Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Richard Branson bloodied by cycling crash after hitting pothole and falling "hard"

Billionaire businessman left with "hematoma on my hip and a nasty cut elbow" after a crash while riding in the British Virgin Islands...

Billionaire business mogul Richard Branson was left injured with a hematoma on his hip and a "nasty cut elbow" after hitting a pothole while cycling in the British Virgin Islands and crashing "hard".

Branson wrote on Instagram, sharing a picture from the roadside: "Took quite a big tumble while cycling in Virgin Gorda a little while ago! I hit a pothole and crashed hard, resulting in another hematoma on my hip and a nasty cut elbow, but amazingly nothing broken.

"We were cycling with Alex Wilson, who fell after me, but thankfully he was ok as well. I'm counting myself very lucky, and thankful for keeping myself active and healthy. After all, the brave may not live forever but the cautious do not live at all!"

The 73-year-old has history with cycling crashes and said "I thought I was going to die" after a 2016 incident which left his bike "completely destroyed" and thrown off a cliff in the British Virgin Islands, where he owns the 74-acre Necker Island.

Sir Richard Branson after bike crash (image from Virgin.com).jpg

That fall happened after he hit a 'sleeping policeman' piece of road furniture while descending a hill in the dark.

"The next thing I knew, I was being hurled over the handlebars and my life was literally flashing before my eyes," he said. "I really thought I was going to die. I went flying head-first towards the concrete road, but fortunately my shoulder and cheek took the brunt of the impact, and I was wearing a helmet that saved my life.

"My bike went flying off the cliff and disappeared. We've since recovered the crumpled bicycle, completely destroyed. My cheek has been badly damaged and my knee, chin, shoulder and body severely cut."

And in 2021 the businessman, who was knighted in 2000, was hospitalised after another "colossal" bike crash while taking part in an event on one of the Caribbean islands.

Sir Richard Branson (picture credit Strive Challenge).PNG

Branson believed the brakes on his bike failed, and said that in his opinion there was "no question" his cycle helmet had saved his life.

In the same year, in a bizarre episode detailed on our live blog, Virgin Galactic admitted that Branson had not rode a bike to the Spaceport America launch site where his space flight launch happened.

"The footage of Sir Richard Branson shown during the event on Sunday was pre-recorded and misidentified in the broadcast. We regret the error and any confusion it may have caused," a Virgin Galactic official confirmed.

Trek Bicycles claimed Branson rode one of its custom-made bikes on launch day, but it turned out the clip, which Branson shared to Twitter and was published by Virgin with the line 'earlier today', was actually from a week earlier. After the flight, Branson said, "It's so awesome to arrive on a bicycle, across this beautiful New Mexico countryside."

Dan joined road.cc in 2020, and spent most of his first year (hopefully) keeping you entertained on the live blog. At the start of 2022 he took on the role of news editor. Before joining road.cc, Dan wrote about various sports, including football and boxing for the Daily Express, and covered the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Part of the generation inspired by the 2012 Olympics, Dan has been 'enjoying' life on two wheels ever since and spends his weekends making bonk-induced trips to the petrol stations of the south of England.

Add new comment

136 comments

Avatar
Hirsute | 2 weeks ago
9 likes

Mods please close this thread.

Avatar
brooksby replied to Hirsute | 2 weeks ago
2 likes
Hirsute wrote:

Mods please close this thread.

Shh.  At least they're not talking about helmets! 

Avatar
Car Delenda Est | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

A lycra clad 'private island haver'

Avatar
don simon fbpe | 2 weeks ago
16 likes

The same Richard Branson who's received over £300m in tax free dividends and the same one who expects British tax payers to bail out his airline to the tune of £500m and the same one who sued the NHS for not giving him a contract? Is this the Richard Branson who can take his leeching and fuck right off? And when he gets there fuck off some more down a pothole filled road the finish the job by further fucking off? That one?

Avatar
Sredlums replied to don simon fbpe | 2 weeks ago
9 likes

Exactly.
When are we finally gonna stop portraying ridiculously rich people like they are cool.
Thery are not. Rich people are scum, and they need to be shunned and ridiculed (and heavily taxed, of course).

Avatar
don simon fbpe replied to Sredlums | 2 weeks ago
7 likes

I know some people who are so poor, the only thing they have is money...

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Sredlums | 2 weeks ago
3 likes
Sredlums wrote:

Exactly.
When are we finally gonna stop portraying ridiculously rich people like they are cool.
Thery are not. Rich people are scum, and they need to be shunned and ridiculed (and heavily taxed, of course).

Billionaires must have a similar emotional disorder to other hoarders, except their hoarding of money is basically depriving other people of their fair share (e.g. they make a lot of money by under-paying their employees).

We shouldn't allow billionaires to exist as it's a ridiculous amount of money and is an obvious sign of greed and selfishness. Anyone with a social conscience is never going to every accrue that amount of money as they'll realise after a few million that they have no need for it, yet there are plenty of people who are dying for the want of money/food/water/medicine. For someone to continue getting richer shows that they have no compassion.

Avatar
brooksby replied to hawkinspeter | 2 weeks ago
2 likes
hawkinspeter wrote:

We shouldn't allow billionaires to exist as it's a ridiculous amount of money and is an obvious sign of greed and selfishness.

https://www.ehd.org/science_technology_largenumbers.php

Quote:

One way to better understand large numbers is to compare the heights of stacks of varying numbers of dollar bills. The thickness of a single one dollar bills measures .0043 inches or .0000000679 miles.

The height of a stack of 100 one dollar bills measures .43 inches.

The height of a stack of 1,000 one dollar bills measures 4.3 inches.

The height of a stack of 1,000,000 one dollar bills measures 4,300 inches or 358 feet – about the height of a 30 to 35 story building.

The height of a stack of 100,000,000 (one hundred million) one dollar bills measures 35,851 feet or 6.79 miles. This would reach from the earth’s surface to the approximate altitude at which commercial jetliners fly.

The height of a stack of 1,000,000,000 (one billion) one dollar bills measures 358,510 feet or 67.9 miles. This would reach from the earth’s surface into the lower portion of the troposphere – one of the major outer layers of earth’s atmosphere.

The height of a stack of 100,000,000,000 (one hundred billion) one dollar bills measures 6,786.6 miles. A column of bills this high would extend 28 times higher than the orbiting International Space Station.

Avatar
marmotte27 replied to brooksby | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

Another way to understand large numbers is conversion to timescales:
- one million seconds is 11 days
- one billion seconds is 35 years
(from memory)

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to hawkinspeter | 2 weeks ago
3 likes

Almost every person in the UK is 'hoarding' an enormous amount of wealth relative to the global average.

Why not show the billionaires how it's done and given away your excess wealth to those who haven't got their "fair share"?

UK median wealth is £125000 whilst globally the figure is a bit shy of £7000 so if you aim to 'redistribute' about 95% of what you own you should be about right.

Avatar
Wingguy replied to Rich_cb | 2 weeks ago
5 likes
Rich_cb wrote:

Almost every person in the UK is 'hoarding' an enormous amount of wealth relative to the global average. Why not show the billionaires how it's done and given away your excess wealth to those who haven't got their "fair share"? UK median wealth is £125000 whilst globally the figure is a bit shy of £7000 so if you aim to 'redistribute' about 95% of what you own you should be about right.

Someone with £125k is 18 times wealthier than someone with £7k. Someone with £1Bn is 8000 times wealthier than someone with £125k. 

Are they really both 'enormous'? Kinda feels like stretching a definition there somewhere.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to Wingguy | 2 weeks ago
3 likes

It's a subjective term but I'd argue they are both enormous.

If you consider what 18x UK averages looks like to get some perspective.

18x the median UK wealth is £2.25m. I'd say that was enormously wealthy.

18x the average UK house price is a house worth about £5m. I'd say that was enormously expensive.

From the perspective of someone with a wealth of £7k I imagine £125k is enormously wealthy.

Avatar
Wingguy replied to Rich_cb | 2 weeks ago
3 likes
Rich_cb wrote:

It's a subjective term but I'd argue they are both enormous. If you consider what 18x UK averages looks like to get some perspective. 18x the median UK wealth is £2.25m. I'd say that was enormously wealthy. 18x the average UK house price is a house worth about £5m. I'd say that was enormously expensive. From the perspective of someone with a wealth of £7k I imagine £125k is enormously wealthy.

If someone with £7k thinks £125k is enormous, what word would they use for some who has 143,000 times the wealth that they do? It's not the same.

Then consider what £125k actually means. Say you plan on retiring at 70 and living to 82... that's £10k a year. Does that sound enormous? Honestly?

Do you think it's reasonable or rational to claim that no amount of wealth can be criticised if a person isn't willing to give that up?

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to Wingguy | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

The wealthy are always defined as those with more money than the person answering the question...

It's fairly undeniable that the average UK resident is enormously wealthy on a global scale.

Of course virtually everyone besides Elon Musk can point to somebody who's richer than them and demand that they should be doing more but the simple fact is that most UK residents are the global 1%.

You might think that it should really be the 0.1% who do more but from the perspective of the bottom 50% of the planet both groups look very similar.

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking with you final question. Could you clarify it?

Avatar
Wingguy replied to Rich_cb | 2 weeks ago
3 likes
Rich_cb wrote:

The wealthy are always defined as those with more money than the person answering the question... It's fairly undeniable that the average UK resident is enormously wealthy on a global scale. Of course virtually everyone besides Elon Musk can point to somebody who's richer than them and demand that they should be doing more but the simple fact is that most UK residents are the global 1%.

So what? When someone in the top 1% has 0.004% of what an entry level billionaire has it's really not the same thing.

And ok - everyone except Elon can say 'hey it's not my responsibility, I'm not that rich'... so what's your point? Is there no reasonable cause to call for them to do something, or to do something to them? After all, as you've pointed out they do have hundreds of thousands of times more than an enormous amount of wealth. 

Quote:

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking with you final question. Could you clarify it?

No idea what confused you, but ok. Is it reasonable to claim that no-one can criticise the excess wealth of a billionaire unless they've given up all but £7000 of their own money?

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to Wingguy | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

I think it is reasonable to criticise those who continue to spend frivolously whilst criticising others for not doing enough to help those with less money.

An expensive takeaway coffee is equivalent to a month's wages in Zimbabwe.

The wealth the average UK person has is almost unfathomable to somebody earning that amount.

I don't think you have to give up everything above the global average to be beyond criticism but you certainly have to make a significant effort at 'redistribution'.

Avatar
Wingguy replied to Rich_cb | 2 weeks ago
5 likes
Rich_cb wrote:

I don't think you have to give up everything above the global average to be beyond criticism but you certainly have to make a significant effort at 'redistribution'.

Well you may not think that, but you did in fact say it. So if you didn't mean what you said then, what do you mean now?

And being beyond criticism is not the same thing as having the right to criticise. At the moment you making a 'don't criticise the rod in your neighbour's eye while ignoring the splinter in your own' kinda point - which I'm sure you can appreciate doesn't sound exactly right.

It also ignores any consideration of who is actually in control of the structure which imposes the gigantic wealth gap. Is the person buying the £4 coffee responsible for the Zimbabwean coffee farmer's tiny wage, or is it the billionaire who owns a global coffee broker?

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to Wingguy | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

Why is that coffee broker a billionaire?

Because millions of people pay for their coffee and don't care about the supply chain.

We all have a personal responsibility for the state of the world.

If you're not willing to take responsibility for your own actions then don't criticise others for acting in a similar fashion.

Let he who is without sin...

Avatar
Wingguy replied to Rich_cb | 2 weeks ago
3 likes
Rich_cb wrote:

Why is that coffee broker a billionaire? Because millions of people pay for their coffee and don't care about the supply chain. We all have a personal responsibility for the state of the world.

We have a responsibility for what we do. If you're claiming that not being informed about, or even not caring about the structure of the world is the same as deliberately creating and profiting from it, then I really don't know where your moral compass is pointing. I don't know what point you're trying to make. Ultimately we all have to consume something, and it's not easy to find out where absolutely everything you buy comes from... and that's by design!

And if you want to talk similarity, you are again looking in the wrong direction. If your bloke with £125k was having a face to face conversation with your bloke with £7k, and the 1 metre between them represented their wealth gap, Richard Branson would be standing in a different town. If they were having the conversation in London, Elon Musk would be in Marrakesh.

If I could throw that far, I would have no qualms whatsoever about casting that stone. I simply can't comprehend why you do.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to Wingguy | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

As UK residents we're guilty of exactly the same thing you accuse Branson et al. of.

We enjoy our relative enormous wealth, using it for frivolity when it could be used to ameliorate harm in the world's poorest countries.

Identifying someone wealthier than you doesn't remove your own culpability.

Avatar
Wingguy replied to Rich_cb | 2 weeks ago
1 like
Rich_cb wrote:

As UK residents we're guilty of exactly the same thing you accuse Branson et al. of. We enjoy our relative enormous wealth, using it for frivolity when it could be used to ameliorate harm in the world's poorest countries. Identifying someone wealthier than you doesn't remove your own culpability.

But we don't do it. We benefit from it, absolutely. But we (your standard £125k having people) don't control it. We don't design it. We don't go out there and purposefully make it happen. Identifying the average Joe who bought the £4 coffee doesn't remove the culpability of the shark who imposed the impossibly low price for a kilo of beans from the farmer. I really have no idea what point you think you're making. I'm not being facetious either, I really don't know where you're going with this.

And again - you're going to have to find another word to describe the wealth of billionaires if you're reserving 'enormous' for the average westerner.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to Wingguy | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

You cannot remove responsibility from the customer.

Ultimately without the customer there is no market.

If you go to a shop and buy something you have responsibility for the production of that product. The carbon footprint of that product is your responsibility. The supply chain abuses are your responsibility.

If you're paying someone to do something then you are responsible for what they are doing.

Take responsibility for your own actions and your effects on global inequality before pointing the fingers at others. Especially if those 'others' have actually been empowered by your actions in the first place.

Avatar
Wingguy replied to Rich_cb | 2 weeks ago
1 like
Rich_cb wrote:

You cannot remove responsibility from the customer. Ultimately without the customer there is no market.

So the existence of market demand justifies any action taken to fulfil that demand while generating absolute maximum profit, does it?

Quote:

If you go to a shop and buy something you have responsibility for the production of that product. The carbon footprint of that product is your responsibility. The supply chain abuses are your responsibility.

So it's my responsibility... but I can't ask for anything to be done about it because that's just privileged whinging?

Quote:

Take responsibility for your own actions and your effects on global inequality before pointing the fingers at others. Especially if those 'others' have actually been empowered by your actions in the first place.

Why 'before'? Does that actually make sense? Even if it does, how do I know when I've met your standards for being able to speak? You said the £125k person should give away 95% of their money first, but then you said that was silly and you obviously didn't mean it. So how much money should they give away? And what if I've already only got as much money as they're supposed to end up with? Am I then permitted to comment on the utter absurdity of demanding that normal people give up significant chunks of their wealth before asking for honest to god billionaires to do anything at all?

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to Wingguy | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

The market demands what the market demands.

If you want ludicrously cheap meat, don't be surprised if animal welfare isn't prioritised.

If you want cheap coffee don't be surprised if workers in the supply chain aren't treated well.

If you find that a company you use doesn't adhere to standards that are acceptable to you then choose a different company that does. Write to the first company and tell them why you're no longer their customer. That's not whinging that's using your power as a consumer.

If you make absolutely no effort to use your privileged global position to at least ameliorate some of the suffering in the rest of the (far less privileged) world then you don't get a pass by pointing the fingers at others.

Avatar
don simon fbpe replied to Rich_cb | 2 weeks ago
1 like

How can this produce a billionaire owner?

Avatar
Wingguy replied to Rich_cb | 2 weeks ago
2 likes
Rich_cb wrote:

If you want cheap coffee don't be surprised if workers in the supply chain aren't treated well.

But we've already established that coffee isn't cheap. Remember? You said it was really expensive. You criticised people for being willing to pay a lot of money for a coffee... and yet coffee brokers are still billionaires and coffee farmers still don't make enough to buy a coffee. Bit of a disconnect in your argument that you need to work on.

Quote:

If you find that a company you use doesn't adhere to standards that are acceptable to you then choose a different company that does.

The word 'if' is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. What if you want to find out the farm standards of the coffee you buy? What if the company you buy from tells you their farmers are really well treated? What if they point to an independent, certified NGO who visits their farms and certifies that the conditions there are great? What if that NGO is actually a joint venture between the billionaire coffee broker and a bunch of his billionaire coffee broker friends and it actually exists to deliberately not find any evidence of not great conditions? Is it still your fault for being fooled and you're still exactly as responsible and culpable as the people who did the fooling?

Quote:

If you make absolutely no effort to use your privileged global position to at least ameliorate some of the suffering in the rest of the (far less privileged) world then you don't get a pass by pointing the fingers at others.

Aha, finally we have a standard to work on! And that standard is not making absolutely no effort. Ok cool, I do get a pass for pointing the finger at others. So what on earth are you moaning about?

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Wingguy | 2 weeks ago
2 likes
Wingguy wrote:

The word 'if' is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. What if you want to find out the farm standards of the coffee you buy? What if the company you buy from tells you their farmers are really well treated? What if they point to an independent, certified NGO who visits their farms and certifies that the conditions there are great? What if that NGO is actually a joint venture between the billionaire coffee broker and a bunch of his billionaire coffee broker friends and it actually exists to deliberately not find any evidence of not great conditions? Is it still your fault for being fooled and you're still exactly as responsible and culpable as the people who did the fooling?

I can recommend buying beans from https://www.hasbean.co.uk/ for a more ethical experience as they try to deal with the coffee growers/processors themselves and give more information about the specific farm and coffee process.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to Wingguy | 2 weeks ago
1 like

I didn't say all coffee was expensive. I said some coffee was expensive. Please don't try and deliberately mislead.

If you choose to buy the cheapest coffee beans available then the onus is on you to check that that low price hasn't been achieved at the expense of workers in the supply chain.

If the coffee company engages in fraudulent practice to completely conceal their poor practice then you're not responsible. If the cover up is known about then you still are.

You've misrepresented my position in your last paragraph too. If you make no effort you can't point the finger, if you make a token effort then you can't expect any more from others etc.

Avatar
Wingguy replied to Rich_cb | 2 weeks ago
2 likes
Rich_cb wrote:

I didn't say all coffee was expensive. I said some coffee was expensive. Please don't try and deliberately mislead. If you choose to buy the cheapest coffee beans available then the onus is on you to check that that low price hasn't been achieved at the expense of workers in the supply chain.

I'm just trying to figure out what you're saying. You've twice claimed that global injustice is caused by people buying coffee that's too expensive and you've also claimed it's caused by people buying coffee that's too cheap. How are we supposed to know what the right amount to pay for coffee is?

Now the kicker, do you honestly think that paying more for coffee means that growers are paid more. Apart from at the absolute bargain basement end of the scale, do you really think there's any direct connection between price of raw material and price of end product? 

Quote:

If the coffee company engages in fraudulent practice to completely conceal their poor practice then you're not responsible.

And do you honestly think this is a vanishingly rare occurence?

Quote:

You've misrepresented my position in your last paragraph too. If you make no effort you can't point the finger, if you make a token effort then you can't expect any more from others etc.

Ok, so you said we should give away 95% of our stuff, but you obviously didn't mean that because it's silly. Then you said we should just not do anything, but you obviously didn't mean that because it's silly.  So what do you mean? Give away just enough that it begins to make a noticeable impact on the lifestyle we can afford to lead? I'm more than happy to be allowed to ask billionaires to do that. I mean seriously, think just how much of a billion quid you have to give away before it makes any difference to you.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to Wingguy | 2 weeks ago
0 likes

I haven't claimed that at all.

I've pointed out that instead of making frivolous discretionary purchases people in the UK could use some of their enormous wealth to ameliorate global suffering.

Please don't try and deliberately mislead.

If you want to know how much an ethical cup of coffee costs then do some research, find genuine ethical companies and look at what they charge. That should give you a ball park figure for how much ethical coffee should be costing. If a cup of coffee is a lot less than that then corners are being cut somewhere.

It takes time but it is part of your responsibility as a consumer.

Pages

Latest Comments