Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that only 280,000 people in the US have a net worth over $20 million? That seems low. Is that an old figure from before the stock market went bananas?

Why, OP? Because there are like 3 of you hanging out on this forum and posting how easy it must be to accumulate this wealth we should assume that everybody and their mother is loaded?

What do we do with various statistics of how most US households are a job loss away from being destitute and don't even have a few months of savings available to them? Or people who are close to retirement and have less than 500K NW? 280k is less than 1% of total US population, it sounds about right to me. There are millions of low millionaires but 20 mil is a different level that's much harder to achieve because vast majority of people aren't good at investing without panic or creating successful businesses or earning 7 figures.

It’s estimated that 40% of Nvidia’s workforce is worth $20MM or more…that’s like 15,000 people at just one company.

Now extrapolate to all these tech companies that have seen huge stock runs over the last several years…not to mention OpenAI is private and is valued at $250BN, so you have hundreds there worth at least $20MM on paper…as well as at all these other AI companies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that only 280,000 people in the US have a net worth over $20 million? That seems low. Is that an old figure from before the stock market went bananas?

Why, OP? Because there are like 3 of you hanging out on this forum and posting how easy it must be to accumulate this wealth we should assume that everybody and their mother is loaded?

What do we do with various statistics of how most US households are a job loss away from being destitute and don't even have a few months of savings available to them? Or people who are close to retirement and have less than 500K NW? 280k is less than 1% of total US population, it sounds about right to me. There are millions of low millionaires but 20 mil is a different level that's much harder to achieve because vast majority of people aren't good at investing without panic or creating successful businesses or earning 7 figures.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I retired early a decade ago as an equity partner in one of the top Biglaw firms in DC. It's one that everyone who knows DC law firms has heard of. My experience is a little dated, obviously, and the average equity partner now surely makes a lot more than they did then, but still . . .

I find the "weirdo" who has been posting here about Biglaw equity partners in the DMV easily accumulating $20+ million net worths amusing. Whoever that is is clearly not a Biglaw partner himself and doesn't know very many either. They mention the Kirkland lawyer, but of course equity partners there make a lot more money than at virtually any other firm and making equity partner there is also extremely difficult -- so they're real outliers.

Law firms aren't handing out $3-5 million to the average equity partner in DC Biglaw. The average partner is making about half that, many are making less, and the top partners are making much more. The American Lawyer publishes average profits per partner, the median number, and the median is almost always lower than the mean. Then there's taxes, both federal and state, which are enormous, expensive homes, private schools, you name it.

I know a handful of "frugal" partners, but not many. The majority have pretty high end taste, and pay for it. It's also not in the nature of most partners to work their asses of for 60 or 70 hours a week and not spend their money -- or allow their spouses and kids to spend it. Very few look to retire early.

Etc.

So…the Kirkland equity partner is likely worth $20MM+. Funny how you admit the one actual example is true.

Cravath equity partners average $4MM-$8MM per year. I know an equity partner there as well.

Perhaps I define BigLaw more narrowly to refer to Kirkland, Cravath, Latham and firms of similar prestige.

There are only 5 Cravath partners in DC . . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that only 280,000 people in the US have a net worth over $20 million? That seems low. Is that an old figure from before the stock market went bananas?

Why, OP? Because there are like 3 of you hanging out on this forum and posting how easy it must be to accumulate this wealth we should assume that everybody and their mother is loaded?

What do we do with various statistics of how most US households are a job loss away from being destitute and don't even have a few months of savings available to them? Or people who are close to retirement and have less than 500K NW? 280k is less than 1% of total US population, it sounds about right to me. There are millions of low millionaires but 20 mil is a different level that's much harder to achieve because vast majority of people aren't good at investing without panic or creating successful businesses or earning 7 figures.

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that only 280,000 people in the US have a net worth over $20 million? That seems low. Is that an old figure from before the stock market went bananas?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I retired early a decade ago as an equity partner in one of the top Biglaw firms in DC. It's one that everyone who knows DC law firms has heard of. My experience is a little dated, obviously, and the average equity partner now surely makes a lot more than they did then, but still . . .

I find the "weirdo" who has been posting here about Biglaw equity partners in the DMV easily accumulating $20+ million net worths amusing. Whoever that is is clearly not a Biglaw partner himself and doesn't know very many either. They mention the Kirkland lawyer, but of course equity partners there make a lot more money than at virtually any other firm and making equity partner there is also extremely difficult -- so they're real outliers.

Law firms aren't handing out $3-5 million to the average equity partner in DC Biglaw. The average partner is making about half that, many are making less, and the top partners are making much more. The American Lawyer publishes average profits per partner, the median number, and the median is almost always lower than the mean. Then there's taxes, both federal and state, which are enormous, expensive homes, private schools, you name it.

I know a handful of "frugal" partners, but not many. The majority have pretty high end taste, and pay for it. It's also not in the nature of most partners to work their asses of for 60 or 70 hours a week and not spend their money -- or allow their spouses and kids to spend it. Very few look to retire early.

Etc.

So…the Kirkland equity partner is likely worth $20MM+. Funny how you admit the one actual example is true.

Cravath equity partners average $4MM-$8MM per year. I know an equity partner there as well.

Perhaps I define BigLaw more narrowly to refer to Kirkland, Cravath, Latham and firms of similar prestige.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I retired early a decade ago as an equity partner in one of the top Biglaw firms in DC. It's one that everyone who knows DC law firms has heard of. My experience is a little dated, obviously, and the average equity partner now surely makes a lot more than they did then, but still . . .

I find the "weirdo" who has been posting here about Biglaw equity partners in the DMV easily accumulating $20+ million net worths amusing. Whoever that is is clearly not a Biglaw partner himself and doesn't know very many either. They mention the Kirkland lawyer, but of course equity partners there make a lot more money than at virtually any other firm and making equity partner there is also extremely difficult -- so they're real outliers.

Law firms aren't handing out $3-5 million to the average equity partner in DC Biglaw. The average partner is making about half that, many are making less, and the top partners are making much more. The American Lawyer publishes average profits per partner, the median number, and the median is almost always lower than the mean. Then there's taxes, both federal and state, which are enormous, expensive homes, private schools, you name it.

I know a handful of "frugal" partners, but not many. The majority have pretty high end taste, and pay for it. It's also not in the nature of most partners to work their asses of for 60 or 70 hours a week and not spend their money -- or allow their spouses and kids to spend it. Very few look to retire early.

Etc.

So…the Kirkland equity partner is likely worth $20MM+. Funny how you admit the one actual example is true.

Cravath equity partners average $4MM-$8MM per year. I know an equity partner there as well.

Perhaps I define BigLaw more narrowly to refer to Kirkland, Cravath, Latham and firms of similar prestige.

Anonymous wrote:I retired early a decade ago as an equity partner in one of the top Biglaw firms in DC. It's one that everyone who knows DC law firms has heard of. My experience is a little dated, obviously, and the average equity partner now surely makes a lot more than they did then, but still . . .

I find the "weirdo" who has been posting here about Biglaw equity partners in the DMV easily accumulating $20+ million net worths amusing. Whoever that is is clearly not a Biglaw partner himself and doesn't know very many either. They mention the Kirkland lawyer, but of course equity partners there make a lot more money than at virtually any other firm and making equity partner there is also extremely difficult -- so they're real outliers.

Law firms aren't handing out $3-5 million to the average equity partner in DC Biglaw. The average partner is making about half that, many are making less, and the top partners are making much more. The American Lawyer publishes average profits per partner, the median number, and the median is almost always lower than the mean. Then there's taxes, both federal and state, which are enormous, expensive homes, private schools, you name it.

I know a handful of "frugal" partners, but not many. The majority have pretty high end taste, and pay for it. It's also not in the nature of most partners to work their asses of for 60 or 70 hours a week and not spend their money -- or allow their spouses and kids to spend it. Very few look to retire early.

Etc.

Anonymous wrote:I retired early a decade ago as an equity partner in one of the top Biglaw firms in DC. It's one that everyone who knows DC law firms has heard of. My experience is a little dated, obviously, and the average equity partner now surely makes a lot more than they did then, but still . . .

I find the "weirdo" who has been posting here about Biglaw equity partners in the DMV easily accumulating $20+ million net worths amusing. Whoever that is is clearly not a Biglaw partner himself and doesn't know very many either. They mention the Kirkland lawyer, but of course equity partners there make a lot more money than at virtually any other firm and making equity partner there is also extremely difficult -- so they're real outliers.

Law firms aren't handing out $3-5 million to the average equity partner in DC Biglaw. The average partner is making about half that, many are making less, and the top partners are making much more. The American Lawyer publishes average profits per partner, the median number, and the median is almost always lower than the mean. Then there's taxes, both federal and state, which are enormous, expensive homes, private schools, you name it.

I know a handful of "frugal" partners, but not many. The majority have pretty high end taste, and pay for it. It's also not in the nature of most partners to work their asses of for 60 or 70 hours a week and not spend their money -- or allow their spouses and kids to spend it. Very few look to retire early.

Etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It maybe feels low to you because I am sure the distribution is very clustered.

I bet 90% of those people live in only like 10 metro markets in the US.

Statewise, it would be Florida, New York and California.

Correct...but in the DC area you have an outsized concentration of law partners as an example who can hit that level after just like 7-8 years of partner earnings.

However, outside of DC and NYC and like SF/LA, the BigLaw market is actually much smaller.

DC is also the #5 metro area for F500 HQs. You have Capital One, Hilton, Marriott, Choice, Boeing, etc. 20 HQs in total.

Bullshit. Hitting that number in “7-8” years as a law partner requires earning $3 million a year, spending none of it and paying no taxes.

Dude...you are a bit unhinged...you do realize you don't go from $0 to $3MM per year right? You are earning many hundreds of thousands and maybe over a $1MM for years even before making equity partner, and investing a bunch of that.

That isn’t right. Say you make equity partner in 10 years. You are making $500,000 or less the first five. And probably less than a million for all of it. Most have law school debt and even if they don’t, are saving for a down payment and paying for day care and schools

What do you mean it isn't "right"? Most people making $500k per year can save at least $100k of that...probably even more. Now you are slowly moving up towards $1MM and continuing to save more...assume normal investment returns...now you make equity partner and are making $3MM+ (or maybe $5MM or maybe more). Once you hit partner you are saving like $1MM per year, and again it's all compounding.

So maybe they don't hit a $20MM NW at 8 years...maybe it takes 10 or maybe 12 or 15. The point is you can definitely get there from being a BigLaw partner and DC has an outsized share of BigLaw partners.

We know so many big law partners and not one has $20M. I know they are out there, and could guess a few at my old firm, but not in the dozens we are friends with. This includes a few dual partners.

You're responding to a known weirdo who likes to calculate how people can hoard wealth if they live frugally with their high salaries. That poster always needs to be reminded that people earning a lot are by and large NOT frugal. They buy several homes, indulge in luxury travel, pay for expensive privates for their multiple kids, and if very foolish, cheat on their wives and end up with very painful child support and alimony.

So no, lots of high earners do not have the very high net worth that others might expect.

I don't know that high earners "by and large [are] NOT frugal". Some of us in the law in particular want out as fast as possible, and we had a sizeable networth before even making partner. A couple of years where you can keep throwing $1-2m into your portfolio on top of millions you already have at work can get you to big numbers fast. I have no idea how much other high earners save, but I agree that the ones who cheat on their wives and are paying alimony and child support and private school tuition are probably not doing so well.

The question is how many of these people you believe exist in the United states, and you cannot extrapolate this number by looking at your immediate area that may have over-saturation of law partners. Even then I doubt 7 figure earners who had been doing this for many years to accumulate this wealth even if invested without overspending or doing stupid sh** is high percentage wise compared to the rest of the population.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It maybe feels low to you because I am sure the distribution is very clustered.

I bet 90% of those people live in only like 10 metro markets in the US.

Statewise, it would be Florida, New York and California.

Correct...but in the DC area you have an outsized concentration of law partners as an example who can hit that level after just like 7-8 years of partner earnings.

However, outside of DC and NYC and like SF/LA, the BigLaw market is actually much smaller.

DC is also the #5 metro area for F500 HQs. You have Capital One, Hilton, Marriott, Choice, Boeing, etc. 20 HQs in total.

Bullshit. Hitting that number in “7-8” years as a law partner requires earning $3 million a year, spending none of it and paying no taxes.

Dude...you are a bit unhinged...you do realize you don't go from $0 to $3MM per year right? You are earning many hundreds of thousands and maybe over a $1MM for years even before making equity partner, and investing a bunch of that.

That isn’t right. Say you make equity partner in 10 years. You are making $500,000 or less the first five. And probably less than a million for all of it. Most have law school debt and even if they don’t, are saving for a down payment and paying for day care and schools

What do you mean it isn't "right"? Most people making $500k per year can save at least $100k of that...probably even more. Now you are slowly moving up towards $1MM and continuing to save more...assume normal investment returns...now you make equity partner and are making $3MM+ (or maybe $5MM or maybe more). Once you hit partner you are saving like $1MM per year, and again it's all compounding.

So maybe they don't hit a $20MM NW at 8 years...maybe it takes 10 or maybe 12 or 15. The point is you can definitely get there from being a BigLaw partner and DC has an outsized share of BigLaw partners.

Oh ok, now I get it. You were wrong before and you’ve corrected yourself and now say it takes twice as long as you said.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It maybe feels low to you because I am sure the distribution is very clustered.

I bet 90% of those people live in only like 10 metro markets in the US.

Statewise, it would be Florida, New York and California.

Correct...but in the DC area you have an outsized concentration of law partners as an example who can hit that level after just like 7-8 years of partner earnings.

However, outside of DC and NYC and like SF/LA, the BigLaw market is actually much smaller.

DC is also the #5 metro area for F500 HQs. You have Capital One, Hilton, Marriott, Choice, Boeing, etc. 20 HQs in total.

Bullshit. Hitting that number in “7-8” years as a law partner requires earning $3 million a year, spending none of it and paying no taxes.

Dude...you are a bit unhinged...you do realize you don't go from $0 to $3MM per year right? You are earning many hundreds of thousands and maybe over a $1MM for years even before making equity partner, and investing a bunch of that.

That isn’t right. Say you make equity partner in 10 years. You are making $500,000 or less the first five. And probably less than a million for all of it. Most have law school debt and even if they don’t, are saving for a down payment and paying for day care and schools

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It maybe feels low to you because I am sure the distribution is very clustered.

I bet 90% of those people live in only like 10 metro markets in the US.

Statewise, it would be Florida, New York and California.

Correct...but in the DC area you have an outsized concentration of law partners as an example who can hit that level after just like 7-8 years of partner earnings.

However, outside of DC and NYC and like SF/LA, the BigLaw market is actually much smaller.

DC is also the #5 metro area for F500 HQs. You have Capital One, Hilton, Marriott, Choice, Boeing, etc. 20 HQs in total.

Bullshit. Hitting that number in “7-8” years as a law partner requires earning $3 million a year, spending none of it and paying no taxes.

Dude...you are a bit unhinged...you do realize you don't go from $0 to $3MM per year right? You are earning many hundreds of thousands and maybe over a $1MM for years even before making equity partner, and investing a bunch of that.

That isn’t right. Say you make equity partner in 10 years. You are making $500,000 or less the first five. And probably less than a million for all of it. Most have law school debt and even if they don’t, are saving for a down payment and paying for day care and schools

What do you mean it isn't "right"? Most people making $500k per year can save at least $100k of that...probably even more. Now you are slowly moving up towards $1MM and continuing to save more...assume normal investment returns...now you make equity partner and are making $3MM+ (or maybe $5MM or maybe more). Once you hit partner you are saving like $1MM per year, and again it's all compounding.

So maybe they don't hit a $20MM NW at 8 years...maybe it takes 10 or maybe 12 or 15. The point is you can definitely get there from being a BigLaw partner and DC has an outsized share of BigLaw partners.

We know so many big law partners and not one has $20M. I know they are out there, and could guess a few at my old firm, but not in the dozens we are friends with. This includes a few dual partners.

You're responding to a known weirdo who likes to calculate how people can hoard wealth if they live frugally with their high salaries. That poster always needs to be reminded that people earning a lot are by and large NOT frugal. They buy several homes, indulge in luxury travel, pay for expensive privates for their multiple kids, and if very foolish, cheat on their wives and end up with very painful child support and alimony.

So no, lots of high earners do not have the very high net worth that others might expect.

I don't know that high earners "by and large [are] NOT frugal". Some of us in the law in particular want out as fast as possible, and we had a sizeable networth before even making partner. A couple of years where you can keep throwing $1-2m into your portfolio on top of millions you already have at work can get you to big numbers fast. I have no idea how much other high earners save, but I agree that the ones who cheat on their wives and are paying alimony and child support and private school tuition are probably not doing so well.