Carnival of Wealth, Sedona Edition

 

Cue the one-upping New Yorkers telling us how much prettier the rock formations in Lower Manhattan are

Cue the one-upping New Yorkers telling us how much prettier the rock formations in Lower Manhattan are

 

CYC has decamped to Central Arizona for the week, and unwittingly witnessed a conversation that segues into our first submission. Laying by the hotel pool, eyes fixed on our Kindles, we overheard the kind of boisterous people that such a milieu seems to attract. A tattooed bro in his late 30s or so, and his fat wife. Conversing – or to be more accurate, interrogating – every person around them.

“So where are you from? We’re from Phoenix.”

“So where are you from? I used to live in Oregon for 6 years, but I was born in California. Then I met him (points to tattooed bro) and now we live in Phoenix.”

And then finally:

“So where are you from? What’s that? Rome? Like Rome in Italy? Oh, no way! Honey, they’re from Rome! I’d love to go to Rome. I’ve never been to Rome. What’s your name? ‘Angela’? That’s a girl’s name in America. Oh, you said ‘Angelo.’ I’m sorry. I thought you said ‘Angela.’ That’s a girl’s name in America. So what part of Rome are you from?* Is this your first time in America? It’s interesting meeting someone from Rome because I’ve never left the United States.”

And that tore it. Again, this was a woman in her late 30s. Not only that, but she had lived in a state that borders another nation and is currently living in a 2nd such state. She also has enough money that she could afford to spend a couple of days at a resort that’s almost as far from her home as another country is. The idea of international travel seemed out of reach for this woman, unlike the crullers and bear claws at the breakfast buffet.

Barbara Friedberg wasn’t there, but she would have shaken her head at this woman’s limited view. Barbara recently traveled to Machu Picchu – a place pool lady probably couldn’t have found on a map – and didn’t vaporize her life’s savings to do so.

Our generation is spoiled to the point that we don’t even realize how achievable international travel is. Your grandmother might have crossed an ocean once, to get here, then never left. But several of our regular CoW submitters have each visited dozens of countries, often paying less to travel to Kigala or Columbo than it would cost to visit Miami. Open your eyes, see how Barb does it, and follow her lead. Or stay insular, whatever.

One of those peripatetic few is Paula Pant at Afford-Anything, who has visited more places than you ever will despite not yet turning 30. Paula didn’t come from money, but she knows how to make it and how to refrain from unnecessarily spending it. (Also how to invest it, but that’s a topic for another time.) Paula forgoes profligacy in some parts of her life (owning an unremarkable car, having roommates) so that she can hop on a plane to Amsterdam or San Francisco without blinking. Largely because she doesn’t squander money. In that respect Paula’s like Trent Hamm, except with a purpose. Well, she also writes beautifully, isn’t obese, is comfortable on camera, doesn’t terrify small children, doesn’t obsess over role-playing games and doesn’t make her own soap, either.

Here, we’ll continue with something cerebral and provocative, keep the dullwits from reading too far. The last baby boomers were born in 1964, meaning that sometime around 2080 they’ll finally, mercifully have gone the way of the Tasmanian tiger.  PKamp3 at DQYDJ.net says it’s inaccurate to credit (or blame) them for every demographic phenomenon, not the least of which is lower participation in the workforce.

For every dozen simpletons whose only understanding of debt is in the form of their monthly credit card balance, there’s one sharp cookie like Pauline Paquin at Reach Financial Independence who understands that borrowing money is almost a necessary condition for building wealth. She borrowed to finance investments and then, trapped in a corner by her conscience and her indebtedness, fought interminably to honor her commitments and keep her investments intact. Pauline says that the debt helped her in an indirect psychological way, too. Knowing that she had to pay back the money she used to finance her investments forced her to drive in a gear that she didn’t know she had.

Our most consistently mysterious contributor is Dividend Growth Investor, a model of efficiency who shares with us every week his** mechanism for building wealth via dividend-paying stocks. Even a company that pays an ever-increasing dividend has some amount of risk in its stock, so how does Dividend Growth Investor go about measuring that risk and working within it? You have to read his piece, but the gist of it is that a $1 drop in the stock price is often less important than a 10¢ drop in the dividend.

New submitter? A college kid who has $15,000 in student loans, is saving up for a $4000 engagement ring and a $5000 “wedding fund”, and who has an emergency fund? Oh, this is going to go splendidly. Jeremy Berretta at My Financial Road has a self-styled “savings problem.” This post is more of that 1st-person singular pronoun confessional stuff we’ve grown accustomed to, the kudzu that stains an otherwise pristine lawn, but Jeremy does have a sense of humor and apparently, some assets. We’ll call him a work in progress. Why he’s going to blow $9000 he can ill afford on a woman who excites his pants is too deep a problem for us to comprehend, however.

Advertising copywriter. Which, for effort rendered, was also the best paying. Harry at Your PF Pro asks his readers, including us, what the easiest job we ever had is.

Evan at My Journey to Millions is a personal finance anarchist, or at least he’d have us believe so from his latest post:

Most people discuss personal finance rules in absolute terms.  I hate it! I truly believe there are almost NO SET PERSONAL FINANCE RULES.  Rather, personal finances are well just that…personal

There are plenty of set personal finance rules, which are basically the antonyms of all the Anti-Tips of the Day we run in the right column. No matter what the endeavor, you need some structure. Beethoven’s worst symphony is objectively better than Train’s asexual caterwauling. Professional football is an institution, while professional dodgeball doesn’t exist. Organization even carries over to crime: Mafia dons lead better lives than street punks do.

Michael at Kitces.com discusses Monte Carlo retirement projections, the response to a previous generation’s less sophisticated insistence that the path to retirement follow a well-defined line. Instead, offering a range of possibilities with corresponding likelihoods makes far more sense.

Finally, Man of the World and chronic overachiever Jason at Hull Financial Planning reminds us that we’ve hardly touched on annuities in the too-long history of CYC. Yearly fixed sums for life? To paraphrase Jason’s synopsis of his own work, Dr. Wade Pfau, CFA recently published research showing that it’s possible to mathematically replicate or improve upon overall net worth performance of annuitization through increasing stock holdings a few years after retirement. But, as [Jason and CYC] have discussed, personal finance isn’t all about math. Research from RAND and from a longitudinal study of retirees in the UK shows that retirees who have annuities and pensions, all other variables held equal, are happier than those who don’t. So what’s the psychology behind why it’s better to make a slightly mathematically suboptimal decision in purchasing annuities (SPIAs or single premium deferred annuities only…don’t want to line salesmen’s pockets) than to take a crack at leaving behind a little more money the Pfau way?

Hold everything: one more. Apparently Wade Pfau’s been a common topic among our more enlightened submitters. Michael at Financial Ramblings shows the calculations behind Professor Plau’s work that suggests the optimal savings rate for a worker who wants to neither defer too much spending (thus being overly frugal in the present) nor have too little saved for retirement (i.e. too much life at the end of the money.) Not only that, but that optimal savings rate is calculated to 2 decimal places.

Thanks again. We’ll be back tomorrow.

 

*Which hill, you mean? Who cares?
**That he’s male is about the only thing we know about him. 

Our Bank Loves Us And Wants Us To Be Happy, Pt. 1

Our 1st house was in Brobdingnag

Our 1st house was in Brobdingnag

 

Welcome to one of those rare 1st-person stories in which we give a smattering of detail about our personal financial life, which is comfortable, so that you can apply the decision to your own life and watch the benefits accrue.

Among the houses in the CYC Land Empire, which still totals a few thousand square miles fewer than John Malone’s, is a handsome 3-bed/2-bath number which we rent out in Clark County, Nevada.

(Fun Fact: The home is in Las Vegas, but that’s not the Fun Fact. The Fun Fact is that in the 1990s, and possibly still today, Citibank operated a check processing center and several other concerns on the outskirts of town. Convinced that their clientele were dumb enough to think that monies addressed to “Las Vegas, NV” would somehow end up on a baccarat table or inside a slot machine before finding their way to Citibank, the company used the county name in place of the city identifier. Beyond that, Citibank created fictional towns that people could send correspondence to without fear. Red Rock, NV was one. The Lakes, NV was another. These cities never existed in any form, but the postal service didn’t care as long as you used the right street address and ZIP code.)

In April of 2005 we refinanced the house, which we’d bought a couple years earlier, for $160,000. A couple of paper transactions later – a sale to a trust we own, and then to a limited liability company of which we’re the directors and officers – and the house is now more than ¼ of the way to being paid off. Well, that’s not exactly true. The mortgage term is more than ¼ over – 7½ years out of 30 – but we’ve dented only ⅛ of the principal. Which is how these things work. The portion of the monthly payment that goes to principal accelerates as we get approach the end of the mortgage. Math.

If you remember, 2005 was an awful time to buy a house and a similarly bad time to refinance one. The bubble was about at its limits, a nationwide mountain of unsustainable debt ready to prick it at any provocation. Still, the proper comparison at the time wasn’t to 2008 home prices. (For one thing, we didn’t know what those were going to be.) The proper comparison was to other investments. We had nothing at our disposal that would (almost) guarantee $1200 or so a month in cash flow, so we committed to the house. Which last appraised at exactly a quarter-million, which probably says less about our shrewdness as investors than it does about the appraiser’s love of round numbers.

The current monthly payment is $1078. The house is in a pleasant if not affluent area, with no visible meth labs nor signs of suburban decay. The neighbors are clean and quiet, as best we can tell. In other words, the street started off OK and doesn’t seem to be getting any worse.

ANYHOW…yesterday we received an ominous phone call from someone purporting to be from a bank. “Hi, this is Christina. Please call me back at this number.” She didn’t address the person she was leaving the voice mail for, which seemed suspicious. A few seconds of Googling did confirm that she was indeed a bank employee and not a sophisticated criminal who dupes people into calling them back with their financial information. (We may have been born at night, but…) Then our skepticism made way for good old-fashioned Catholic guilt. “Oh my God, are they repossessing the house?” No, our payment record is perfect. “Sweet Jesus, are they calling because someone hacked into our account and…?” Even if that were true, what could such a person do? Pay off our balance? We’re debtors here. Anyone who impersonates us is going to be impersonating someone with 22½ years of financial obligations.

Or 15 years. When we finally got a hold of Christina, she made us an offer:

Your credit history is perfect. You’re paying too much. If you want to refinance again, we can put you in a 15-year mortgage for only $100 a month more than you’re paying now. It costs $420 to do this. You want me to send you the paperwork?

Yes, you can send us the paperwork.
But no, we don’t want your charity.

Our current rate is 5⅞%. The new one was supposed to be 4½%. The new monthly payment would indeed have been $100 more, but we’d also be cutting 7½ years off our obligation. (Not forgetting the $420 upfront cost, of course.)

So it’d take 2 years for this to pay for itself, and again, it frees up 7½ years worth of investment potential, new opportunities to take advantage of. If we held onto the house for 2 years and 1 month, assuming the market doesn’t crash again, this would seem like a shrewd move. Except for one thing. Well, 2 things. First, the closing costs worksheet the bank employee sent us used a rate of 4⅞%, not 4½%. Baiting-and-switching us isn’t a good way to start this relationship off. Second, just look at this (changed slightly since we stole created the graphic):

 

15-year

 

The worst rate listed on Bankrate is 3.68%, that from Mutual of Omaha. With all due respect, we think we’re entitled to the 3⅜% that Roundpoint customers are paying.

Say we hold onto the house for another 5 years. Sparing you the calculations, if we take advantage of the bank’s “generous” offer we’ll have paid down an additional $14,994.89 in principal. We’ll also have forked over an extra $10,504.80 in monthly payments. Is doing this worth $4,490.09, given that it takes 5 years to realize?

No, because there are better offers out there. Paying 120 basis points over market price is insanity. Not quite as insane as staying in our current loan, but at least now we know we have options. In the interests of full disclosure, we’ll shop around and give you our findings next week. And tell you how much we’ll end up saving.