Hi ozbargainers
I want to know how i am doing financially compared to my peers. I find it rude to ask my colleagues/friends how much money/assets do they own. And I don't believe I will get a straight answer even if I ask. So as an anonymous ozbargainer will you care to share?
Net worth is defined as all your assets minus liabilities.
So how old are you and what is your net worth?
Let me start
I am 38 with 1 wife 3 kids $1.5mil
What Is Your Age and Net Worth?
L[Deactivated] on 14/11/2014 - 21:24
Comments
I'm guessing insecurities, op doesn't seem like he's in a bad place.
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/169852OP is clearly trolling, there's no way a person in the financial position he professes to be in does all of those things.
he's part of the 1%. He wants to know what the other 99% peasants net worth is.
Actually, the average net worth of the 1% is (i think) around 70 million.
A few years ago (maybe 5) it was 14 million. This is how much it is increasing exponentially.
wrong. to be in the top 1% its like 1.2m or so
@imtahir7: HAAHHAHAHA. You sound like my partner. 1.2m might be in the 10% but no way is it 1%. This is an extremely common and ultimately costly assumption that people are making. Wake up!!
The richest 85 people across the globe share a combined wealth of £1tn, as much as the poorest 3.5 billion of the world’s population.
The 1% do not ever have to work, something someone with a measly 1.2m won't be considering anytime soon. Their money provides the power to shift Governments … anyway, I could go on but the info is freely available.
Here is a very interesting article from 2011
http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/05/top-one-p…@imtahir7: Also, I should have pointed out that the 1% own you. They own all the services you need, the food you buy and the water you drink. They will soon find a way to own the air you breath, just give them some time.
28 YO - 100k net worth if you exclude hecs. 75k if you include HECs.
Have had a 100k+ salary for a few years now so quite low - now trying to save 50%+ of my income and invest in shares.
I'm turning 27 next week, and have spent all of my savings on rent and fun. I'm in debt to the ATO $5k, but I own a car that's worth $10k…so I guess I am slightly ahead.
Im 23. $70k net worth.
Have 50k in the bank and own a 20k car.I am worth $30m*
Valued myself based on future cash flows like Amazon, Facebook ;)
hahaha nice
FB P/E: 72.14x
So $30,000,000 divide 72.14x = $415,858 per year salary?
I find it interesting that the poster is trying to compare himself to others instead of focusing on how much he needs himself. Obviously asking on ozbargain will make him feel better when he reads 99% of the replies. And yeh asking your colleagues is rude bro. It's not a competition.
I don't believe that everyone or even most people on ozbargain can be considered poor or lacking assets. There's a lot of rich people that enjoy saving money and getting value out of their spending, even if they do have significant assets and earning income.
When you have a mortgage, you want to save as much as you can in other areas so that you can make a big dent in the mortgage.
There will be 2 groups of people reading the OPs post; one that thinks he's bragging and another that is thinking to themselves with a smile that I'm doing better than that
I am 69, have 2 girls and 1 cup.
Net worth: $420m, I'm in the pottery business and business seems to be blazing upwards at the moment.
Did you mean glazing?
I am 38 with 1 wife 3 kids $1.5mil
I am 29 with 5 wives and 3 goats
When everyone had finished here please head over to my forum post- "How big is your willy and how good are you at sex?"
You'll find my answer there too- hint 'I'm amazing'
34 years old, Wife, 2 kids
Mortgage: $345,000
Bank account: $4,600
Credit card debt: $650
Personal loan debt: $12,000Net worth (not counting super): -$353,050
you need to add value of your house.
Value of house is $400,000
someone doesn't live in Sydney
You should add the personal loan to your mortgage, cheaper interest rate. Imo
You're right, I probably should… although the rate of the personal loan is 9.95% which isn't too bad for a pers. loan, but yeah I should probably roll it into the mortgage to take advantage of 5.23%
Not necessarily a good idea considering mortgages are usually much more long term than personal loans. Assuming a 25 year mortgage and a 5 year personal loan paid monthly, you'll pay ~$9530 in interest through the mortgage which is almost triple the ~$3280 you'll pay through the personal loan. Only reason you should do it is if you're having issues with cashflow in the short term.
If you're going to pay off the personal loan anyways you may as well have both loans on a lower rate. They are both earning you debt, regardless of how long they go for or which one you are paying off.
Drop it into the mortgage and pay it off like it was still a personal loan. If the mortgage has a lower interest rate, from what I can see it can only put you in a better place. SavageCarrot doesn't need to take 25 years to pay off the personal loan portion and in which case would mean less interest paid overall.
You can't drop it into your mortgage unless your bank is ok with more than an 80 LVR. 357k would take it to 89.25.
At the moment, your loan is on 86. How did you even do that? Did you pay mortgage insurance or was your bank happy with 90?
Honestly think it's just out of curiosity
I am 28 year old exiled Nigerian prince. I have 32,000,000 USD in my bank account. But due to my predicament I need the help of an honest foreigner to help me transfer these funds to Australia.
Pm me. I can help!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Your Highness, I have been receiving your emails but just haven't had an opportunity to respond yet. If only I'd known you were a fellow OzBargainer, I would have attended to them faster.
hahah!
+1
My cousin who is in mid 20s lives in Sydney and he owns 4 Investment properties(apartment and units) that are POSITIVELY geared.
His all out goings are covered in rent plus he pockets little bit money also from investment. AFAIK his net wealth is around 1.5-2.5 millions.
Since he is not losing money from his investments he keeps on growing his positively geared portfolio.Massive inheritance?
nope he didn't inherit it, he investigate the area very well before he buy, and do minor renovations himself to make the properties look nice so he can charge more rent :).
first property was the key, since it generated a positive cash flow he could invest on 2nd, 3rd, and 4th properties and he got a very good discount on interest rate from the bank(AFAIK around 1.5% discount from standard variable rate)His opinion is that we shouldn't invest on anything if it makes a loss.
what does your cousin do? lawyer? doctor? robber? (lol)
Are you sure that is his net wealth and not his current assets? If really IPs it makes more sense to keep them loaded to the hilt with debt as it is tax deductible.
10 mill of property and 8 million loans makes 80% LVR and net assets of 2 mill. Or 2 mill with no loans?
Positively geared… So he has debt on the properties. Take the value of the property minus the debt to get the net worth.
Seems like most people here do not understand net worth.
Need to call it Equity instead. E = A - L
it's always "my cousin" or "i know a guy/friend"…
Lol. With 1.5 mil but go to different churches to get Handouts and go to the local library to charge?
I call bullshit on you
That's why he has 1.5mil - because he scavenger where he could.
Unfortunately OP may have money, but will die empty. Spend your money OP, it's not following you to the grave.
He's the Evangelical guy at the front…
agree with some of the stuff here, but to suggest kids can't make something of themselves if you don't pay $10k a year for private school is completely ridiculous.
Completely agree, sending your kids to private schools doesn't automatically make them academically or financially better in the future.
Fully agree too - I went to a private school in Sydney (albeit i was on a scholarship)
There were a few boys who received an * asterisk for their ATAR ( meaning they scored less than 30). Consider it is ~$20,000 academic fees + $20,000 boarding fees, their parents probably shouldn't have sent them to a private school.
Oh, by boys, I mean they were twins. so thats $40k/son/year for 6 years.
Currently in university, doing a high demand university degree. i think only 4 out of 12 students in my tutorial group went to a private school.
@bs0: my cousin who went to his local high school and then on a scholarship to a very expensive private school said the main difference was a better class of drugs available and boys who grew up with the knowledge that their parents could buy their way out of trouble with a generous "building donation". Academically the reason why they do well falls mainly on scholarship students.
Most of my friends from uni that went to public schools or really low end private schools are doing better than the people I went to school with (high end private school).
I think this is the (unfortunate) case in Australia.
I'm from New Zealand, and many public schools are as good as the (very few) private ones. Seriously.
What's up, Australia? Why the premium when we just need a decent education?
Anti-intellectualism is ingrained in our culture.
what do you mean by "doing better"?
I don't see the value in private schooling, nor in extra tuition. Neither did my parents. They did a great job at giving me a head start in life. For starters, they taught me not to be a pretentious fool.
people don't send their kids to private schools because they are necessarily academically better.
private school kids have the opportunity to meet other kids/parents from already affluent backgrounds which may provide them with opportunities that public school kids have to work for in a different way (through hard work and well thought out & disciplined decisions).
not saying that private school kids don't work hard, just explaining that it's not just about academic performance
Sending your kid to a private school would only increase the chance of your kid becoming an academic vegetable. Not saying this is the case with all kids. If I had all the money in the world I'd probably still send my child to a solid public school.
I'd probably still send my child to a solid public school
I thought which public school depends on whether you live within their catchment? Unless you are talking about selective high schools which you need to get through increasingly-competitive exams? So it's more than just saying "I want to send my child to a solid public school" and it can be done.
I'm 24.
FUll time worker.
24K in savings,
- 20K (student debt).No car. Living on my own.
Absolutely no support from parents; I don't want it. No inheritance or anything like that; all my money's made on my own.
24,
House(living in) recently valued at 300k, mortgage -240k, 40k in the bank and the car value / finance pretty much covers itself. in the bank.Put's me at 100k up, yet I feel like a slave to this mortgage still.
26
30k in shares
2k in bitcoin
80k in savings
~2.5k HECS debt
1 case of fat yack from woolworths online for $36
1 $5 dell printer
0 enloopsAny reason for $80k in savings instead of putting more in shares?
I'm not as informed about shares as I should be. Risk mitigation. I'm thinking of sticking 20 in a vanguard managed fund though.
Fair enough. Higher return but higher risk too.
@rochow: Still alright stability with blue chip long term + very good divs. (Also for most blue chip you get frankings which come off your tax.)
My shares went nuts last year (should have started earlier!), however I wouldn't recommend it to anyone uncomfortable with it. I don't think the portfolio is too risky, at least no more than the overall market.
I've lost some money in shares. Quite risky to go in with knowledge, even worse to go in without. Hold on to your money dearly.
Really though, losses are to be expected. My strategy would be to buy some quality stocks that provide fully franked dividends, and then hold onto them no matter what - and reinvest the dividends. With a portfolio including Telstra and Sydney Airport I don't think you could go wrong.
This is not financial advice
This thread just proves how materialistic some people are, and how they just love to brag about their personal financial situation.
No need to flex your e-penors. Just be happy and healthy.
Not really. We were asked. I don't think there is necessarily anything materialistic about setting yourself up financially?
48 and $750,000
Le ebin bait thread
35yo
single, no dependants.
$2.4m real estate
$2.4m shares
$300k business, super, cash
$2.6m debtnet worth about $2.5m
Still run around the city trying to save $10 on an Amex deal, while using my COTD coupon before it expires :/lend me $50?
Keyword…"single"
m/f? Actually it doesn't matter ;)
This here is what we call here ladies and gentlemen a short snapshot of how to win at life.
Net worth is a silly measure. It's not all liquid, so fooling yourself into thinking you have all this "worth" is unrealistic. Me? All I see is net liability. I have a home loan. Sure at the end I'll have paid off the house but if I sell it I will have no where to live or will have to downsize. So who cares what it's worth.
House should be excluded from net worth calculation - your home is a liability. An investment property is an asset.
How can a home be a liability? Mine is my retirement fund and it's value doubles every ten years.
Maraco, that's a false statement. So a person renting will almost always have a higher net worth than a person living in their home based on your statement?
For owner occupied homes, the "equity" component adds to your net worth. If you have a $1m mortgage but your house, as an asset, is worth $1.6m, then you should add $0.6m to your net worth based on your home alone. Principle is applied in the same way to investment properties.
Yes, it is debatable but it is not a completely "false statement"
Consider these two families who each own $2m of real estate
A) The Smiths who live in a $300k apartment and hold an additional $1.7m of investment property rented for $1700/week income after all outgoings are paid.
B) The Jones family who live in a swanky $2m penthouse apartment but hold no investment property and have to pay $15,000 a year in body corporate and outgoings.Another way of looking at it.
http://www.richdad.com/Resources/Rich-Dad-Financial-Educatio…While people say they are worth X and include their own house, they live in that property and it is not liquid or useable. Using your house in your calculation is only kinda for making yourself feel good. Maraco is right in the sense that you can't use that asset for anything unless you sell it. People think they buy a big house and that will be their super or whatever … look at what happened in the US. Plus, when you get old, the idea of moving is not so appealing so you're living in a big asset you can't use. Sure, you can use the equity but it's always advisable not to use your primary home as security over other IPs. Should life go belly up, you'll lose the lot.
@snook: Net worth means how much you own. Just because I live in my house doesn't mean I am worth less. So if I have $2m in cash and live in a rented apartment I have a $2m net worth. If I have a $1m house and $1m cash I have $1m net worth. Doesn't make any sense.
@maraco: I just read your scenario but it still doesn't convince me. Assuming both families have no mortgage, both families have the same net worth. The difference? The Smiths are better off from a cashflow perspective since they've allocated a large portion of their net worth for investment purposes. Your home is an asset the same way your investment property is. The Jones family in your scenario have a much larger opportunity cost since they are forgoing the cashflow for a better standard of living.
Put simply, net worth is the same for the Jones and Smiths family at time 0. However, the Smiths will possibly have a higher net worth at time 1 relative to the Jones, assuming all properties experience the same growth and ceteris paribus.
At time 1,
Net Worth of Smiths = $2m + $1700*52 = $2,088,400
Net Worth of Jones = $2m - $15000 = $1,985,000Net worth is a point in time measure. If OP asked what your net present value was, then the Smiths in your example would be far better off than the Jones.
@snook:
We own our Sydney home worth around 800k and are about to purchase and move to another property on the NSW North coast that cost 450k. We will free up 350k in the process so the original house should be considered net worth as we are able to turn some or all of it into cash at any time.@lolmao: All it means is if you can't use it, it's not actually worth anything. I reference richdad poordad.
@snook: Actually it's always worth money even if it can't currently be used for investment purposes. Because if I own a $1m house I could at any time sell that for $1m.
64 in dog years. 350 million Dogecoin buried in my front yard.
2324150 in quarxon space time lines and 32142149 galaxian credits. 3 little gwerbals and 1 wife.
Net worth varies depending on how much I spend on whores and cones in a week. Who needs a million when you can get fun time by the hour? ROFL @ all those mortgages - you have just signed your life away for a pile of overpriced bricks. All hail debtridden wage slaves!
You sound like a sad fella :(
he sound like a legend…tbh
It's not so much about showing off but what net worth means to you.
My net worth? I'm in a family of 5 kids and we have the best gatherings. My friends are loyal and I can rely on. I've got a good stable job that helps out the community and society. And I have a partner who loves me.
I have a level head on my shoulders, decent sense of humour and an open mind. That's my net worth. Not what's in the bank.
That sounds pretty good, wish I could buy it.
OP, I am rather curious why you are interested to know what others make.