Or 48.5% of respondants are millionaires.
What better reason to hang out on Pt and attend a few casual events with us all.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Net worth of PTers
Collapse
X
-
Ave Net Worth
Well, as it's raining today for the first time in 5 months..time for a spot of naval gazing ....
Taking the mean figure for each grouping:
0 *1 = 0
37,500*1 = $37,500
75,000*5 = $375,000
175,000*6 = $1,050,000
375,000*15 = $5,625,000
625,000*18 = $11,250,000
875,000*9 = $7,875,000
1,500,000*35 = $52,500,000
2,000,000*17 = $34,000,000
Total of $112,712,500 / 107 = $1,053,387
So as at 14.10.07 the average net worth of PT respondents is in excess of NZ$ 1 million. Not a bad place to hang out and keep learning I reckon
All the best out there in investment land !!
G
Leave a comment:
-
Ron,
A second hand Ferrari is like a second hand pair of underpants - they might still be underpants but the world isn't too impressed. Best you opt for the new one. Stop slacking around. Work a bit harder - I'm sure you'll get there in the end.
Julian
Leave a comment:
-
Lurkers are just fine! Any time. Good to see you upgrade.
Even better to hear that some of the reading has been
inspirational for you. Roll on the next step/year!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Monid View PostHi CJ
So for this poll it would have been very interesting to also have ages since of course net worth typically varies with age. I've been contemplating setting up another site just to run these sorts of polls and get some more solid data, but time is of course the problem.
Cheers
David
Age 29
~1/3 Rental Property
~2/3 Holding Company (mostly shares)
and a few pennies in cash
Category 6/7 (not sure exactly)
Woot! First post . I've been a lurker on the forum for sometime. Gleaned some interesting and useful information although as you can see from my spread I don't have a lot to do with property investment apart from one rental property bought many years ago without much thought going into it. Might dip my toes back in prop investment sometime next year.
Leave a comment:
-
Free is always good... I had a look around but couldn't find anyone who would do free after that first 100. That said there was less than 100 respondents. Maybe I will have to look into these some more.
Cheers
David
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Monid View PostI've been contemplating setting up another site just to run these sorts of polls and get some more solid data, but time is of course the problem.
Or talk to Donna and Mark for them to have the first annual Property talk Investors survey. they might be able to add in a few extra questions which they can then show their advertisers (to ask for more money).
Leave a comment:
-
Hmm, very interesting, but more interesting would be to see actual annual profit made from all these "investments". Paper value doesn't count much to me.
Leave a comment:
-
Well I guess my net worth has instantly increased 40k after getting a valuation for the purchase of my 1st place.
However this is just on paper.
It looks good though!!
Leave a comment:
-
Hi CJ
There are a variety of interesting polls like this which can't be set up because they require at least two stages of questions or allowing the poster to select an amount. So for this poll it would have been very interesting to also have ages since of course net worth typically varies with age. I've been contemplating setting up another site just to run these sorts of polls and get some more solid data, but time is of course the problem.
Cheers
David
Leave a comment:
-
I dont think you need a new poll for those above $. The fact they have that much is enough.
What would be more interesting, and I dont hink this can be done with a simple poll (since you need to put in %, is how much of you gross worth (ie. ignoring debt) is in investment property, shares, business, PPOR etc.
For example, all the $2+ in this survey might actually have the majority of their weath in their busines (non property) or in shares. As such, the numbers above would be misleading.
Leave a comment:
-
Excellent posting David - it's a very worthwhile poll and very interesting to watch it develop too.
Good on you.
Cheers,
Donna
Leave a comment:
-
Hi Ron, just to clarify as I stated above, there were several points of this poll. The first and main point was simply to get an idea of the average net worth of PTers, I'm interested in this because I was interested in comparing this to the average net worth of NZers. I thought it was an interesting topic. This was why the poll was designed to get specificity towards the low end, to compare to the average NZer with $350000 this was needed.
A second point was to try and get a sense of how many big fish are around, which was prompted by your claim that they were mostly scared off although I will happily admit that this poll didn't go high enough to really determine this.
A third point was to get a feel for the activity level on PT vs Somersoft, by comparing the amount of voting across a similar time span on the same issue.
Anyway let me apologise for the 'ridiculous' comment it was churlish.
Cheers
David
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Monid View PostXris I was puzzled by the same thing.
At first I thought if the conditional (if 100% of property investors have 2 or more properties) held true Ron's maths were fine. But then I realised that this is still false because another condition would have to hold true, namely all property owners with two or more properties would have to be investors. But both conditionals are clearly false, since some property investors will have only one property (they live in rented accommodation) or perhaps even none (they are in between properties). Likewise some of those with two or properties may not be property investors, they may just have multiple dwellings that they live in. I guess the moral of the story is that making claims based on stats like this is always going to be perilous.
I was more confused about the conclusion of Ron's argument:
I didn't see how the final claim was supposed to follow from the claim that 20% of property investors have 5 or more properties even if it was true? Is it that if 20% have 5 properties then you must have lots more than 5 to count as a big investor? Or was it that to have 5 or more properties you had to have more than 2 Million net worth?
But then, given that I don't buy the claim that only 'big' investors are worth listening to, I'm not that motivated to explore the puzzle.
Cheers
DavidOriginally posted by Monid View PostWell part of the point was to rebut Ron's ridiculous claim that there are no big investors left here any more... 33 of us with over a million in net worth I think there may still be one or two big investors kicking around even if they don't publicly identify themselves as such. It also provides some way of judging certain promotions such as the hype about a certain seven/ten million dollar man, remembering the much vaunted 10 million dollar man had from memory about 3-4 million equity.
Cheers
David Hunter
David,
Lets not forget that your original statement to rebut Ron's ridiculous claim...
I am merely pointing out the $1m and $2m + is on the low side for establishing big fish Property Investors and from your own argument above the categories should be extended to $5m plus.
I absolutely agree with you that Big Investors are not the only ones worth listening to, however why the hassle and negativity from the gang of ten. What's wrong with a balance of views or is it that only replies from smaller investors that counts?
As I have repeatedly said many times in previous posts "After all who teaches the Teacher?"
Why have this Poll anyway... are you not trying to prove a point that there are still some big fish around and not all have been put-off from posting regularly?
Ron
(My vote on an issue)
PS - I don't count myself a big fish yet, I am only 2/3 of the way from my I/P goal and a very long way from purchasing even a secondhand Ferrari.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: