comment by DiscipleOfDoom — December 26, 2008 @ 2:35 am
you failed to mention lex luther… who is up there for sure.
Comment by wonder — June 16, 2009 @ 4:23 pm
There is definitely something wrong with this list. I’m not really an expert but what I know is:
Richie Rich- The movie states thet they have 70 billion dollars. And that’s in the nineties, so about a hundred billion would be more appropriate.
The Malfoy’s fortune is never stated in the books, so where did they come up with these numbers.
And a weapons developer like Stark has got to be worth A LOT MORE.
Mr. Monopoly is based on real businessmen, like Rockefeller, Carnegie, Van Der Bilt etc. who are all worth HUNDREDS of billions.
The inconsistencies go on, and on, and on…
Comment by Johnnie — October 25, 2010 @ 4:26 pm