The Control Your Cash Open-Book Quiz, Part I

Today's kids have terrible posture

Today’s kids have atrocious posture

Presenting the Control Your Cash Open-Book Quiz, complete with answers. For each of our next 3 posts (excluding Monday’s upcoming Carnival of Wealth), we’re going to put you in a fictional but plausible financial scenario. If you can figure out what steps you should take, then congratulations. You’ve got this stuff figured out and should be busy making deals instead of reading our site. This will make more sense once you read the 1st example:

 

Your friend just came back from Hawai’i, and you can tell it made an impression on her because she’s taken to spelling “Hawai’i” with the ‘okina. She and her husband bought a timeshare condo and think you should buy the adjacent one. That way you can take vacations together (!), which some people are into for some reason. If you ever get sick of Hawai’i, you can always exchange your timeshare week for one in Mexico, the Caribbean or Miami.*

 

The annual maintenance fees on the condo are $804, and the cheapest financing you can find is 11½%.  You’re going to put half down, and after 5 years all your vacations will be free.

What questions should you ask?
Do you have enough information?
If no, what else do you need and where would you get it?

 

When we’ve given this scenario to people in real life, the sharper ones usually stop and say, “Wait a second. 11½%?

 

We were being conservative. That rate is generous by timeshare lender standards. Here’s a company (DON’T CLICK THAT LINK, WHATEVER YOU DO) that charges 12.9% for the same loan. Why is timeshare financing so exorbitant, when the average residential loan is going for less than 3½% right now?

 

Profit maximization, that’s why. That, and one dumb customer base. Payday loan places charge 350% annual interest, rather than 5% or 10%, because their less-than-savvy customers want cash and they want it right now. Paying attention to rates? That’s for chumps. In the same vein, liquor stores not only kill alcoholics’ brain cells, the drunks pay them for the privilege (cf. cigarettes.) Someone on a modest income who has overconfident dreams of being a regular visitor to the Na Pali Coast isn’t going to be swayed by usurious interest rates. And no one ever said that both parties in a transaction have to be acting rationally.

 

The maintenance fee we gave was modest, too. But timeshare owners renters justify what they pay, because that’s what Monkey Brain (® Jason Hull 2013) inevitably does. A prospective timeshare renter sees $804 as a mere $15 a week. That little to keep the place painted and sprayed for bugs? Deal of the century!

 

Again, look at every deal from the other party’s perspective. (Which should have been the book’s title, except it’s unwieldy.) $804 in maintenance costs. Multiplied by 52 owners. The timeshare company is getting $41,808 a year per unit. No condo unit requires anywhere near that much maintenance, not even if DeAndre Hopkins and Mark Harrison each own a week. The $41,808 isn’t pure profit, but it’s a juicy markup.

 

The timeshare resale market is vibrant, and populated by buyers considerably smarter than the timeshares’ original buyers. If you made the error of buying a timeshare in the first place, you can expect to recoup no more than 20% of its price when you sell.

 

Why? Because the maintenance fees never go away. Nor do they ever decrease. Worse yet, many properties aren’t even owned by the timeshare companies that sold your week to you in the first place. Instead the properties are on long-term leases, which means that your timeshare will only be valid for the length of the lease. You’re not going to believe this, but that’s rarely the first line in the sale agreement.

 

There’s always someone who can justify buying a timeshare even though it’s a horrible investment. Here are a couple of the most common justifications:

  • It’ll be invaluable family time. Spending vacations together is more important than money could possibly be.
  • It’s not a “timeshare”, so much as it’s vacation ownership.

 

Yes, these objections are being articulated by a fictional rebutter of our own creation, but they’re still used all the time.

 

Few things have value that transcends money, e.g. health, eros, eternal salvation. A temporary living space in a desirable location doesn’t count, especially since it’s not a necessity. Nothing’s stopping you from buying plane tickets and renting a one-bedroom suite like normal people do. Which brings us to our second justification.

 

“Vacation ownership.” Think about that one for a minute. That the concept has to be shrouded in a piece of business jargon should tell you something about how valid it is. A vacation is temporary and evanescent, not unlike a round of golf or, for an even more commonplace example, lunch. The idea of somehow possessing it, whether in perpetuity or for future sale, is absurd. You purchase airfare and a room, you go on vacation, you come home, you pay your American Express bill in its entirety at the end of the month. The end. What is so hard about this, and why would you prefer a different method in which the payments never end?

 

On top of everything else, timeshares are the one “real estate” “investment” with zero tax benefits. You might as well just put the money earmarked for maintenance fees into a money market fund, and use that for a vacation each year.

 

Timeshares are among the starkest counterexamples we’ve found to the buy assets, sell liabilities mantra. On an individual level, there are few more efficient ways to impoverish oneself.

*Yes, we’re aware that Mexico and the Caribbean aren’t mutually exclusive. You go to the front of the class, Geography Dork.

Optionality. The Choice is Yours.

"I've got an 83% chance of staying alive! Those are great odds."

“I’ve got an 83% chance of staying alive! Those are great odds.”

Don’t make dumb bets.

We recently read Antifragile, the latest from iconoclast and self-described flâneur Nassim Nicholas Taleb. If you’re unfamiliar with Taleb, he’s most famous for writing the predecessor to Antifragile,a book called The Black Swan. Its main argument is that there are certain events that defy prediction and that you can’t do anything about, other than minimize your risk of exposure to their negative effects (if any) and maximize your risk of exposure to any positive ones. The title derives from the Australian bird of the same name, which Europeans discovered in the late 17th century, thus destroying the part of their worldview that held that swans are definitively white.

This isn’t a review of Antifragile. (Alright, here’s a review: Buy it, then read it slowly and repeatedly.) However, today we are concerning ourselves with one of Taleb’s fundamental recommendations: Put yourself in situations where the potential for a great reward is offset by the potential for a small loss, and avoid the opposite scenarios. If you need a concrete example, Taleb suggests that you should live in a big city. (He lives in New York.) That way you can increase the likelihood of having random encounters with people who can benefit you. Go to enough cocktail parties on the Upper East Side and you’ll find someone who can look at your business proposal, or at least put you in touch with someone who can.

On a macro scale, Taleb cites federal government intervention in the economy that’s always done with the promise of a (modest) benefit, yet invariably ends with (unanticipated, gigantic) costs. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will serve as the definitive examples of this until something greater and more destructive comes along. Single-payer healthcare, maybe. The temptation to take the path of least resistance, when resisting can result in disaster, never enters these bureaucrats’ vacuous heads.

Which brings us to a real-world example of our own experience. Last summer, your humble blogger got a speeding ticket. 40 mph in a 35 zone, on a moderately used divided 4-lane road that’s flanked by a series of car dealerships. Shortly after they’d closed for the day. Meanwhile, not 100 yards away on the nearby U.S. highway, several drivers were cruising in the passing lane and thus driving far more dangerously than anyone driving in excess of 5 mph in a commercial zone would be. But we digress.

The ticket is exorbitant. $205, but the very act of going down to the county court house and acknowledging receipt of the ticket will knock it down to $140 and a non-moving violation (i.e., no harm to the driver’s record and no disclosure to the insurer.)

Or we could fight it. Which carries a potential risk and a potential reward. Let’s see what a rational person, or at least a Taleb reader, should do in this situation.

Choose not to go to court, and we’re looking at a certain debit of -$140. So that’s our baseline. Proceed on the most conservative path possible, the equivalent of buying T-bills, and that’s how much we’ll be out. So let’s consider that $140 an all-but-irretrievable sunk cost, and proceed from there. What happens if we fight the ticket? There are 2 possible outcomes:

  1. Not guilty/case dismissed. Net gain, +$140.
  2. Guilty. This one’s more complicated. The fine will be for the full amount of the ticket, $205. A guilty verdict also means 1 point on the license, which, as best we can estimate, will result in a 15% increase in premia over the next 3 years. That’s about another $500, ignoring the time value of money. Sum it and that’s a net loss of $565. (Remember that we’ve already accepted that we’re down $140 by doing nothing and paying the reduced fine already offered by the court.)

So by taking the risk of going to court, one of 2 results will happen – a $140 gain, or a $565 loss. Neither of which mean anything without examining our chances in court.

Our case is less than airtight. We did everything you’re supposed to (take video of the crime scene, come up with a list of questions to ask the officer, and then request one continuance after another), but we’ll be going up against an officer who’s so diligent that he went to the trouble of writing the radar gun’s calibration data on the ticket. He’s been on the force for 6 years, has already been an officer involved in an officer-involved fatal shooting, makes 6 digits a year and looks about 19 years old, so the likelihood of him having retired before the court date is slim. If he gets 3 weeks of vacation a year, the chance of the trial happening during one of them is about 6%. If he shows up, we can pencil in an L.

Our research indicates that officers show up for similar cases at least 60% of the time, and we could probably jack that up a few percentage points. So that’s a reduced chance of winning (enjoying a $140 gain), and a substantially greater chance of losing (incurring a $565 cost.) Even a lottery ticket, though its odds are atrocious, offers a huge payoff balanced with a tiny cost. Fighting this speeding ticket offers the opposite.

We’ll be contacting the prosecuting attorney and writing our $140 check tomorrow.

January’s (Financial) Retard of the Month

 

Not to be confused with her sister, Candy Johnson (née Smith)

Not to be confused with her sister, Candy Johnson (née Smith)

We’ve never met the guy who runs Get Rich Slowly, but he certainly seems like a nice fella. Even though his site’s subtitle contains another one of those godawful cents/sense puns.

He recently sold his blog for way more than it’s worth, and more power to him. In the manner of a successful entrepreneur, he’s now concentrating on big-picture stuff and farming out the content of his site to anyone with a pulse and, it appears, a debt load.

Take new Get Rich Slowly staff writer Honey Smith, who might have the least imaginative pseudonym we’ve ever heard. While her name might be derivative, her story is anything but. She’s the only personal finance blogger in existence with:

  • Tens of thousands of dollars in student loan debt
  • Credit card debt
  • A sense of entitlement
  • An advanced degree or two.

Yup, she’s the only one. No others whatsoever. None. Honey Smith’s story is a completely original one, the likes of which the world has never seen before. We’re guessing she didn’t vote for the stuffy old white man who was going to take away all the ladies’ IUDs, but now we’re getting ahead of ourselves.

Here’s how Ms. “Smith” chose to introduce herself to the world:

my husband Jake and I owe a combined total of over $230,000 (about $100,000 apiece in student loans and $30,000 in credit card debt

Sweet feathery Jesus. How can someone disclose that and not crawl into a cave out of pure embarrassment, pseudonym or otherwise? Wait, we already know the answer. Because no one’s going to tell today’s empowered and educated woman what she can and can’t do.

Here are her liabilities and assets, with her pointless and mollifying commentary removed. The first list is her own, the second belongs to her “hubby”, and if you’re a guy whose wife refers to him as such without repercussions, will you at least show us the pretty pink handbag that she carries your testes in?

  • Bank of America credit card, $2,435.66
  • U.S. Bank credit card, $2,386.72
  • Federal Direct (student) Loans, $94,295.99
  • Retirement fund,  $12,240.41
  • Emergency fund, $4,500

Note: This is getting too easy. Of course there’s an emergency fund, and of course she adds to it every month. Even though it doesn’t pay her any interest, while all her debts incur interest. Honey Smith is a self-proclaimed atheist, but she sure has no problem not questioning the existence and/or purpose of a personal finance cliché that we’re running out of jokes for.

Hey Dr. Smith: You owe $230,000. If that’s not an emergency, nothing is. Anyhow, here are the corresponding items for Mr. Smith. (Make that Smith, Esq. He’s a bloodsucking attorney. And thank God, or the deity of your parents’ choice, because America clearly has a drastic lawyer shortage.)

  • Pentagon Federal Credit Union credit card, $12,935.83
  • Bank of America credit card, $8,311.35
  • First National credit card, $2,838.37
  • Discover credit card, $2,075
  • Chase credit card, $1,500
  • Student loans, $102,204.28
  • Car loan, $5,452.02
  • Retirement, $19,026.46
  • Emergency Fund, $2,194.77

So yeah, the two of them are going to spend the next few decades living less richly than they otherwise might, because a) they incurred too many debts and b) they’re in no rush to pay them off. (If they were, they’d start by getting rid of those ridiculous emergency funds and, you know, using them to extinguish at least some of the flames.)

Oh, how can you say that? She’s doing her best.

No, she isn’t. She’s doing her worst. Just read this post on her wedding, which includes minutiae all the way down to who got whose ring where. You think we’re joking? Not on Control Your Cash:

My ring is white gold with CZ accent stones and his is white gold.

Other expenses for her initial magical day (you want to bet there won’t be at least one more?) included:

excursions like snorkeling with sting rays, zip lining in Belize, tubing through ancient Mayan caves, alcoholic beverages while on the cruise, and all gratuities.

Read through the rest of her whining if you can stomach it, but it isn’t anything we haven’t already deconstructed and assailed on this site. She got married on a cruise ship. She should have gotten married at a justice of the peace’s office, but try telling her that while her debts continue to mount.

This was a seven-day western Caribbean cruise with four ports of call. We also stayed in one of the nicest cabins on the ship – we had a living area, plenty of closet space, and a balcony.

In the same post’s final paragraph – you know, the paragraph in which every unimaginative blogger on the planet closes up by directing questions at the readers in a lame attempt to get them to comment – she writes:

Are we heroes to be commended for spending less than half the national average?

We’ll assume that’s sarcasm, but she did feel the need to twice mention that her wedding cost less than half the national average. As if that’s some sort of accomplishment. Sweetheart, your consumer debt is more than twice the national average; for some reason, you’re considerably more reticent when it comes to mentioning that.

Look, we don’t make fun of these people just to make fun of them. That’s just an ancillary benefit. We do it because they’re sentencing themselves to a life of indebtedness and poverty, instead of the strong possibility of the relative affluence they could be enjoying if they’d just think a little less stupidly. They put these anchors around their necks willingly, they don’t care, and no amount of evidence to the contrary is going to convince them that they just might be wrong.

But “Honey Smith” is not a woman without an action plan. Why, she has goals for 2013. Would you like to hear them?

  • Pay off $5000 in student loan principal
  • Buy a house

(excuse us)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

(sorry)

Oh no, she can totally do it. After all,

Credit-wise we are in good shape

(Please note above lists of debts.)

  • Save for travel

(And if you can make it through her interminable list of which of her bridesmaids is getting married in which city in which month, you’re either a masochist or…no, you’re just a masochist.)

  • Bring in at least $5000 in side income

We’ll only make (more) fun of the first one. What kind of a goal is it to lower your student loan debt by 5% in one year? This is saying you’re going to quit smoking by going from a pack a day to 19 cigarettes a day. Healthy alveolar tissue, here I come! Or it’s like going from routinely blowing a .12 on the Breathalyzer to…well, you get the idea.

A message to our (Financial) Retards of the Month, and to anyone else reading this who isn’t rich yet: Be honest with yourself. It’s not easy. That college degree is almost certainly a waste of time. The advanced degree is an even greater one. These are commitments with the potential, however small, for increased earnings. The problem is that they come with an actual hefty price tag. And actual financing.

Either way, whether you have a useless M.A.* or a useless GED, the primary criterion for whether you should have an extravagant wedding is whether you can afford the damn thing.

What are you talking about? We paid $11,400. That’s cheap. It’s less than half the national average.

(slaps head)
(bangs head against wall)
(finally draws blood)

Okay, we’re back. Yes, absolutely $11,400 is extravagant if your net worth is negative. Sorry if that contravenes what you so desperately want to believe – that you’re entitled to at least a reasonable facsimile of what the Duchess of Cambridge enjoyed on her wedding day. After all, every woman is.

If you’re a multimillionaire, or marry into a family of them, different story. If you’re $200,000 in the hole – i.e., 5 years’ wages – you have to play by other rules. Cheaper, less fun, more restrictive rules. This isn’t discrimination. This is math. Easy math, too; stuff that even a lady with advanced qualifications in the humanities should have little trouble with.

*”Honey” has a useless Ph.D., too. Unless getting a $40,000-a-year job was the purpose of the Ph.D.