4 ms·
Yes, it's a very bad deal. She's 20 years old, figuring the chances of death and the valuation, she's lost the vast majority of the actual value, and the guys w
by IkmoIkmo 11y ago
Yes, it's a very bad deal. She's 20 years old, figuring the chances of death and the valuation, she's lost the vast majority of the actual value, and the guys who bought the settlement from her can make upwards of $1m of profit over the next 35 years, above and beyond what they paid for it.
It's not 'value'. If you have $3k annual income for the next 50 years and I offer you $100k for it, it's not value, it's total bs. It becomes value ones the valuations are close. Plenty of investors will give you value, and if put on an open market, you'd get that value. But this happened due to predatory business, calling people who are mentally challenged and offering an awful rate. I'd have given her double and I'd still make a profit of more than half a million dollars, investors would line up to give her even more than that.
If she'd been given a market rate, then yes it'd be good value to an ordinary person who has this preference. Although the whole point is that she wasn't because she's a vulnerable person with no financial sense who's better off receiving $1k for the next 35 years, than receiving pennies on the dollar in a lumpsum $60k which lasts her for 5 years if she'd be frugal, and likely won't last because shitty friends/family will exploit a mentally damaged person who's known to have just received $60k.
Even for an ordinary person, this just makes no sense. After all, you can apply this type of discounting to any payment stream. Take your salary for example.
I mean let's scale the numbers to a salary that makes sense to some of you. The average payment the woman in the article was getting in those 35 years is about $1.4k or say $17k per year, and she's forgoing them for $63k.
Now let's quadruple those numbers to get to a salary some of you might get, about $70k per year, forgone for a one-time $250k. Imagine that $70k is your salary.
Now who here is willing to sell/forgo their GUARANTEED, 0 hours of work, $70k annual salary for the next 35 years, for $250k? Absolutely nobody, not a single soul.
There's no way you can call that 'value', until someone offers you a few million dollars at least. And if you had such a salary, guaranteed, without any hours of work, because someone poisoned you with lead and you're brain damaged... it's NOT okay for someone to convince you to forgo it for $250k over steak. That's predatory, unethical, harmful business. Especially when that person is DEPENDENT on that money. Yeah stealing $50 billion from Buffet is one thing, or even $1m from you or me. We can actually work and still live and thrive and enjoy life even if all our wealth is stolen. But she's brain damaged, can't work and can't live alone. She's the type of person that without $1k a month will end up homeless or on welfare or a combination of both, 20 years down the line.
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago>It's not 'value'. If you have $3k annual income for the next 50 years and I offer you $100k for it, it's not value, it's total bs. Did you mean 3k monthly? Because if you meant annual, I'd take your offer.