FYI, Grant Cardone has a net worth somewhere around 100-150 million and climbing. I believe he is closing on a 86 million dollar property.
His advice definitely isn't for everyone - but certainly has it's advantages in the right people.
There is no single plan to invest in life.
People who win major lottery jackpots after years of religious or obsessive play also pass on their investment strategy, which does indeed "work" for a handful of people.
The vast majority of young people fresh out of high school won't get to their first $100k following his advice.
Sure, lottery winners can win big - even though most are eventually broke as they don't know how to manage their wealth.
Some people that are ultra frugal are miserable and just have 500k - 1 mil in the bank, without any joy in life.
There are a million examples out there to prove anyone's point.
The reality is, this guy started with a lower income than Mr. Money Mustache, he was earning 30k in sales, with no money in the bank. He learned how to sell and earn a good income. Then he learned how to invest. He is now worth >100 million and climbing. He has a personal jet, which everyone told him not to buy, except billionaires (as they understand that something like that could build more wealth in the right hands).
My point isn't to defend his strategy to everyone. It's just to avoid the mocking attitude and judgmental stance. He has a different strategy, it is by nature much higher in risk and also much higher in reward. I agree anyone can save a million and retire early. Also, some will want to build wealth in a different way. Even Mr. Money Mustache said he would invest in more, but he doesn't want that burden / stress, so he keeps it simple.
I just found it funny that people are calling this guy dumb, when he started earning less than most of the people here and now is worth > $100,000,000. Instead of laughing at him, I think it's ok to listen and then think about it. Maybe you disagree - that's fine too.
According to this logic, though, the 6000 calories a day Michael Phelps ate when he was at the peak of his competition career represents a reasonable and viable diet for humans.
I get that you're keen on Grant Cardone, and I respect that. However, his advice works for one person-- Grant Cardone-- and for people who, like him, have some exceptional skills and a similar starting environment and community. His investment strategy works extremely well for a person with his skills and talents, in his specific situation. But it is not even a little bit forgiving of error or tolerant of accident. That makes it a weak strategy overall.
Here's how to compare strategies. An "excellent" one can be implemented successfully to obtain good results even with imperfect conditions, some bad luck, and minor errors in implementation. It is tolerant of differences in capability, it is low risk, and if it does not bring immediate success the implementer will still see good or at least better-than-average results in the long term. The circumstances under which it can lead to utter disaster are very few, and those circumstances tend to be the sort of thing that will wipe out almost *any* person.
A "good" strategy works well and produces good results when the conditions are favorable, but the risk level is low enough that if the conditions become unfavorable the implementer does not put himself at risk of a complete disaster. It is flexible enough to survive the occasional mistake, but it still requires attention to detail.
A "poor" strategy is essentially the process of taking advantage of an optimal or near-optimal situation. It relies heavily on innate talent, the special skills of the individual, and luck. When the conditions are not optimal, or when the individual trying to implement the strategy lacks key skills, health, or talents, or if the implementer makes even a minor mistake or error in judgement, the strategy not only fails but renders the implementer worse off than before. When the conditions are perfect and the right person is in the right place at the right time, the implementer is very successful. An example of a poor investment strategy is trying to get rich through multi-level marketing. There are a select few who make a killing by getting in on the ground floor, selling big, and creating a large and productive down-line. The rest earn very little and many actually lose money.
That's what I mean when I say Grant Cardone presented a poor strategy. I'm fully aware of his achievements, and he was able to achieve a great deal through his approach. It created more of a return for him than an excellent but conservative strategy would have done. But in terms of being a viable approach for the vast majority of people it's a poor strategy overall. This, I think, is what most of the people in this thread are trying to say. They're not making fun of Grant Cardone-- he should be praised for making the best possible results given a poor strategy. They're mocking Business Insider for not being able to tell the difference between a poor strategy and an excellent one.