New Yorker Article: The Scold - Mr. Money Mustache’s retirement (sort of) plan

[Jsn]

With each monthly truckload of money dumped upon his lap, the burden probably gets larger.  That has to be a huge weight on their shoulders.  They could just blindly give it away to multiple charities with little effort and make a small difference in the world.  But we are talking about the optimized, efficient, and DIY motherfucker, right?
...
Whether they piss it away, donate it right away, let the blog revenue accumulate and compound til later in life, or create a new foundation/charity/trust shouldn't be anyone's choice but theirs.

Hear, hear. As Bill Gates and scores of other mega-wealthy people will tell you, giving money away can be as challenging as making it. You can't purchase change. Firehosing money at problems doesn't make them disappear.  Growing an expertise in philanthropy at the same time you're growing an enterprise (and a movement) can make for a significant dilution in focus, and then there's the quite appropriate need to let time and compounding work their wonders.

MMM is completely right to defer such concerns. And to address them privately when he gets around to it.

[adam]

I think MMM should spend that blog money in a way I deem appropriate, or not at all!

(buy me a boat pls kthx)

[GuitarStv]

I think MMM should spend that blog money in a way I deem appropriate, or not at all!

(buy me a boat pls kthx)

Free carbon fiber road bikes with Zipp wheels for all forum members with over 5287 posts!

[AdrianC]

I think MMM should spend that blog money in a way I deem appropriate, or not at all!

(buy me a boat pls kthx)

But you know what a boat is right? A boat is a hole in the water into which you pour money. Please don't buy me a boat :-)

[arebelspy]

I think MMM should spend that blog money in a way I deem appropriate, or not at all!

(buy me a boat pls kthx)

Free carbon fiber road bikes with Zipp wheels for all forum members with over 5287 posts!

lol.

And here I was going to suggest a giant bonus for his hardworking moderators.

DOUBLING our salary, even.

[Travis]

First, $400k per year? Holy shit!  Pete needs to be careful or this blog really will become a job.

Second,

FWIW, reddit and Bogleheads comments.

Wow are Bogleheads worried about whether he's really retired.  Some posters actually seem *angry* about it.  Not sure I understand why, whether it's jealousy or something else.

Finally, I thought the article was pretty interesting.  As someone else pointed out MMM came off as even more extreme than his blog entries would indicate.  Scrubbing floors with a sponge because he doesn't want to use up space for a mop? Seriously?

One thing I do wonder is it seems like Mrs. Money Mustache, while frugal, and goes along with it, might start looking at that $400k/year coming in from the blog and want to spend on some extravagances.  I wonder if there is tension there.  I know DW and I have some when I try to push the mustachianism.  (They should go to dinner at Frasca in Boulder.  MMM's head would explode spending $300-400 on a meal. lol)

I've been following the Bogleheads debate on this since last night.  I get that our two forums have diverging philosophies, but DAMN do some people just not get it.  "It'll never work" despite a decade of success for him and an entire sub-section of forum members discussing their success every day here.  A couple others keep arguing "the blog is for the wealthy" and "he's making $400k a year so he's a hypocrite and not really living his message." My favorite so far boils down to "I know almost nothing about him and I'm not interested in learning, but I'm going to call him a liar anyways."  Way to miss the point guys.  The blog is for whoever can take something useful from it.  He even clarified in the article that FIRE is more of a byproduct of his lifestyle choices. And he doesn't spend any of his blog income.  He says that constantly.  It was even mentioned in the article.  Why does it matter how much he makes if he's not even touching it?

[RootofGood]

I thought the article was an interesting take on Pete.  A day in the life so to speak.  A fresh way of living life presented to New Yorker's readers, many of whom might have never considered there is a different way to live life (and there are interesting dudes outside of Manhattan). 

Re: Magic the gathering cards - what parent hasn't had to confront the ridiculous rampant consumerism and peer pressure our kids face?  When your first grader tells you I need an iphone because everyone else has one, you should be able to say "(a) no, most of them do not and (b) you don't need one yet, but perhaps some day it will make sense".  No different with the MTG cards.  If you can't play with your other 9 year old friends without a $20 buy in every Friday, WTF man, WTF.  I'm glad my kids' friends are middle class and working class because that's just crazy train right there.  Though I'd probably let them spend their own $$ if they really wanted to spend it.  I imagine after dropping a Jackson or two, they would realize they could buy another thousand or two identical MTG cards in bulk. 

It's not entirely a hypothetical situation, except in our case it was Pokemon cards and the kids ended up not spending any of their $ and the fad went away after a few months.  Kids still have a very active social life and all their $20's.  Now it's Minecraft which other than the $7 app purchase is free.

[spud1987]

I'm not surprised that the blog earns 400k/year. In fact, that would've been a low estimate if I was guessing. By "earns" I assume that the 400k is after expenses (eg Ecuador trip, Seattle meetup, electric bikes, costs associated with running a large blog, taxes, etc.).

Also, I don't really care whether or not the money is donated. As others have said, the money is MMMs and he can choose to do what he wants with the earnings.

I do share others concerns about MMMs use of affiliate links and other promotions (which presumably constitute a large part of the blogs earnings). These seem anathema to his stated goal of environmental anti-consumerism and it cheapens the message to casual observers. I realize that these affiliate links are disclosed and are products that MMM actually uses, but some promotions promote consumer behaviors nonetheless (I'm sure someone at some point who used the Chase affiliate link has paid interest to Chase as a result of holding the credit card).

Then again, the blog is owned by MMM so he can do whatever he wants with it. Maybe we just shouldn't expect MMM to be run as a nonprofit with a singular anti-consumerist goal, because it's not; it's a business.

[adam]

I think MMM should spend that blog money in a way I deem appropriate, or not at all!

(buy me a boat pls kthx)

But you know what a boat is right? A boat is a hole in the water into which you pour money. Please don't buy me a boat :-)

I usually try to disprove this but mine caught on fire on Sunday so I don't have much room to talk.






On the other hand its only going to be a $155 fix, assuming I didn't completely melt the wiring harness.....

[Midwest]

I think MMM should spend that blog money in a way I deem appropriate, or not at all!

(buy me a boat pls kthx)

But you know what a boat is right? A boat is a hole in the water into which you pour money. Please don't buy me a boat :-)

I usually try to disprove this but mine caught on fire on Sunday so I don't have much room to talk.






On the other hand its only going to be a $155 fix, assuming I didn't completely melt the wiring harness.....

That's a story.  We caught my alternator on fire (just the plastic) this summer when we failed to unhook the battery during an on water repair.  fire and boats are interesting.

[tooqk4u22]

First, $400k per year? Holy shit!  Pete needs to be careful or this blog really will become a job.

Second,

FWIW, reddit and Bogleheads comments.

Wow are Bogleheads worried about whether he's really retired.  Some posters actually seem *angry* about it.  Not sure I understand why, whether it's jealousy or something else.

Finally, I thought the article was pretty interesting.  As someone else pointed out MMM came off as even more extreme than his blog entries would indicate.  Scrubbing floors with a sponge because he doesn't want to use up space for a mop? Seriously?

One thing I do wonder is it seems like Mrs. Money Mustache, while frugal, and goes along with it, might start looking at that $400k/year coming in from the blog and want to spend on some extravagances.  I wonder if there is tension there.  I know DW and I have some when I try to push the mustachianism.  (They should go to dinner at Frasca in Boulder.  MMM's head would explode spending $300-400 on a meal. lol)

I've been following the Bogleheads debate on this since last night.  I get that our two forums have diverging philosophies, but DAMN do some people just not get it.  "It'll never work" despite a decade of success for him and an entire sub-section of forum members discussing their success every day here.  A couple others keep arguing "the blog is for the wealthy" and "he's making $400k a year so he's a hypocrite and not really living his message." My favorite so far boils down to "I know almost nothing about him and I'm not interested in learning, but I'm going to call him a liar anyways."  Way to miss the point guys.  The blog is for whoever can take something useful from it.  He even clarified in the article that FIRE is more of a byproduct of his lifestyle choices. And he doesn't spend any of his blog income.  He says that constantly.  It was even mentioned in the article.  Why does it matter how much he makes if he's not even touching it?

Even if you want to make the argument that MMM failed at FIRE on his initial stache it should still resonate that his message was still correct when you factor in the flexibility that comes with low cost lifestyle and other fail safes that come with FIRE to accidentally earn money.....started a blog for fun, made a few pennies along the way, uh oh turns out $600k wasn't enough for me, oops blog is making many many pennies.....


call the IRP ASAP he is on the run.

[robartsd]

My favorite part of the article was learning of the man behind the man behind the mustache. The article credits Luc as encouraging Pete to go full mustache. Pete needed a little encouragement to become MMM.

[wild wendella]

Am I the only one that was a bit uncomfortable with the author's inclusion of personal details about MMM's son? 
At times it felt like a psycoanalysis on the boy's personality and upbringing.  Leave Mini MM out of it!

You're not the only one.  I also felt uncomfortable with this, as well as with the revelation of personal details about the entire family, and clear judgement present in the tone of the piece.  Most articles are more objective, less personal, and I generally didn't care for this one.  But that's ok.  This is just what happens when one becomes famous - you can't control what everyone else writes about you.

Edited to add: and another thing that rubbed me the wrong way.. Being a helicopter parent isn't the same as being engaged in your children's life.  If anything, helicopter parents are are those who can't spend the time and so compensate with other forms of 'helping'.  This writer just seems like a cynical NY jackass, who feels he looks smart by finding snarky ways to subtly and not so subtly pass judgement and insults on his subjects.  Whatev..

[brooklynguy]

I thought the article was an interesting take on Pete.  A day in the life so to speak.  A fresh way of living life presented to New Yorker's readers, many of whom might have never considered there is a different way to live life (and there are interesting dudes outside of Manhattan). 

Most readers aren't in New York.

Nonetheless, the magazine is famous for epitomizing (and at the same time lampooning) the average New Yorker's myopic view of the world, which, as depicted in what is probably the magazine's most famous cover illustration, barely extends beyond the city's own borders.

[Frugal_NYC]

My big question after reading the article is what will MMM do with all the extra millions?  If you say he will pass it down to his son, then his son has no need to ever actually go to college :-)

I just find it ironic that the guy who represents living simply/minimizing spend is rapidly accumulating (maybe not intentionally) the very tool used to do the opposite of that - for normal spendypants

[nereo]

I think MMM should spend that blog money in a way I deem appropriate, or not at all!

(buy me a boat pls kthx)

Free carbon fiber road bikes with Zipp wheels for all forum members with over 5287 posts!

lol.

And here I was going to suggest a giant bonus for his hardworking moderators.

DOUBLING our salary, even.

what's 2x of $0 again...? :-)
5287 posts... i better get crankin'!

[SugarMountain]

I think MMM should spend that blog money in a way I deem appropriate, or not at all!

(buy me a boat pls kthx)

Free carbon fiber road bikes with Zipp wheels for all forum members with over 5287 posts!

lol.

And here I was going to suggest a giant bonus for his hardworking moderators.

DOUBLING our salary, even.

what's 2x of $0 again...? :-)
5287 posts... i better get crankin'!

How do the moderators feel about working for free on a machine that is cranking out $400k per year?

[CanuckExpat]

Thanks for sharing, that was an interesting read, if a tad bit personal/voyeuristic for my taste. I don't think the tone or content is that surprising given the general audience.

For all we know, the the author may have intended a different article and then got push-back from his editors "tell us more about the person, put in a cute story about his kids and wife", etc; when you write for the public, you have to give them what they want.

I think I learned a thing or two from the article: "He said that thirty dollars of sativa oil lasts him half a year".
That is awesomely efficient and looks pretty cheap compared to other forms recreational drug use: that's the same as three joints, 30 beers, or maybe 10 fancy coffees? Got to hand it to MMM, now I have another budget line item to consider optimizing... always learning :)

Did any body else notice the awesome picture of the wheelie with the mountains in the background? Great photography and great backdrop.
How far away are those mountains from the town, anybody know out of curiosity?

[Jude]

I'm glad MMM is getting the attention - the article has flaws, obviously, but will bring a lot of new eyes to the website and a sizable percentage will stick around and "get it".

Just want to add that this type of article is why I gave up on The New Yorker. They love to do these personal stories where your hear about all kinds of little anecdotes, and read about what the person is wearing and what life was like growing up, and how that might have influenced etc. etc. etc. It's fine once in a while but they do it so often, with climate scientists and web start-up CEOs and so on, it gets really formulaic.

Come to think of it, the last one I read was about some young guy who got rich and famous with a Harry Potter blog and now runs some company that manufactures and processes clickbait (Voldermort to MMM's Harry Potter?).

[seaworthy]

The piece was, unfortunately but inevitably, written/edited to fit the tone of the New Yorker: wry, eyebrow-archingly cynical, and ultimately comforting to its target demographic. To expect anything else of a publication that's financed by selling ads for Cadillac SUVs and other luxury lifestyle products would be naive.

The writer's intent wasn't to examine the principles behind FI/RE: it was to paint a portrait of a "colorful" individual. This is why eccentricities were highlighted, his adherents were relegated to shadowy, supporting roles, and no effort was made to place his achievements in context. There were certainly no attempts to evaluate the efficacy of his philosophy, much less understand how it might be effectively applied to others. The foofraw about game cards and his mother-in-law's underwear existed only to make the average reader roll their eyes: that wacky pot-smoking, beer-drinking, Colorado utopianist crank!

The ultimate cheap shot was the $400K annual income from this website. Instead of that being used to demonstrate the power of his ideas, it was presented as if they undermined them--as if the success of the website somehow made his lifestyle an eccentric hobby. Never mind that he doesn't make use of that money or even live in its shadow, thereby making it about as relevant as his shoe size. (Speaking of the physical realm: was anyone else creeped out by the reference to his being in shape, and how that was somehow threatening?)

In other words the article, like so much media these days, comes pre-consumed: the expected reader reaction is already baked into the tone of the piece. To read it, it's implied, is tantamount to thinking about the topic at hand. I guess I'm glad it'll help at least a few new people find their way to MMM, but on the whole I think it exemplifies why Pete was prudent to craft a semi-anonymous persona in the first place.

I completely agree, Jsn.

[lukebuz]

I think MMM should spend that blog money in a way I deem appropriate, or not at all!

(buy me a boat pls kthx)

Free carbon fiber road bikes with Zipp wheels for all forum members with over 5287 posts!

lol.

And here I was going to suggest a giant bonus for his hardworking moderators.

DOUBLING our salary, even.

what's 2x of $0 again...? :-)
5287 posts... i better get crankin'!

How do the moderators feel about working for free on a machine that is cranking out $400k per year?

Ouch.  Y'all got invited to go to Ecuador with him?  Right?

[iamlindoro]

How do the moderators feel about working for free on a machine that is cranking out $400k per year?

I really think this is the wrong way to look at this. First off, the vast, vast majority of the money being made off the blog isn't coming from the forums (which have *one* ad at the very bottom of the screen, and none of the referral links). If MMM had to personally moderate the forums, odds are they'd just get shut down, there'd be no more community to have these discussions in, and the blog would *still* make $400K (or very close to it).

The moderators do what they do for *us*, not for MMM.  They are members of this forum too.

[The Happy Philosopher]

I don't get the criticism about the blog making money. The real value is Pete's ideas and creativity and ability to inspire - not 400k. In the grand scheme of things 400k/yr wont change anything...but MMM's ideas will.

Real change in the world comes from ideas, not money. Money flows to ideas. When the right idea presents I have no doubt in my mind MMM will do whats right for him.

I don't care if MMM donates the money to widows and orphans or buys a huge pile of weed and has a big THC bonfire in his back yard, just doesn't matter. It's his money and he earned it.

As for the haters on reddit and boggleheads, who cares. They were not going to be swayed to clarity no matter what the article says. It's gonna drive traffic and traffic is good. The people that get it will get it.

[nereo]

How do the moderators feel about working for free on a machine that is cranking out $400k per year?

I really think this is the wrong way to look at this. First off, the vast, vast majority of the money being made off the blog isn't coming from the forums (which have *one* ad at the very bottom of the screen, and none of the referral links). If MMM had the personally moderate the forums, odds are they'd just get shut down, there'd be no more community to have these discussions in, and the blog would *still* make $400K (or very close to it).

The moderators do what they do for *us*, not for MMM.  They are members of this forum too.

I honestly never noticed the ads on this site before.  Then I remembered that i have Ad Blocker installed.  Self-Facepalm!

But seriously moderators, thanks for all you do here.  And you too arebelspy.

[Tim1965]

I don't think the article was negative or unflattering at all. I think it told things as they are and MMM would be totally ok with that. It also confirmed my thoughts that this whole site isn't really about money at all. It's about curbing the rampant consumerism that is not only destroying our financial lives, but the planet. FIRE is just a side effect.

I kind of disagree. I think the curbing of rampant consumerism is a nice side effect, and the main point is the avoidance of tedious bullshit as represented by FIRE.

To each his own, though.

[Tim1965]

Phenomenal post, Frankies Girl. I totally agree.

Ditto. I wasn't offended in the way Frankies Girl was but I did leave the article feeling as if the author hadn't quite nailed it.

[spud1987]

I don't get the criticism about the blog making money. The real value is Pete's ideas and creativity and ability to inspire - not 400k. In the grand scheme of things 400k/yr wont change anything...but MMM's ideas will.

Real change in the world comes from ideas, not money. Money flows to ideas. When the right idea presents I have no doubt in my mind MMM will do whats right for him.

I don't care if MMM donates the money to widows and orphans or buys a huge pile of weed and has a big THC bonfire in his back yard, just doesn't matter. It's his money and he earned it.

As for the haters on reddit and boggleheads, who cares. They were not going to be swayed to clarity no matter what the article says. It's gonna drive traffic and traffic is good. The people that get it will get it.

My point wasn't necessarily that the blog shouldn't make money, my point was that making money via affiliate links dilutes the message.

And if you're right and 400k/year isn't a lot in the grand scheme of things compared with the underlying message, then why even monetize the blog at all? If MMM is going to give away the money to charity anyway it makes no difference to him.

I think an apt analogy is Wikipedia.org. The website could earn millions per year if it was monetized, but the leadership specifically runs it as a nonprofit so as not to taint the goal of Wikipedia (unbiased free information). That's why we get those annoying donate messages every so often on the Wikipedia homepage. ;)

[arebelspy]

And if you're right and 400k/year isn't a lot in the grand scheme of things compared with the underlying message, then why even monetize the blog at all? If MMM is going to give away the money to charity anyway it makes no difference to him.

It makes a difference for the people those charities are helping.

And if his monitization is subtle, and only for stuff he'd promote anyways, it's a win-win, for products that he likes, who then get more customers.  And with him pushing anti-consumerism, the people using those products will hopefully be more savvy than the average person, and only be using products they need.

If MMM didn't monetize it, just recommended those same products without affiliate links, the same people would presumably go to the sites and sign up for those products, and the only difference is those companies would have more profit.  Instead they pay MMM for his affiliate links, and that profit can instead go to charity.

I don't see the message as being diluted at all.

If he suddenly posted "Go buy this SUV, tell the dealer coupon code MMM for a discount" and he got a kickback, sure, I'd agree that'd dilute the message.  But referring people to Personal Capital?  Not so much.

[ponyespresso]

No one's mentioned the muffler incident yet! He really should have fessed up to that. At the very least, it would be useful knowledge for those trying this at home.

From the article:

There was a thirty-dollar mistake, back in 2010: Mr. Money Mustache built a rig for a storage box attached to the rear of his Scion hatchback, but the heat of the muffler melted a hole in the box. He modified the design, then wrote about it on his blog. The post, called “Turning a Little Car Into a Big One,” was an ode to the ingenuity of his storage box and to the underlying good sense behind owning a cheap, small, fuel-efficient automobile. He left out the bit about the muffler.

[boy_bye]

No one's mentioned the muffler incident yet! He really should have fessed up to that. At the very least, it would be useful knowledge for those trying this at home.

From the article:

There was a thirty-dollar mistake, back in 2010: Mr. Money Mustache built a rig for a storage box attached to the rear of his Scion hatchback, but the heat of the muffler melted a hole in the box. He modified the design, then wrote about it on his blog. The post, called “Turning a Little Car Into a Big One,” was an ode to the ingenuity of his storage box and to the underlying good sense behind owning a cheap, small, fuel-efficient automobile. He left out the bit about the muffler.

nah, i don't think so. he found and resolved the problem in his design before he posted about it so what would be the point?

[TheOldestYoungMan]

You are all missing the biggest revelation!

Pete is a genius!

Using a vice to get more juice!  The world is now better and there is no going back!

[spud1987]

And if you're right and 400k/year isn't a lot in the grand scheme of things compared with the underlying message, then why even monetize the blog at all? If MMM is going to give away the money to charity anyway it makes no difference to him.

It makes a difference for the people those charities are helping.

And if his monitization is subtle, and only for stuff he'd promote anyways, it's a win-win, for products that he likes, who then get more customers.  And with him pushing anti-consumerism, the people using those products will hopefully be more savvy than the average person, and only be using products they need.

If MMM didn't monetize it, just recommended those same products without affiliate links, the same people would presumably go to the sites and sign up for those products, and the only difference is those companies would have more profit.  Instead they pay MMM for his affiliate links, and that profit can instead go to charity.

I don't see the message as being diluted at all.

If he suddenly posted "Go buy this SUV, tell the dealer coupon code MMM for a discount" and he got a kickback, sure, I'd agree that'd dilute the message.  But referring people to Personal Capital?  Not so much.

I agree that MMM's affiliate links are very innocuous and it really doesn't give me too much concern. But I think a message that is backed by a for-profit enterprise is always going to raise more eyebrows than a nonprofit enterprise. Rightly or wrongly.

All this being said, I would likely be doing the same thing as MMM if I were in his shoes so I am not really judging him for making money via the blog.

[ponyespresso]

No one's mentioned the muffler incident yet! He really should have fessed up to that. At the very least, it would be useful knowledge for those trying this at home.

From the article:

There was a thirty-dollar mistake, back in 2010: Mr. Money Mustache built a rig for a storage box attached to the rear of his Scion hatchback, but the heat of the muffler melted a hole in the box. He modified the design, then wrote about it on his blog. The post, called “Turning a Little Car Into a Big One,” was an ode to the ingenuity of his storage box and to the underlying good sense behind owning a cheap, small, fuel-efficient automobile. He left out the bit about the muffler.

nah, i don't think so. he found and resolved the problem in his design before he posted about it so what would be the point?

my point was that it would be helpful to anyone thinking of designing their own box.

[AdrianC]

It's not entirely a hypothetical situation, except in our case it was Pokemon cards and the kids ended up not spending any of their $ and the fad went away after a few months.  Kids still have a very active social life and all their $20's.  Now it's Minecraft which other than the $7 app purchase is free.

Our boys are into Pokémon, which means I am too, and Pokémon is even more bullshit than Magic. Older cards are not legal for tournament play, so no $20 boxes of 1000 cards from Amazon. And to be competitive you have to buy $20 and up "Mega-EX" boxes. It's a total racket.

Minecraft is good. Very little ongoing expense. They play on two of my old work laptops, which work fine for the game. It's creative and fun. They are doing their "20 minutes of screen time" right now.

[TallMike]

The piece was, unfortunately but inevitably, written/edited to fit the tone of the New Yorker: wry, eyebrow-archingly cynical, and ultimately comforting to its target demographic. To expect anything else of a publication that's financed by selling ads for Cadillac SUVs and other luxury lifestyle products would be naive.

The writer's intent wasn't to examine the principles behind FI/RE: it was to paint a portrait of a "colorful" individual.

This idea has shown up in a couple forms in this thread, and I think it's basically correct. I used to subscribe to the NYer because I associated it with being erudite. After a few years, I realized that I was reading it, talking about an article or two with a couple friends, and then forgetting it entirely, i.e. it wasn't staying with me. When I compared that with other reading (Emerson, Marilynne Robinson, John Koethe) that did stick with me, it became clear that the NYer was really just satisfying my desire to look educated, whoops, I mean my vanity... So, it was time to cancel the subscription.

That's a bit far afield, but let me try to bring it back by saying that I started reading MMM four years ago, did so rather fervently for a while and then less religiously for the opposite reason: the ideas HAD stuck. I WAS changing many of my behaviors as a result of ideas and arguments I encountered on this blog. MMM is forthright about the fact that a lot of this boils down to a few basic ideas that can be recycled. The principles of this blog and forum are the opposite of the "buy a new MTG deck every Friday" and embrace the "your deck in hand still has a lot of life in it" position instead. I'm grateful to MMM for that.

[FenderBender]

what will be puzzling to ny readers is he is retired and somehow without working he created a blog that makes him 400k a year.    i watch lots of woodworkers on youtube that quit their day job to instead earn through youtube/fb/blogging and all of them talk about how much "work" it is.   i don't think it makes a difference if they have a million in the bank, at the end of the week, it was work.  yes, i guess i'm being the internet work police or retirement police or whatever it is you guys call it.  just saying it because readers of the article might be wondering, blogging isn't working?

thanks to moderators for lightening the load on his way to 400k. 

all the rehab work i mean play shoot i'm so confused.... i always wondered how anyone could do all that rehab work on 2 and a half tanks of gas/year too (sorry if i missed the explanation). 

[Tetsuya Hondo]

what will be puzzling to ny readers is he is retired and somehow without working he created a blog that makes him 400k a year.    i watch lots of woodworkers on youtube that quit their day job to instead earn through youtube/fb/blogging and all of them talk about how much "work" it is.   i don't think it makes a difference if they have a million in the bank, at the end of the week, it was work.  yes, i guess i'm being the internet work police or retirement police or whatever it is you guys call it.  just saying it because readers of the article might be wondering, blogging isn't working?

thanks to moderators for lightening the load on his way to 400k. 

all the rehab work i mean play shoot i'm so confused.... i always wondered how anyone could do all that rehab work on 2 and a half tanks of gas/year too (sorry if i missed the explanation).

There's a big difference between doing work because you have to and because you want to. That's what FI is all about. FIRE isn't about sitting very, very still not doing anything that might be construed as "work." Pete likes to build things and blogging, so that's what he's doing.

Start at the beginning of his blog and work your way forward. This is all covered pretty well.

[nereo]

all the rehab work i mean play shoot i'm so confused.... i always wondered how anyone could do all that rehab work on 2 and a half tanks of gas/year too (sorry if i missed the explanation).

From his blog postings there's two things going on here.  1) he does many of his hardware store runs on a bike with a trailer attached.  He's frequently mentioned hauling lumber, even appliances on it.  2) his construction projects are all in his own neighborhood, so his contruction mini-van is making occasional trips of a few miles and not for commuting.  He mentioned he spent 1 tank of gas exclusively on the minivan in 2015 (so... 300-400 miles, enough for 50(ish) trips to the local Home Depot a year)

[MrsYTF]

I agree completely with Frankiesgirl, but not only did I feel like this article was an affront to MMM, I felt like it was an affront to ME and the other people who have bought into this cult. I get that the author didn't fully embrace mustachianism but he made the ones that do sound so lame. Whenever he referred to Mrs MMM, I just got a visual of her rolling her eyes. Their whole lifestyle sounded like a burden to her. It sounds like she is fairly reserved so maybe that's how it came across. But geez how disappointing. And finally,  the gathering at the pub, describing the initial attendees...I didn't get a sense of their passion for mustachianism. Sounded like a bunch of people who when interviewed answered mostly, "duh I don't know...is there like beer in there." Even if the author didn't "get" mustachianism I would have hoped for a better characterization of the people that do.

[RootofGood]

And if you're right and 400k/year isn't a lot in the grand scheme of things compared with the underlying message, then why even monetize the blog at all? If MMM is going to give away the money to charity anyway it makes no difference to him.

It makes a difference for the people those charities are helping.

And if his monitization is subtle, and only for stuff he'd promote anyways, it's a win-win, for products that he likes, who then get more customers.  And with him pushing anti-consumerism, the people using those products will hopefully be more savvy than the average person, and only be using products they need.

If MMM didn't monetize it, just recommended those same products without affiliate links, the same people would presumably go to the sites and sign up for those products, and the only difference is those companies would have more profit.  Instead they pay MMM for his affiliate links, and that profit can instead go to charity.

I don't see the message as being diluted at all.

If he suddenly posted "Go buy this SUV, tell the dealer coupon code MMM for a discount" and he got a kickback, sure, I'd agree that'd dilute the message.  But referring people to Personal Capital?  Not so much.

A bigger point in favor of monetizing is that having a nicely positive cash flow opens lots of doors for someone like Pete that presumably wants to spend time writing top notch articles and not troubleshooting the technical side and worrying about website upgrades, server issues, forum software issues, etc.  At some point he might want to hire a paid community manager for these forums.  Maybe he hires a brand manager for MMM (run more camps, set up more retreats, etc).  Maybe he provides scholarships to the retreats or camps using all that cash. 

It would be ridiculous to forego all that income just to prove the point that he's not a corporate sellout.  If he was a corporate sell out you would know it because he could probably double or triple the revenue from the blog overnight by hiring a full time affiliate manager to add more affiliate links, add more advertising, do more corporate partnerships, and similar revenue generating activities. 

I'm at the point with my own blog where I have an adequate income stream that I could hire a technical expert to tweak things and manage any server issues (but I'm still small enough where I can handle those on my own right now).  It's a nice position to be in but it wouldn't be that way if I didn't monetize. I imagine Pete was thinking the same thing - might as well make some cash to cover the cost of running the servers and keeping the lights on, and then boom it kind of exploded into this largely profitable enterprise. 

As for spud1987's wikipedia comparison, because they don't advertise they are always hard up for money.  A friend and neighbor used to sling code for them until a few months ago.  He quit and went to a similar role at another firm because the pay wasn't great at wiki ($60k for a $120k+ job in silicon valley or a $90k+ job virtually anywhere else in the developed world).  They lost a good guy because they couldn't pay anywhere close to market rates due to lack of cash.  Hey, they made a principled choice but their quality of service might be suffering (wiki was down intermittently shortly after my bud quit, oddly enough :) ).  If only there were a way for them to tap a readily available source of cash... 
 

[FenderBender]

what will be puzzling to ny readers is he is retired and somehow without working he created a blog that makes him 400k a year.    i watch lots of woodworkers on youtube that quit their day job to instead earn through youtube/fb/blogging and all of them talk about how much "work" it is.   i don't think it makes a difference if they have a million in the bank, at the end of the week, it was work.  yes, i guess i'm being the internet work police or retirement police or whatever it is you guys call it.  just saying it because readers of the article might be wondering, blogging isn't working?

thanks to moderators for lightening the load on his way to 400k. 

all the rehab work i mean play shoot i'm so confused.... i always wondered how anyone could do all that rehab work on 2 and a half tanks of gas/year too (sorry if i missed the explanation).

There's a big difference between doing work because you have to and because you want to. That's what FI is all about. FIRE isn't about sitting very, very still not doing anything that might be construed as "work." Pete likes to build things and blogging, so that's what he's doing.

Start at the beginning of his blog and work your way forward. This is all covered pretty well.

i know you guys say it ain't working if you enjoy it, but those woodworkers i'm watching keep talking about working and let's say they didn't know about your way of thinking about FI and they have a million invested, i think they would still say they are working.  i think my definition of work would be anything you are doing that isn't providing an income - that is just me personally.  i just don't get this "i'm not working but i'm making 400k."   i mean just call it what it is.   he created a job for himself - i imagine the IRS thinks so too.   just b/c you don't depend on the income doesn't mean it isn't work. 

i've read the story, i don't need to start at the beginning, i mention this because those ny readers may wonder about all this work for a retired person.   


EDIT:  i think my definition of work would be anything you are doing that is providing an income - that is just me personally.

[kudy]

I *do* want a signed print of this shot to hang on my wall.

[acanthurus]

Apparently Bogleheads locked the thread discussing this article. The Internet Retirement Police and the Ministry for Language Decency have a moderation team it seems.

[arebelspy]

i think my definition of work would be anything you are doing that isn't providing an income - that is just me personally.

Huh?  I assume there's a typo in there.

i just don't get this "i'm not working but i'm making 400k."   i mean just call it what it is.   he created a job for himself - i imagine the IRS thinks so too.   just b/c you don't depend on the income doesn't mean it isn't work. 

Well let's see.  He wrote 28 blog posts in 2015.  About two per month.  He got paid approximately $14k/article.  And yes, he did some other stuff, too, like getting interviewed for various articles and tv spots.

The thing is, it's all voluntary, on his time, if he feels like it.

Maybe it's work for him, or maybe it's a pleasurable hobby.  I think his hourly rate is probably well above 99.9% of anyone out there, if it is "work," which I'm still not convinced of.  I definitely wouldn't call it a job.

[One Noisy Cat]

Growing up, I was always told nobody buys "New Yorker" for the articles, you buy it for the cartoons.


I don't begrudge MMM getting $400,000 from advertisers or even what they are selling. It is our job to use credit cards and cell phones wisely. I am just surprised there is that much money to be made. Maybe I should start my own blog...except I can't even get my brother and sister to look at my facebook page.

[FenderBender]

all the rehab work i mean play shoot i'm so confused.... i always wondered how anyone could do all that rehab work on 2 and a half tanks of gas/year too (sorry if i missed the explanation).

From his blog postings there's two things going on here.  1) he does many of his hardware store runs on a bike with a trailer attached.  He's frequently mentioned hauling lumber, even appliances on it.  2) his construction projects are all in his own neighborhood, so his contruction mini-van is making occasional trips of a few miles and not for commuting.  He mentioned he spent 1 tank of gas exclusively on the minivan in 2015 (so... 300-400 miles, enough for 50(ish) trips to the local Home Depot a year)

i have a bs detector of my own and i just can't imagine anyone hauling building supplies on a bike trailer.  before i purchased a truck, i had a small trail for my car and i often worried about the axle breaking.  it is also a pain tying it all down.

you can chose to believe just because it is written, but my bs detector has limits.  i without a doubt believe he does his fair share of walking and bike riding, but bike trailer with building materials - nope.  When you are building, when you chose to take on a project, even if you are retired, you want to optimize your time so even when you need that one small item to finish the rest of the job, who in their right mind will ride a bike in the interest of time?  especially someone that is always weighing benefit/reward.   something tells me, the environment is going to lose in the interest of time.  i've been there many times.   i have to get shit done.  i don't want projects to linger.  i don't have time to bike to HD and it is just 1.8 miles away from me.  not only would it take me a long time, but for the things i'm usually carrying, a very dangerous ride home on a bike let alone the dangerous ride there as compared to the car with seat beats and airbags.

makes no sense to me.
 

if i REALLY used just 2 and a 1/2 tanks of gas a YEAR, i'd sell my car.  i think the insurance, tags and maintenance wouldn't make it worth having.  better to call a taxi when you need a ride.   

[FenderBender]

i just don't get this "i'm not working but i'm making 400k."   i mean just call it what it is.   he created a job for himself - i imagine the IRS thinks so too.   just b/c you don't depend on the income doesn't mean it isn't work. 

Well let's see.  He wrote 28 blog posts in 2015.  About two per month.  He got paid approximately $14k/article.  And yes, he did some other stuff, too, like getting interviewed for various articles and tv spots.

The thing is, it's all voluntary, on his time, if he feels like it.

Maybe it's work for him, or maybe it's a pleasurable hobby.  I think his hourly rate is probably well above 99.9% of anyone out there, if it is "work," which I'm still not convinced of.  I definitely wouldn't call it a job.

i fixed the typo.  thanks!

i think you forgot about the problems he was having with the website and hosting.  I know there is a lot of other work that he does to keep this site going - i used to support a site like this (not on the same subject) so i know there is a lot of work and attention to detail involved.  he also had to either hire out or do himself accounting/billing/collection considering all the deals he had going.  all those advertising deals had to be worked out to different degrees too - work.   the media interviews, call them voluntary, no matter, he did them, time spent toward promoting this site - work.  movie stars call it part of the job when they promote their movies.  going to MMM meetups, time spent, might be fun, but still site promotion.  in my mind he did these things to increase site traffic - same reason he did the ny story though he framed it as to keep rich people from spending too much and thus destroying the environment, but they have to find MMM to realize.  he is still promoting the site and that is why he agreed to spend so much time with the ny reporter - time spent - work.

i remember someone threatening to sue him so he had to deal with that - work. 

he needs to collect/organize financials for IRS filing - work.

when an enterprise earns 400/yr, there is no doubt about it, no matter your wealth, no matter how much you enjoy the work that you are putting into setting it up and keeping it going, it is for sure work.  he definitely earned a lot for time spent, but worked to earn.   i'm not so sure i'd call him retired at this point.

i love this site and what it has done for people.  i just wish we'd call work what it is no matter how wealthy we are. 

[arebelspy]

That's fine.  He does do some work. 

But that doesn't mean he isn't retired.

Or is your definition of retired "earns $0 from paid work"?

[FiveSigmas]

At some point he might want to hire a paid community manager for these forums.  Maybe he hires a brand manager for MMM (run more camps, set up more retreats, etc).  Maybe he provides scholarships to the retreats or camps using all that cash. 

Please, please, please no. The best part about the forums, the meetups, and especially CM is that they are grass-roots and community driven. Pete's blog is his, but I like to think that all the rest is ours. Yes, Pete's arrangement with Pantheon is paying the forum's bills, but AFAIK, Pete basically leaves moderation up to the moderators (who are themselves pretty hands off, which I also greatly appreciate).

My interest in all of the above would drop to 0 if it ever started being managed by a branding consultant. I hope he's able to find a much better use of his unexpected windfall.

[shelivesthedream]

Remember, this whole MMM thing is secretly an environmental activism blog. It's about getting my fellow rich people to consume less, because we are the ones destroying the planet.

It frustrates me that this has to be a secret. Has this ever been made explicit on the blog? I see so many posters in this forum who have totally failed to see this underlying message and argue that as long as they can afford it they should be allowed to pump oil straight into the mouths of baby seals. I know that a direct environmental message probably wouldn't be as effective, but I am happy that I can now quote this post to finish that argument.

The $400k thing is both positive and negative. The positive is that it reinforces the message that just because you have money doesn't mean you need to spend it. It totally disassociates spending and income. So +1 for principle on that. However, I do think it somewhat undermines confidence in the 4% rule. Do we know how MMM's original stash is holding up? I would feel better if we knew that the original stash was ringfenced and still going strong and that the post-retirement income was kept separate.

As for the philanthropy... Heck, I'd need to think for a decade or more about how to give away that much money. It could be a major influence and you need to get it right. However, I would be interested to see MMM start small and experiment now. There is so much expertise in this community. He could hold a competition for the best way to use $10,000 to further the MMM message/improve the world. I'm sure we'd be able to come up with some great ideas.