Bay Area's Definition Of Being Rich

Bay Area
21

Look at net worth, not income.

Use my handy definition: $5M x number of household members.

22

When will you get there?

A person who earns 1M a year but lives paycheck to paycheck is very poor if you use networth as the only determinant

1 Like
23

If you have 2 kids, that takes $20M. What do you do with the extra $10M once the kids are grown and out of the house? Would you give each kid $5M once they are married?

24

Maybe give each kid $10M so that the kid will stay “rich” even if he or she marries a penniless.

25

Use the extra to move up a notch to the “mega rich”: $10m x household members. :smile:

2 Likes
26

Did you research what percentage of people in the BA and US meets your criteria?

27

No. Even 20m may not be enough. Common definition of “high networth individual” is 30m asset. But I figure nobody should complain about 20m.

28

I think you mixed up the definitions of HNWI and ultra-HNWIs.

29

Why don’t you explain?

30

Go to wiki and look it up yourself.

31

High-net-worth individual (HNWI) is a term used by some segments of the financial services industry to designate persons whose investible assets (such as stocks and bonds) exceed a given amount. Typically, these individuals are defined as holding financial assets (excluding their primary residence) with a value greater than US$1 million.[1][2][3]

By 2007, the expansion of HNWI assets led to the creation of a super class of HNWIs, known as ultra-high-net-worth individuals (UHNWIs), i.e. those with US$30 million in liquid financial assets according to the Capgemini and Merrill Lynch World Wealth Report 2006[3][5] or with a disposable income of more than US$20 million.[6]

1 Like
32

HNWI is definitely not enough to be “rich” in BA. Ultra is definitely enough but bar too high. Notice assets have to be “liquid” to qualify. People’s 3M primary homes don’t qualify.

1 Like
33

They only count stocks and bonds, which is investible readily. Wall Street uses HNWI to identify their advertising target, it’s different than people’s need to live a good life. Rentals are not liquid so it’s not counted as well.

1 Like
34

They count all except your primary residence… which means they do count rentals.

35

The reason for using only stocks and bonds is because those are the people that they can con to use their wealth management services :slight_smile: For our purpose, should include RE both rental and primary.
HNWIs > $1 million total net asset
UHNWIs > $20 million total net asset (not that many use $30 million)

Please PM me if you have more than $20 million total net asset.

36

You read the sentence too literally.

37

Please let us know how many people PM’ed you for that.

3 Likes
38

It should be “equity”, not “asset”. Doesn’t take that much down payment to buy a $30M house.

39

Net asset = equity

40

PM is not anonymous until you become a robot. Even a robot can’t be trusted blindly.

Anonymous poll is the only way to collect this data :rofl: