Anonymous wrote:Just today I was in a shop and a beautiful blouse was $550. We have a very high net worth but I just don’t have the desire to spend money like that. But the two of us went out to dinner tonight and it was $200. I drive a Subaru SUV, but we fly first class. I’m sure a shrink could define my behavior.

Our HHI is only $300k, but we're like this as well - nice dinners and first class. It's spending on experiences vs. stuff.

I would guess that there's an inverse correlation in this thread between higher incomes and money spent on luxury goods.

Jewelry - I don't spend anything but DH does occasionally get me a nice item for my birthday (example - a Cartier tank watch 15 years ago that I wear every day)
Designer clothing - $0, unless J Crew counts
Bags - $0, best I can do is a Lo&Sons laptop backpack for work trips
Cars - our last car purchase was a $75k Porsche SUV, which replaced a similar 12 year old SUV. So it's a luxury item but we keep them for a long time

Our actual luxuries are a second home, ski trips and international travel (which we do Rick Steves style so not luxurious).

HHI around $1.3m.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our HHI is around 800K.

I think it's important to realize that certain luxury brands hold their value or go up in value, so I treat these as investments not as expenses.

For jewelry, Van Cleef and Cartier hold their value very well. For bags, the classic Chanel flap bag and the Hermes Birkin (if you can get your hands on a new one) have appreciated at the same rate as the S&P 500.

So it depends... would I "waste" $2500 on a Gucci or YSL bag that will lose more than half its value in a year? probably not, but I will save up for a small piece of Van Cleef jewelry for $5000. The former is an expense, the latter is an asset.

I hope you don't make 800k giving financial advice.

What a strange post. This person actually gave great examples of instances where an expense can actually be an asset that appreciates, or at least doesn't depreciate that much. PP wasn't suggesting anyone invest $1MM in Birkin bags, but rather, some things have a decent up-front cost...but then you can resell that bag and buy a new one and keep doing that. You do that 10x and maybe you spend $5,000 for the first one, but you enjoyed 10 new bags and effectively paid $0 for it when you resell he 10th bag.

Bags and jewelry are depreciating assets. I don't care what you want to trick yourself into believing. The idea that you are going to make money off a 5k necklace is absurd. People with real wealth aren't buying rinky dink mass produced jewelry as an investment, and saying you do makes you look like a poorly educated rube.

Actually, it makes you look like the rube. Clearly, you don't have the $$$s to play this game, so you make yourself feel better by posting like you do.

Here are quotes from a 1/12/2024 WSJ article:

For a handful of luxury companies, resale values are flattering as buyers pay up to avoid waiting lists. On average, used Hermès handbags are 25% more expensive than new ones, and scarce designs get an even higher premium. A basic Birkin 25 bag, which costs roughly $10,000 to buy new in one of Hermès’ U.S. boutiques, will set shoppers back $24,000 or more from major resale dealers like Privé Porter. Similarly, used watches made by Rolex and Patek Philippe sell at average premiums of 20% and 39%, respectively, based on data from WatchCharts.

My hhi is in the seven figures and I have no interest in buying things just so people know how much money I have, because I'm not an insecure ahole. Beyond that, I was specifically replying to the PP (you?) who said they would "save up" for a 5k VCA necklace because it's an investment piece.

1. If you have to save up for it you can't afford it
2. The definition of an investment is that it makes you money. VCA may hold its value but no one is buying used pieces for more than retail.
https://nationaljeweler.com/articles/2303-which-jewelry-brand-has-the-highest-resale-value

I suggest you save your money and spend it on therapy to address your self esteem issues.

Wow...you are a little triggered, no? When confronted with some actual evidence vs. your conjecture, you respond with tremendous vitriol.

You actually do sound like an insecure a**hole because you don't even know how the luxury market operates. I am actually not the PP, but as someone who is wealthy, understand that there are actually many non-liquid markets (antique coins if you understand what you are doing, rare cars, etc.) that are quite lucrative.

Actual evidence like the article I linked, citing VCA holds 76% of its value? We're not talking about rare coins or cars, we're talking about mass produces mid level jewelry, that PP erroneously thinks is an investment. It's not, and wishing is it doesn't make it so. If PP wants to talk about her rare coin collection I'm all ears! But of course she doesn't have that, because then people wouldn't know she's been able to climb her way to the UMC.

Money talks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our HHI is around 800K.

I think it's important to realize that certain luxury brands hold their value or go up in value, so I treat these as investments not as expenses.

For jewelry, Van Cleef and Cartier hold their value very well. For bags, the classic Chanel flap bag and the Hermes Birkin (if you can get your hands on a new one) have appreciated at the same rate as the S&P 500.

So it depends... would I "waste" $2500 on a Gucci or YSL bag that will lose more than half its value in a year? probably not, but I will save up for a small piece of Van Cleef jewelry for $5000. The former is an expense, the latter is an asset.

I hope you don't make 800k giving financial advice.

What a strange post. This person actually gave great examples of instances where an expense can actually be an asset that appreciates, or at least doesn't depreciate that much. PP wasn't suggesting anyone invest $1MM in Birkin bags, but rather, some things have a decent up-front cost...but then you can resell that bag and buy a new one and keep doing that. You do that 10x and maybe you spend $5,000 for the first one, but you enjoyed 10 new bags and effectively paid $0 for it when you resell he 10th bag.

Bags and jewelry are depreciating assets. I don't care what you want to trick yourself into believing. The idea that you are going to make money off a 5k necklace is absurd. People with real wealth aren't buying rinky dink mass produced jewelry as an investment, and saying you do makes you look like a poorly educated rube.

Actually, it makes you look like the rube. Clearly, you don't have the $$$s to play this game, so you make yourself feel better by posting like you do.

Here are quotes from a 1/12/2024 WSJ article:

For a handful of luxury companies, resale values are flattering as buyers pay up to avoid waiting lists. On average, used Hermès handbags are 25% more expensive than new ones, and scarce designs get an even higher premium. A basic Birkin 25 bag, which costs roughly $10,000 to buy new in one of Hermès’ U.S. boutiques, will set shoppers back $24,000 or more from major resale dealers like Privé Porter. Similarly, used watches made by Rolex and Patek Philippe sell at average premiums of 20% and 39%, respectively, based on data from WatchCharts.

My hhi is in the seven figures and I have no interest in buying things just so people know how much money I have, because I'm not an insecure ahole. Beyond that, I was specifically replying to the PP (you?) who said they would "save up" for a 5k VCA necklace because it's an investment piece.

1. If you have to save up for it you can't afford it
2. The definition of an investment is that it makes you money. VCA may hold its value but no one is buying used pieces for more than retail.
https://nationaljeweler.com/articles/2303-which-jewelry-brand-has-the-highest-resale-value

I suggest you save your money and spend it on therapy to address your self esteem issues.

Wow...you are a little triggered, no? When confronted with some actual evidence vs. your conjecture, you respond with tremendous vitriol.

You actually do sound like an insecure a**hole because you don't even know how the luxury market operates. I am actually not the PP, but as someone who is wealthy, understand that there are actually many non-liquid markets (antique coins if you understand what you are doing, rare cars, etc.) that are quite lucrative.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our HHI is around 800K.

I think it's important to realize that certain luxury brands hold their value or go up in value, so I treat these as investments not as expenses.

For jewelry, Van Cleef and Cartier hold their value very well. For bags, the classic Chanel flap bag and the Hermes Birkin (if you can get your hands on a new one) have appreciated at the same rate as the S&P 500.

So it depends... would I "waste" $2500 on a Gucci or YSL bag that will lose more than half its value in a year? probably not, but I will save up for a small piece of Van Cleef jewelry for $5000. The former is an expense, the latter is an asset.

I hope you don't make 800k giving financial advice.

What a strange post. This person actually gave great examples of instances where an expense can actually be an asset that appreciates, or at least doesn't depreciate that much. PP wasn't suggesting anyone invest $1MM in Birkin bags, but rather, some things have a decent up-front cost...but then you can resell that bag and buy a new one and keep doing that. You do that 10x and maybe you spend $5,000 for the first one, but you enjoyed 10 new bags and effectively paid $0 for it when you resell he 10th bag.

Bags and jewelry are depreciating assets. I don't care what you want to trick yourself into believing. The idea that you are going to make money off a 5k necklace is absurd. People with real wealth aren't buying rinky dink mass produced jewelry as an investment, and saying you do makes you look like a poorly educated rube.

Actually, it makes you look like the rube. Clearly, you don't have the $$$s to play this game, so you make yourself feel better by posting like you do.

Here are quotes from a 1/12/2024 WSJ article:

For a handful of luxury companies, resale values are flattering as buyers pay up to avoid waiting lists. On average, used Hermès handbags are 25% more expensive than new ones, and scarce designs get an even higher premium. A basic Birkin 25 bag, which costs roughly $10,000 to buy new in one of Hermès’ U.S. boutiques, will set shoppers back $24,000 or more from major resale dealers like Privé Porter. Similarly, used watches made by Rolex and Patek Philippe sell at average premiums of 20% and 39%, respectively, based on data from WatchCharts.

My hhi is in the seven figures and I have no interest in buying things just so people know how much money I have, because I'm not an insecure ahole. Beyond that, I was specifically replying to the PP (you?) who said they would "save up" for a 5k VCA necklace because it's an investment piece.

1. If you have to save up for it you can't afford it
2. The definition of an investment is that it makes you money. VCA may hold its value but no one is buying used pieces for more than retail.
https://nationaljeweler.com/articles/2303-which-jewelry-brand-has-the-highest-resale-value

I suggest you save your money and spend it on therapy to address your self esteem issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our HHI is around 800K.

I think it's important to realize that certain luxury brands hold their value or go up in value, so I treat these as investments not as expenses.

For jewelry, Van Cleef and Cartier hold their value very well. For bags, the classic Chanel flap bag and the Hermes Birkin (if you can get your hands on a new one) have appreciated at the same rate as the S&P 500.

So it depends... would I "waste" $2500 on a Gucci or YSL bag that will lose more than half its value in a year? probably not, but I will save up for a small piece of Van Cleef jewelry for $5000. The former is an expense, the latter is an asset.

I hope you don't make 800k giving financial advice.

What a strange post. This person actually gave great examples of instances where an expense can actually be an asset that appreciates, or at least doesn't depreciate that much. PP wasn't suggesting anyone invest $1MM in Birkin bags, but rather, some things have a decent up-front cost...but then you can resell that bag and buy a new one and keep doing that. You do that 10x and maybe you spend $5,000 for the first one, but you enjoyed 10 new bags and effectively paid $0 for it when you resell he 10th bag.

Bags and jewelry are depreciating assets. I don't care what you want to trick yourself into believing. The idea that you are going to make money off a 5k necklace is absurd. People with real wealth aren't buying rinky dink mass produced jewelry as an investment, and saying you do makes you look like a poorly educated rube.

Actually, it makes you look like the rube. Clearly, you don't have the $$$s to play this game, so you make yourself feel better by posting like you do.

Here are quotes from a 1/12/2024 WSJ article:

For a handful of luxury companies, resale values are flattering as buyers pay up to avoid waiting lists. On average, used Hermès handbags are 25% more expensive than new ones, and scarce designs get an even higher premium. A basic Birkin 25 bag, which costs roughly $10,000 to buy new in one of Hermès’ U.S. boutiques, will set shoppers back $24,000 or more from major resale dealers like Privé Porter. Similarly, used watches made by Rolex and Patek Philippe sell at average premiums of 20% and 39%, respectively, based on data from WatchCharts.

The smartest thing the luxury houses ever did was convince UMC housewives their bags and jewelry were "investment" pieces.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our HHI is around 800K.

I think it's important to realize that certain luxury brands hold their value or go up in value, so I treat these as investments not as expenses.

For jewelry, Van Cleef and Cartier hold their value very well. For bags, the classic Chanel flap bag and the Hermes Birkin (if you can get your hands on a new one) have appreciated at the same rate as the S&P 500.

So it depends... would I "waste" $2500 on a Gucci or YSL bag that will lose more than half its value in a year? probably not, but I will save up for a small piece of Van Cleef jewelry for $5000. The former is an expense, the latter is an asset.

I hope you don't make 800k giving financial advice.

What a strange post. This person actually gave great examples of instances where an expense can actually be an asset that appreciates, or at least doesn't depreciate that much. PP wasn't suggesting anyone invest $1MM in Birkin bags, but rather, some things have a decent up-front cost...but then you can resell that bag and buy a new one and keep doing that. You do that 10x and maybe you spend $5,000 for the first one, but you enjoyed 10 new bags and effectively paid $0 for it when you resell he 10th bag.

Bags and jewelry are depreciating assets. I don't care what you want to trick yourself into believing. The idea that you are going to make money off a 5k necklace is absurd. People with real wealth aren't buying rinky dink mass produced jewelry as an investment, and saying you do makes you look like a poorly educated rube.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our HHI is around 800K.

I think it's important to realize that certain luxury brands hold their value or go up in value, so I treat these as investments not as expenses.

For jewelry, Van Cleef and Cartier hold their value very well. For bags, the classic Chanel flap bag and the Hermes Birkin (if you can get your hands on a new one) have appreciated at the same rate as the S&P 500.

So it depends... would I "waste" $2500 on a Gucci or YSL bag that will lose more than half its value in a year? probably not, but I will save up for a small piece of Van Cleef jewelry for $5000. The former is an expense, the latter is an asset.

I hope you don't make 800k giving financial advice.

What a strange post. This person actually gave great examples of instances where an expense can actually be an asset that appreciates, or at least doesn't depreciate that much. PP wasn't suggesting anyone invest $1MM in Birkin bags, but rather, some things have a decent up-front cost...but then you can resell that bag and buy a new one and keep doing that. You do that 10x and maybe you spend $5,000 for the first one, but you enjoyed 10 new bags and effectively paid $0 for it when you resell he 10th bag.

Anonymous wrote:Our HHI is around 800K.

I think it's important to realize that certain luxury brands hold their value or go up in value, so I treat these as investments not as expenses.

For jewelry, Van Cleef and Cartier hold their value very well. For bags, the classic Chanel flap bag and the Hermes Birkin (if you can get your hands on a new one) have appreciated at the same rate as the S&P 500.

So it depends... would I "waste" $2500 on a Gucci or YSL bag that will lose more than half its value in a year? probably not, but I will save up for a small piece of Van Cleef jewelry for $5000. The former is an expense, the latter is an asset.

I hope you don't make 800k giving financial advice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of us patting ourselves on the back for driving old cars don’t get it, it’s still luxurious because a) we could afford to maintain them and b) if and when they become unreliable, we’ll replace them

So? It frees up money to spend on other "luxuries" in life. I drove my Luxury big SUV for 12+ years, sold it for ~30% of what I paid for it. Yes, I got rid of it when it started having electrical issues that were going to start costing $$$. But I have an extra $25-40K in my pocket because I didn't get a new car after 4-5 years, not to mention my insurance was cheaper the last 4-5 years because it was an older car. Do that with each vehicle (10+ years instead of 4-5 years) and you have a lot of money to spend on other luxuries.

But why would anyone get a new car after 4-5 years if it's still running well?

I know lots of people who replace their cars every 4-5 years. They want the newest, "safest" exciting vehicles. I agree with you---if its running and not many issues, why replace it? Sure it's always nice to have a new car, but it's not financially smart. I kept mine until it started having electrical issues---didn't want to sink $1500 for two electrical issues that needed to be fixed if I wanted to keep the car. Rather take my $12K I sold it for and the 1.5K I saved and put it into a new car, that I will also drive for 10+ years.
I can afford a new car but I'd rather spend that money on other things. For me now, it's Flying first class---I no longer have any desire to be crammed back into even economy plus. We can afford it, so it's our splurge.

$400,000 HHI

Used cars
No fancy jewelry
Mostly low end clothing but an occasional higher end piece - not truly designer
One used (and outdated for those who follow fashion) designer purse
Anything over $400 still feels like an expensive purchase to me
Maybe I’d feel different in Tulsa but here it’s a very boring not at all special lifestyle, not at all what I envisioned at $400 HHI would be like in my 20s

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will sound crazy but our income in 2022 was over $2 million and I spent just about nothing on clothes, jewelry or other luxury goods like fancy cars. I love my Forester! We do travel very well and we have two nice homes so our overhead is high. We give away a lot every year so we are not sitting on mattresses stuffed with cash.

Same. I drive a minivan and buy my clothes at target. We do spend a lot on travel, food and housecleaning/yard/child activities.

+2

Same. We are retired and our income is $2 million. You get to a point where you just don’t need stuff and the generosity gene kicks in especially if you have grandchildren. Yet we live and travel very comfortably and that’s pretty luxurious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the DMV has an overabundance of HHI earners, but not that many people with f**k you money.

All the folks that barely spend who make $800k...I bet if they worked for a hedge fund and made $50MM in a year...they would probably buy a bunch of useless crap.

I would assume Carlyle VPs, MDs and Partners and wives probably spend $$$s on extravagances, but they also don't worry much about covering their daily expenses if they quit tomorrow

50m/yr is a wild unachievable dream for me but my spending would be on the same stuff just amped up. Still mainly food, travel and kids but first class and fine dining all the time. My art collection would grow but I'm not going to suddenly become interested in jewelry and logo bags I didn't like before

Except, you wouldn't even blink an eye a buying a $5,000 or $10,000 bag if you wanted it. Even someone making $800k has a hard time spending the $$$s.