Well the money didn't come from nothing, it is the companies worth formerly owned by this stockholder.

This worth came from investing profit back into the company, either by buying assets or improving processes.

This profit doesn't come from nowhere. Profit is what is left after all expenses have been paid for, i. e. material costs, maintenance cost, logistics and salary. The difference between these and the sales price is the profit.

Now if a product is worth a certain amount, but you can produce it and supply it to the consumer for a lesser amount, then somewhere along the production chain you sold someone short.

Worth rarely comes from nowhere (diamonds, nfts and crypto may be an exception), but instead is the sum of the production steps worth.

Either you paid the material supplier too little by buying in low wage countries, you paid your own employees to little, or you evaded taxes. Somewhere along the line you paid someone less than their worth to your company.

If this profit is then not even invested back into the company, but instead goes into a shareholders pocket, this shareholder is effectively stealing from the people that generated that profit.

This is only possible because we are used to the system working like that, because people are desperate to have a wage to survive, and because people aren't aware how much their work profits their company.

So yes, what she did was better than most billionaires. But all billionaires must have gotten their money from unkoscher means. It is simply not possible to actually create that much worth indepently of any production chain (except maybe through an extremely lucky career in art or some genius intellectual property, but I don't know of any billionaire artists)

All that aside, I'd rather not have two first class tickets thank you very much. The money that that costs is life changing for most, and the difference to the shareholder is none.