The Wealth Report 2012

but who is smarter. that podgy, old man who has to pay to keep that woman around or the younger fitter but much poorer pilates instructor her husband is paying to teach her but also playing around with her for free. as they say a fool and his money are soon parted.

I'm curious as to how the fool and his money got together in the first place ;)

With some of those photos above its a symbiotic relationship, the guys hate to be lonely and the girls hate to be poor (win-win).

Some people actually love you more and cost you less than others :p
 
First you get the money, then you get the power, then you get the... oh wait a minute, I'm still just a residential property investor.
lgpp30042UalUpacinoUpowerUalUpacinoUscarfaceUposter.jpg


I had a feeling you were an Al Pacino fan. You have good taste.
He's also one of these guys with wealth and power who has a younger partner.
Al is now 71, his girlfriend is 31.

article-0-0C88448600000578-393_634x880.jpg
 
I guess the more extreme the difference in age between the older man and the younger woman reflects on more significant wealth, power and status of the man. Al Pacino clearly has loads of all three - with a 40 year difference. And I not sure that his hot young girlfriend is just with Al for his wealth, power and status. She may like him for his personality. Given the degree of her hotness, I am sure that she could find herself a young billionaire or movie star.
 

Sounds like $5m is the new $1m but i reckon it should be closer to $10m.

According to Fidelity Investments' latest report on millionaires' attitudes towards investing, 26 percent of US millionaire respondents said they did not actually feel rich, and that they would need an average of $US5 million of investable assets to begin to feel wealthy.

The report, which surveyed more than 1,500 respondents, also found that the vast majority of millionaires in the US — 86 percent — are self-made. In Australia, there are 179,500 millionaires.

And millionaires' paths to wealth affect the way they invest. The survey found:

Self-made millionaires said their top sources of assets included investments/capital appreciation, compensation and employee stock options/profit sharing, while those born wealthy were more likely to cite inheritance, entrepreneurship and real estate investment appreciation as key asset sources.

Born-wealthy millionaires were more likely to use financial advisers, especially on issues such as personal trust services and foundation/endowment management.

When it comes to investment strategies, self-made millionaires were more likely to add equity investments, while those who were born wealthy typically had more real estate investments.

Fidelity found that today's millionaire is, on average, 61 years old with $3.05 million in assets. And their outlook is sunny: respondents were more optimistic about the future financial environment than at any other time in the survey's five-year history.
 
Secrets of the rich: being a tightass

Rupert Murdoch (no, a different billionaire) once told me he got all his suits made on the cheap in Hong Kong and I'll bet he's never spent more than $20 on a tie. Lately he's taken to not wearing one that often. Guess why?

These instances of, let's say, frugality, or what Thomas Stanley and William Danko in their book The Millionaire Next Door based on interviews with 500 millionaires call, approvingly, ''living below your means'', are a telltale sign of wealth. Incidentally, a focus group of millionaires who they invited to a swish function for their book just nibbled on crackers and ''it turned out the only gourmets on the scene were among the non-millionaire research staff''.


secrets-of-the-rich-frugality-property-resilience


art-583708741-620x349.jpg
 
Interesting point that self made millionaires were more likely to have share investments whilst inherited millionaires owned more property assets.

That's because business (i.e. shares) is where money is made the quickest in terms of cashflow. Property is where wealth is preserved.
 
What do you mean by wealth preservation in property?

Real Estate is always seen as a safer investment than business. The wealthy families always have large property holdings and land is always how wealth has been transferred in both feudal and modern societies. Besides, business is subject to all the inherent business and management risks - since when the key member dies the company can lose its way - no such problem with real estate.
 
Real Estate is always seen as a safer investment than business. The wealthy families always have large property holdings and land is always how wealth has been transferred in both feudal and modern societies. Besides, business is subject to all the inherent business and management risks - since when the key member dies the company can lose its way - no such problem with real estate.

So what you are saying is that property is not the fastest way to grow net wealth but is the best way to keep wealth and securely transfer wealth to future generations?
 
So what you are saying is that property is not the fastest way to grow net wealth but is the best way to keep wealth and securely transfer wealth to future generations?

Buildings often last at least 100 years or even more, and can be insured against total loss.

Businesses can't as far as I know, so the common practice for wealthy is to operate the business/es for cashflow, and put some of that into property and/or shares with the plan to grow the cashflow and wealth holdings.
 
Buildings often last at least 100 years or even more, and can be insured against total loss.

Businesses can't as far as I know, so the common practice for wealthy is to operate the business/es for cashflow, and put some of that into property and/or shares with the plan to grow the cashflow and wealth holdings.

A well run business can last forever - BHP, CBA whereas buildings will decay and rot.
 
There's plenty of 100 year old houses in all cities in Australia.

Think you might be battling to come up with a dozen companies that old.
 
A well run business can last forever - BHP, CBA whereas buildings will decay and rot.

Buildings may rot, but the land doesn't.

The real wealth is in the land, not the building.

The land will still be there thousands of years from now.

Very few (if any) companies that exist today will still be around then.
 
A well run business can last forever - BHP, CBA whereas buildings will decay and rot.
More minority spun into majority.

What about insurance against total loss? I guess the Gubbmint might bail them out.

I can rebuild my IP's after every fire or plane landing on them, or if the feral tenant wrecks it.

But since you mentioned it; you could always buy a business or start your own; you've got $680k of equity sitting there doing nothing.
 
Last edited:
More minority spun into majority.

What about insurance against total loss? I guess the Gubbmint might bail them out.

I can rebuild my IP's after every fire or plane landing on them, or if the feral tenant wrecks it.

But since you mentioned it; you could always buy a business or start your own; you've got $680k of equity sitting there doing nothing.

What sort of business would you advise buying as a checkout dude in Coles? Most businesses require some input and expertise.
 
Back
Top