Facepunch Financial Samurai

[Mgmny]

I know he's been brought up before on here, but I don't think I've seen a dedicated thread to it....

But every time the financial samurai gets a news outlet to do a story on him (which seems often this year as he "left early retirement"), I just want to punch him in the face.

Here's one from yesterday: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/19/42-year-old-millionaire-failed-at-early-retirement-here-is-what-went-wrong.html

His SWR is based on treasury bonds 1.5%... He has $3M, but thinks that should only afford him about $50k a year because bond interest rate is so low. What a dumb move.

He thinks he can't afford housing because they cost $1.6 MILLION DOLLARS in San Fran. His BACKUP PLAN is $800,000 in Hawaii. Moving to LITERALLY anywhere else in the world/USA a $1.6million dollar house is a mansion. I don't even think you can call it geo-arbitrage when moving literally anywhere else would be better.

He also complains about paying for pre-school. Like, if you are paying property taxes on a house worth $1.6 million dollars (and so is everyone else in your neighborhood), I would be DAMN sure to make sure the schools are "sufficient" in the district. It sounds like San Fran schools are weird. So again, move to literally anywhere else.

If the dude is stuck in SF for reasons that are beyond me, then don't blame FIRE, blame yourself.

Crazy.

[nereo]

I'm not sure exactly when Sam took a hard left turn towards financial crazy-ville, but his articles over the last several years have trended more towards click-bait and cater to the very well off who view six-figure annual spending as a floor for a "middle-class" lifestyle. His defense of Suze Orman's "You need $10MM to comfortably retire" was cringeworthy and filled with gasp-worthy mathematical errors.

What strikes me as ironic is that Sam "failed" in his ER while retiring during the greatest boom-market we've seen and earning more in blog income than the median US household income.

His failure can be summed up like this: They accepted ludicrous levels of spending as 'essential and normal' and thereby spent more than their assets allowed. The only lesson I'd take from his story is that no level of assets are safe from bankruptcy if you aren't minding the store.

ETA:  I have a deep-seated suspicious that Sam has found a niche of refuting FIRE, and is writing articles such as these to capitalize on clicks. The more audacious his numbers, the more attention he seems to get.  This fits the bill ("even with $250,000 in passive income we still fell $60,000 short and couldn't make ER work!")

[therethere]

ETA:  I have a deep-seated suspicious that Sam has found a niche of refuting FIRE, and is writing articles such as these to capitalize on clicks. The more audacious his numbers, the more attention he seems to get.  This fits the bill ("even with $250,000 in passive income we still fell $60,000 short and couldn't make ER work!")

Your view is spot on. One of the articles within the last month stated quite bluntly... with the shortfall he'll need to get a salaried job or increase his passive income from his website..... (something along those lines)

So it's all just for clickbait. No sense to debate it.

[henramdrea]

Well, reading between the lines it really sounds like #4 on the list of reasons to come out of retirement boiled down to--wait for it--he got bored!
AND...he's  he's going to push his website a little harder  and re-FIRE in 2022.

So, i think this article was written to get us to read it and start a mini-storm.  I guess I don't see controversy except for reliance on government issued bond income (really, who does that?) and insisting on living in SF (the most anti-mustachian place on earth).  He makes enough money still that the Bay area is "affordable".  If it wasn't, and he really wanted to stay retired, he'd move for the good of his family.

[Davnasty]

ETA:  I have a deep-seated suspicious that Sam has found a niche of refuting FIRE, and is writing articles such as these to capitalize on clicks. The more audacious his numbers, the more attention he seems to get.  This fits the bill ("even with $250,000 in passive income we still fell $60,000 short and couldn't make ER work!")

Your view is spot on. One of the articles within the last month stated quite bluntly... with the shortfall he'll need to get a salaried job or increase his passive income from his website..... (something along those lines)

So it's all just for clickbait. No sense to debate it.

Based on this, I don't want to give his blog or articles about him any clicks so I haven't read for myself. But I wonder, has he sold the blog? Perhaps to Suze Orman?

[Mgmny]

ETA:  I have a deep-seated suspicious that Sam has found a niche of refuting FIRE, and is writing articles such as these to capitalize on clicks. The more audacious his numbers, the more attention he seems to get.  This fits the bill ("even with $250,000 in passive income we still fell $60,000 short and couldn't make ER work!")

Your view is spot on. One of the articles within the last month stated quite bluntly... with the shortfall he'll need to get a salaried job or increase his passive income from his website..... (something along those lines)

So it's all just for clickbait. No sense to debate it.

Based on this, I don't want to give his blog or articles about him any clicks so I haven't read for myself. But I wonder, has he sold the blog? Perhaps to Suze Orman?

No, i don't think so. He says he wants to work on making it bigger over the next 3 years, so i don't think he sold it.

[undercover]

When I was regularly reading blogs (I don’t anymore), his was certainly in my rotation. I liked his unique perspective, even if I didn’t always agree. It was sometimes helpful. A lot of what he says seems to be drawn out of thin air, but it’s not all bad. Better than the same old same old. A lot of his posts are definitely tongue-in-cheek though he does sometimes make it hard to figure out if it is.

As far as I remember he went back to work years ago as a consultant.

That article does seem like a new low for him though. I don’t understand what he’s talking about with the $1.6m home, $309k/yr BS. He’s owned several homes outright in SF before. Not sure if he’s sold everything now or what. either way, not sure how those numbers are relevant to his decision to go back to work.

Guess he’s just getting delusional at this point. He should be saying he’s bored rather than trying to come up with all those lame excuses...

[CCCA]

I haven't read any of his articles, but I enjoy reading these threads here and on reddit facepunching his ridiculousness.


Thanks!

[nereo]

FWIW I looked up the median household income in San Francisco, where Sam claims he needs $310k/year

In San Francisco, where the median household income is $96,265, the middle income range is $64,177 to an eye-popping $192,530.

So: his ability to 'not make ER work' on $250,000 is well above the middle income range. His target spending is more than 3x the median household income. Forget antimustachian - this level of arrogance requires a radical disconnect between yourself and the reality of those in your immediate community.

[surpasspro]

I read his blog regularly and do enjoy a lot of the content.  I get new perspectives and ideas and like reading the comments.  Living in San Francisco and also in Hawaii are two of the most expensive places to live.  However, it is hard to relate sometimes, when you can just move to a lower cost of living location, even within California.  I understand people have roots and family in a location and don't want to move.  For myself I'd rather move then go back to work full time, since the income from a blog is not location dependent.  I also don't have kids and can live in a tent, so everyone's lifestyle is different.

[Scortius]

I remember at one point he mentioned his most controversial "Living on $500k" post drew a substantial number of people to his site and probably made him a decent chunk of change. I would not take anything he writes these days at face value. His site is big enough that controversial articles can probably net him a significant amount of money.

In a sense, he sells outrage. People buy it with clicks. He trades the clicks in for cash. I don't think there's any value trying to understand him further.

[mancityfan]

I read the blog for a while, but stopped a couple of years ago. FIRE for investment bankers seems like the audience. Big numbers being used. and some of the articles became just over the top, almost like they were trying to generate clicks/debate hmmm :-). After a while I could just not relate to what he was writing about.

[Kierun]

I seriously hope he and his family don’t go to Hawaii, what a terrible place.

[Buffaloski Boris]

I actually like Sam’s perspective, although I disagree with anyone volunteering to live in the Bay Area.  Different strokes I guess.

[Tuskalusa]

As a financial professional, he should have been able to figure out how to leverage his considerable net worth into an early retirement lifestyle. I’d never hire this guy for advice.

[Fomerly known as something]

I read the blog for a while, but stopped a couple of years ago. FIRE for investment bankers seems like the audience. Big numbers being used. and some of the articles became just over the top, almost like they were trying to generate clicks/debate hmmm :-). After a while I could just not relate to what he was writing about.

+1, I feel the same way.  I use to be able to relate to him even with him being higher income but now I decided he just must not want a person like me as a reader.

[MoneyTree]

yeah i used to follow his blog, but stopped because I couldn't stomach some of the arrogance that came through in his writing. There were comments where someone would point out legitimate concerns with his reasoning, and his response would be along the lines of "tell me what your credentials are before I will even entertain your question"

Seems that he's always written with a chip on his shoulder, but not in a good way.

In the past few years its gotten more and more ridiculous where I can't tell anymore if he's writing for clickbait or actually that delusional.

[HBFIRE]

He has $3M, but thinks that should only afford him about $50k a year because bond

Actually he's worth considerably more, north of 10 M.  That 3 M figure was from more than a decade ago when he retired from finance.

As to the rest, he's obv not a "mustachian" and values different things than readers here do.  No reason to let it bother you.  His goal is to "fat fire" in specific areas of the country (Bay Area and Honolulu).  To each their own.

All that said, as mentioned above, his articles (and headlines) definitely lean towards click bait to cause emotional responses.  I don't think he's always being intellectually honest, he's more interested in raising his viewership numbers and monetization.  His strategy has obviously served well.  I'll occasionally check out his blog then quickly realize why I stopped reading it.   There's more than enough good material out there that I no longer need to waste time with his trash.

[Wrenchturner]

If he plays his cards right, maybe one day he can get impeached!

[Mgmny]

He has $3M, but thinks that should only afford him about $50k a year because bond

Actually he's worth considerably more, north of 10 M.  That 3 M figure was from more than a decade ago when he retired from finance.

HAHA WHAT!?!?

Source?

That's hilarious. Assuming he's just doing/saying all this to drum up clicks, then whatever floats your boat,i guess. But if he REALLY can't FIRE with 10 mil... lol then i can't help you.

[vand]

F.S. is a tosspot who long ago sold out to the conventional financial media and has very little left in common with the grassroots FIRE movement which espouses virtues of self-sufficiency and finding your "enough".

[MrGreen]

That's no samurai. That's a Financial Sumo.

[Fish Sweet]

There's something almost painfully sad about someone who spends upward of 250k a year and cries bitter baby tears about how that's just not enough for them to live on, ablooboobooboo.  For someone like that, it wouldn't matter if they've got 1 mil, 10 mil, or 100 million in the bank, there's always more to spend and more to buy and more money that they need to be content with their lot in life..

That said, FS doesn't need my pity LOL, not when he spends more in a year than my total net worth, but I actually use him as a personal example for myself when I start feeling... shall we say, covetous of luxurious things or experiences I don't really need.  It's in human nature to want want want, but that's not an excuse not to just realize at some point 'that's enough.'

[the_fixer]

That's no samurai. That's a Financial Sumo.

FTW

Thanks for the chuckle

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[bacchi]

F.S. is a tosspot who long ago sold out to the conventional financial media and has very little left in common with the grassroots FIRE movement which espouses virtues of self-sufficiency and finding your "enough".

Yep. Reminds me of the conversation between Vonnegut and Heller.

I said, “Joe, how does it make you feel to know that our host only yesterday may have made more money than your novel ‘Catch-22’ has earned in its entire history?”
And Joe said, “I’ve got something he can never have.”
And I said, “What on earth could that be, Joe?”
And Joe said, “The knowledge that I’ve got enough.”

[socaso]

I like to read Money Diaries on Refinery 29 and they mentioned once that they get a lot more readers for the diaries from super high earning individuals. I think he might be leaning into that sort of readership. I know a couple of people who live in SF and they make a lot of money, love to complain about the cost of living, and refuse to consider that they could live anywhere else. Maybe that's where his readership is right now.

I had my kid in preschool in LA and it was less than $1k. I think it's possible to find quality preschools for less than he is paying. That was a 5 day program and I just check their rates, still under $1k.

[ender]

He's been progressively clickbaity for several years at this point.

I refuse to click on them now out of principle ;-)

[nereo]

I like to read Money Diaries on Refinery 29 and they mentioned once that they get a lot more readers for the diaries from super high earning individuals. I think he might be leaning into that sort of readership. I know a couple of people who live in SF and they make a lot of money, love to complain about the cost of living, and refuse to consider that they could live anywhere else. Maybe that's where his readership is right now.

I wouldn't mind as much if he were writing for the very high income crowd.  I mind because he's constantly making unsound financial arguments that someone in his position certainly should not make.  As an example, he inexplicably said that a 45yo ER 'cannot access' a hypothetical $750k in retirement accounts, ergo he ignored those savings when declaring that $2.625MM was 'definitely not enough to retire comfortably'.  It was as if those funds simply didn't exist at all. Um... that money still exists, and it can be accessed, and it will definitely be accessible (and likely much larger) in 14 years). I believe elsewhere he recommended $400k for undergraduate expenses, even though that exceeds the median cost of basically every school in the country. etc etc.

[Metalcat]

I think he's become a really good example of how money and  FIRE don't create happiness, and if you are a miserable dissatisfied fuck while working, you're at a pretty high risk of being a miserable, dissatisfied fuck in retirement.

What a sad, joyless existence he must live in to produce such toxic drivel. Even if it's intentionally click-baity, that content is coming from somewhere.

What a sad, joyless, soul sucking way to choose to live.

He should really divert some of those millions into really good therapy.

Maybe he needs to spend some of his ample free time volunteering with people who can really offer him a frame of reference for what human suffering looks like, and see that a lot of people with truly horrific personal realities are actually a lot happier and more satisfied with life than he is.

Hell, I know a 20 year old with CHARGE who, if she could talk, would probably tell him to lighten up.

Or he could keep stewing in his own indulgent juices, monetizing his own whining for more personal financial gain. I mean, it's obviously produced such wonderful results for him so far *eye roll*.

Buried deep under his silliness is a valid conversation, but that wouldn't sell very well.

[EngagedToFIRE]

I stopped reading Wes' blog when virtually every article was nothing but clickbait. 

[dougules]

He reads like somebody that got bored and couldn't overcome an addiction to buying status. 

His clickbait seems to be working like a charm.  How many threads has he spun up just on this forum alone?

[slappy]

Can someone briefly summarize how clicks=cash? Is it just clicks to the website? I thought you had to click on an ad for it to create income for the blogger. I get the idea that more clicks=more desirable ad platform for advertisers. Is that what you mean when you say he is doing it for the clicks?

[nereo]

Basically, the more traffic you get onto a particular page the more money advertisers will pay to put their ads on said page, and the more money a blogger will get.

The site owner gets even more money if users click on the add and subsequently buy something from that company... but just traffic is enough to generate revenue.

[Bernard]

There are now countless FIRE blogs out there. It's on the verge of becoming mainstream. Sam always catered to those who are living a more affluent lifestyle, and based on his statement wanting to monetize his blog, I have the feeling that he's trying to stir the pot for that very reason. He's not a dumb person, on the contrary, so I believe there's a plan to this madness.

That out of the way, unless I get off on human feces, used needles and homeless urinating in public, I can't think of any reason to live in San Francisco. Even if I had to work there, I'd leave the sinking ship the moment I retire.

[nereo]

There are now countless FIRE blogs out there. It's on the verge of becoming mainstream. Sam always catered to those who are living a more affluent lifestyle, and based on his statement wanting to monetize his blog, I have the feeling that he's trying to stir the pot for that very reason. He's not a dumb person, on the contrary, so I believe there's a plan to this madness.

That out of the way, unless I get off on human feces, used needles and homeless urinating in public, I can't think of any reason to live in San Francisco. Even if I had to work there, I'd leave the sinking ship the moment I retire.

Objection noted. Pretty audacious to shit so completely on a city of several million people

[EndlessJourney]

Can someone briefly summarize how clicks=cash? Is it just clicks to the website? I thought you had to click on an ad for it to create income for the blogger. I get the idea that more clicks=more desirable ad platform for advertisers. Is that what you mean when you say he is doing it for the clicks?

Depending on the advertising platform, a more common description would be "eyeballs=cash" as opposed to "clicks=cash".

In that scenario, a third-party advertising server keeps track of how many times a website serves up its ads to their audience. The more ads get served up to client web browsers (eyeballs), the more money they pay that website.

Not all online-advertising works that way, some require the end user to actually click on the ad, so "clicks=cash" would be more appropriate.

[aspiringnomad]

Apologies if someone already mentioned this, but I remember him writing in another clickbait article at this time last year that he was moving his investments into cash. Not a very skilled samurai.

[HBFIRE]

Apologies if someone already mentioned this, but I remember him writing in another clickbait article at this time last year that he was moving his investments into cash. Not a very skilled samurai.

Highly doubt that being fairly familiar with his investing strategy, do you have a link?   

[aspiringnomad]

Apologies if someone already mentioned this, but I remember him writing in another clickbait article at this time last year that he was moving his investments into cash. Not a very skilled samurai.

Highly doubt that being fairly familiar with his investing strategy, do you have a link?

I don't. I thought I recalled a thread on these forums where someone linked to an article he wrote saying he moved to cash expecting a crash, but I can't find that thread and don't feel like clicking on all of his articles in an attempt to find it. It's very possible I'm thinking of someone else.

[dougules]

There are now countless FIRE blogs out there. It's on the verge of becoming mainstream. Sam always catered to those who are living a more affluent lifestyle, and based on his statement wanting to monetize his blog, I have the feeling that he's trying to stir the pot for that very reason. He's not a dumb person, on the contrary, so I believe there's a plan to this madness.

That out of the way, unless I get off on human feces, used needles and homeless urinating in public, I can't think of any reason to live in San Francisco. Even if I had to work there, I'd leave the sinking ship the moment I retire.

Objection noted. Pretty audacious to shit so completely on a city of several million people

Basic economics seems to disagree with the idea that SF is a bad place to live. 

(I see what you did there, btw)

[OurTown]

Life is all about choices.  You can choose HCOL.  You can choose LCOL.  You can choose to keep working.  You can make choices to give you the opportunity to stop working and live off your money, or live off a side gig you enjoy.  Choices, consequences, opportunities.  To each his/her own. 

[norajean]

I guess there is a difference between being a financial samurai and a frugal samurai. He understands finances, to a degree, and wants more income so he can spend more. And he knows how to get clicks. Bay Area is expensive and it is easy to get caught up in high expenses.i know some fairly frugal people there who can’t manage to keep their retiree budget under $200k or so.

[dougules]

Life is all about choices.  You can choose HCOL.  You can choose LCOL.  You can choose to keep working.  You can make choices to give you the opportunity to stop working and live off your money, or live off a side gig you enjoy.  Choices, consequences, opportunities.  To each his/her own.

Places like SF are HCOL because there is so much earning potential there.  There are a lot people there who have been fortunate enough to have the talents and abilities to take advantage of that level of opportunity, many to the point that VHCOL FIRE is easy.  Just like anywhere else, it means that you have to invest wisely and plan based on your spending in that particular location.  Also just like anywhere else it also helps if can sacrifice by doing things like sending your kids to public schools, taking only one big vacation a year, or living in less than 3000 sq ft. 

[ender]

Life is all about choices.  You can choose HCOL.  You can choose LCOL.  You can choose to keep working.  You can make choices to give you the opportunity to stop working and live off your money, or live off a side gig you enjoy.  Choices, consequences, opportunities.  To each his/her own.

Places like SF are HCOL because there is so much earning potential there.  There are a lot people there who have been fortunate enough to have the talents and abilities to take advantage of that level of opportunity, many to the point that VHCOL FIRE is easy.  Just like anywhere else, it means that you have to invest wisely and plan based on your spending in that particular location.  Also just like anywhere else it also helps if can sacrifice by doing things like sending your kids to public schools, taking only one big vacation a year, or living in less than 3000 sq ft.

... for a very limited percentage of the population.

[HBFIRE]

Basic economics seems to disagree with the idea that SF is a bad place to live. 

True, it's good for careers.  For many that's not a compelling enough reason.

[dougules]

Life is all about choices.  You can choose HCOL.  You can choose LCOL.  You can choose to keep working.  You can make choices to give you the opportunity to stop working and live off your money, or live off a side gig you enjoy.  Choices, consequences, opportunities.  To each his/her own.

Places like SF are HCOL because there is so much earning potential there.  There are a lot people there who have been fortunate enough to have the talents and abilities to take advantage of that level of opportunity, many to the point that VHCOL FIRE is easy.  Just like anywhere else, it means that you have to invest wisely and plan based on your spending in that particular location.  Also just like anywhere else it also helps if can sacrifice by doing things like sending your kids to public schools, taking only one big vacation a year, or living in less than 3000 sq ft.

... for a very limited percentage of the population.

Yes, that was implied, but I wouldn't say very limited. 

[dougules]

Basic economics seems to disagree with the idea that SF is a bad place to live. 

True, it's good for careers.  For many that's not a compelling enough reason.

I don't think SF is as good for careers as the south Bay Area.  There are a decent number of people working in that area that are willing to take on a long commute to live in SF. 

[TeeNixx]

I used to read Sam's blog but when his content went overboard he moved into the clown category just like Jim Cramer on CNBC.
Nothing there worth my time!