That makes sense, although of course most people with significant assets pay for professional money management (there are several "tiers" of this kind of servic

That makes sense, although of course most people with significant assets pay for professional money management (there are several "tiers" of this kind of service, e.g. wealth managers) without actually having a family office. The tl;dr seems to be "when it saves you time/effort," vs. "here is a financial threshold where a family office is more financially efficient than a traditional wealth manager." Right?