Hailey Bieber has just signed a billion dollar deal
Hailey Bieber has just signed a billion dollar deal for her trendy beauty brand Rhode, making her richer than her pop singer husband, Justin Bieber.
e.l.f Beauty acquired the brand, which hasn't even celebrated its third-year anniversary, for a staggering $1 billion (A$1.56b)
The 28-year-old model, who married Mr Bieber in 2018, launched her beauty brand in June 2022. She took to social media to share the big news with her more than 54 million followers on Instagram.
'I always had big dreams for the company,' she wrote.
'I am so incredibly excited and proud to announce that we are partnering with e.l.f Beauty as we step into this next chapter in the world of Rhode.
'I found a like-minded disrupter with a vision to be a different kind of company that believes in big ideas and innovation in the same way that I do and will help us continue to grow the brand.
'I feel invigorated, excited and more ready than ever to step into an even bigger role as Chief Creative Officer, and Head of Innovation of Rhode as well as strategic adviser to e.l.f Beauty.'
e.l.f Chairman and chief executive officer, Tarang Amin, told WWD that he was stunned to see how quickly the brand had succeeded.
'In less than three years, going from zero to $212 million of net sales, direct-to-consumer only, with just 10 products – I would never believe that if somebody told me,' he said.
A press release states that the $1 billion dollar deal is 'comprised of $800 million of consideration payable at closing' in a combination of cash and stock, subject to customary adjustments.
The deal also includes an additional potential earn-out consideration of $200 million based on the future growth of the brand over a three-year time frame.
Ms Bieber's famous friends were quick to congratulate her on the eye-watering deal with Kylie Jenner writing she 'could cry' over the news and Kim Kardashian writing 'Yes Hailey!'.
The 28-year-old's billion dollar deal officially makes her much richer than her famous husband, which is quite the feat considering she was relatively unknown when she married the pop singer in 2018.
While Mr Bieber might be known for pop bangers like Peaches and Sorry, according to Forbes, his estimated net worth is $83 million in 2025, even though he sold his music catalogue for $200 million in 2022.
There's been speculation for a while now that the cancellation of his Justice Tour in 2022 was a big financial blow.
The billion dollar deal also comes after Ms Bieber snagged the June cover of Vogue.
Her pop singer husband then took to Instagram to share that that he had told the model she would never be a cover girl for the influential fashion publication during a fight.
'Yo this reminds me when Hailey and I got into a huge fight. I told hails that she would never be on the cover of Vogue. Yikes I know, so mean,' he wrote.
The pop star admitted he felt 'disrespected' during their argument and gave into a knee-jerk reaction to want to get even.
'I think as we mature we realise that we're not helping anything by getting even,' he said.
'We're honestly just prolonging what we really want which is intimacy and connection. So baby u already know but forgive me for saying u wouldn't get a Vogue cover cuz clearly I was sadly mistaken.'
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
Tariffs a sideshow to greater US problem: economist
Samantha Donovan: Well up until the last couple of weeks, the financial markets have swung wildly after Donald Trump's every utterance on tariffs. Recent reaction to the President's trade policy shifts has been more muted though. Australian Justin Wolfers is a Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the University of Michigan. He told our business correspondent David Taylor, tariffs are now a sideshow to a much greater concern for the international community. Justin Wolfers: The Constitution gives the power over tariffs to Congress, not the White House. Now over the years, Congress has given some of that power, handed it off to the White House, but only in a very limited and constrained way. So a simple reading of the rules would say the President can't do this. So in order to have across the board tariffs or what he calls reciprocal tariffs on every country in the world, he's had to call it a national emergency and invoke the Emergency Powers Act, which is interesting, first of all, because that act says nothing about tariffs. And secondly, there's no emergency. The so-called emergencies, the US has trade deficits with many countries. Bilateral trade deficits are not themselves a problem. So it's been in the works that this was going to get knocked down and it finally hit court last night. The court said this is quite clearly unconstitutional. It was a three judge panel, an Obama judge, a Reagan judge, and a Trump judge. So it seems like a pretty clear decision. So that all seemed pretty clear until the US federal government, the Trump administration, filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals unsurprisingly agreed to hear the case. And while it's waiting to get its work done, so while they're reading the documents and so on, it decided to stay, that is to say reinstate the Trump tariffs. All of this is going to be on a pretty expedited schedule. So within a couple of weeks, they're going to come back with their decision. If, as I expect, they find this to be unconstitutional, then the tariffs will be back off again. Then we'll be off to the Supreme Court. We'll see the same drama play out one more time. And then what happens after that is what's really interesting. Because this is saying you can't have across the board tariffs, but recall Congress delegates certain tariff powers to the White House. And it turns out there's a lot of other statutory authorities that they could use. They're a little narrower. And so for instance, that's why the tariffs on steel and aluminium and cars are going to persist because they did not come through this overreach. And it would be easy to get further tariffs on semiconductors and pharmaceuticals and so on. So my guess is the White House lawyers are just going to find other ways of creating international trade havoc. David Taylor: That kind of goes to my next question though, Justin Wolfers, based on your understanding of recent history and Donald Trump, what is, and I know this is a very complicated and difficult question to answer, but where is Donald, where would you think that Donald Trump's mind is at? What do you think his next move is likely to be? Justin Wolfers: His lawyers will be telling him as of this afternoon, Mr. President, the statutory authority we were using will come under question. But if you want to push ahead with tariffs, I've got lots of other ways that you can do it. My guess based on past history is he'll say that's terrific. Let's keep going. David Taylor: Given that, and given how much you know that financial markets can't stand uncertainty, the market reaction, the financial markets reaction over the past 24 hours, I would describe as being quite muted compared to... Justin Wolfers: I agree. David Taylor: Yeah, why? Why? Justin Wolfers: Yeah, I've given this a lot of thought. So the S&P 500 rose one and a half percent when this was announced. That's quite muted given that the day that Trump... So, and this announced all of these tariffs are illegal and they're off. Compare that to seven days after Liberation Day when Trump announced a 90-day pause on the tariffs that led US stocks to rise by about 9%, like six times more for a pause as opposed to it's unconstitutional and you can't do it. So a few thoughts here. One is perhaps this is markets betting that this is going to be overturned at a later point. Another possibility is markets, even if markets don't think it's going to be overturned, and I don't think it's going to be overturned, I think the use of the Emergency Powers Act will be ruled unconstitutional. But even so, Trump has other ways of imposing tariffs. So I suspect that this is markets understanding someone's getting in the way of Trump creating tariffs the way he wants to, but he's probably just going to come back and do it a different way. If you're really interested in this, I'm going to give you one more interpretation. So the markets were incredibly volatile in early April when he announced Liberation Day tariffs, they tanked. When he paused, they soared. They acted like this was a huge thing. Now there's two interpretations of that. One, markets believe that tariffs are so fundamentally important to the profitability of American businesses they have no choice but to rise and fall dramatically every time something happens. If that were true, then you would have thought that the Supreme Court making it unconstitutional should have caused markets to absolutely soar today, and they merely rose a little. So the other possibility is that the original policy announcement was so incoherent, so poorly thought through, so dramatic, so unconstitutional on its face, so absurd, so much overreach in both the economic, political, and legal domains that it signalled an administration that's out of control, and that could do a lot of damage. And so maybe that's what markets were learning in early April. They reacted a little bit to tariffs and a huge amount to learning that this is an economically unhelpful administration. And if that's the case, then all that we learned today, when the courts say Trump wasn't allowed to do tariffs in a particular way, you're only going to see a small reaction because it's still true that the White House is full of lunatics, and that still weighs on people's minds. Samantha Donovan: Professor Justin Wolfers from the University of Michigan. He was speaking with our business correspondent, David Taylor.
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Trump tariffs win legal reprieve
Samantha Donovan: Donald Trump's tariff regime has been given a reprieve after a US federal court ruled the import taxes will remain in place while it considers an appeal by the White House. A US trade court had blocked the tariffs by deciding the President had exceeded his authority in imposing them. Mr Trump has continued to rail against that decision, declaring it was a threat to the country and would quote, completely destroy presidential power. Luke Radford reports. Luke Radford: A lot can happen in a day, including yet another twist in the battle over Donald Trump's tariffs. A Manhattan court struck them down yesterday, arguing the power to levy tariffs in this case belongs to Congress, not the President. But after the Trump administration launched an appeal, the federal court has temporarily reinstated them. Something White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was quick to celebrate. Karoline Leavitt: The courts should have no role here. There is a troubling and dangerous trend of unelected judges inserting themselves into the presidential decision-making process. America cannot function if President Trump, or any other president for that matter, has their sensitive diplomatic or trade negotiations railroaded by activist judges. Luke Radford: It's important to note that the administration hasn't actually won its appeal. The courts just decided the tariffs can stay while that's being figured out. And despite what the White House says, experts say the court does have a role here. Nick Ackerman is a former assistant US attorney and was a member of the Watergate prosecution team. Nick Ackerman: I think ultimately, if you read the opinion, it's pretty well written, it's well reasoned. I think it's going to be affirmed by the Federal Circuit Court and most likely to be confirmed by the Supreme Court. I mean, I've been saying for a long time that this act just doesn't give him the power to impose the kinds of tariffs that he was imposing and doing it the way he did. Luke Radford: In the meantime, the US is continuing its negotiations with other countries. US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent told Fox News while discussions with China have stalled, yesterday's decision has had no notable impact. Scott Bessent: They are coming to us in good faith and trying to complete the deals before the 90-day pause ends. So we've seen no change in their attitude in the past 48 hours. As a matter of fact, I have a very large Japanese delegation coming to my office first thing tomorrow morning. Luke Radford: It's a small victory in what has been a tough week for the president. On Wednesday local time, he reacted angrily after he was asked about a new acronym coined on Wall Street. TACO. Short for Trump Always Chickens Out. Donald Trump: And in many ways, I think we really helped China tremendously because, you know, they were having great difficulty because we were basically going cold turkey with China. We were doing no business because of the tariff, because it was so high. But don't ever say what you said. That's a nasty question. Luke Radford: While this case is going to appeal, it's unlikely to be the end of the legal challenges. Another case lodged by 13 US states is still underway. Dan Rayfield is attorney general of Oregon. Dan Rayfield: When you have a president who thinks that you're above the law and above following the laws and is trying to corral power in this way, that is one of the most undemocratic things you can do. The Constitution of the United States gives the power to set tariffs solely to our Congress. Congress then delegates some of that power to the president. So it's not even his role. If we are going to have a healthy democracy long term, you have to have a president that is willing to follow your constitution. He takes an oath. You got to follow it. You got to take it seriously. Luke Radford: The White House says it has other ways of levying tariffs, even if this case goes against them. Samantha Donovan: Luke Radford reporting.
News.com.au
2 hours ago
- News.com.au
Renée Zellweger and Ant Anstead shut down split rumours
On Thursday, editors at the Daily Mail claimed the Oscar-winning actress and TV personality had been "living apart for the past year". They also alleged Anstead has been staying at the home of Julia French in Laguna Beach, California while Zellweger films the upcoming season of Only Murders in the Building in New York City. A source claimed the Wheeler Dealers co-host had been living in an apartment on French's property since he moved out of his rental in April. However, a representative for Anstead later shut down the report.
