6 ms·
That's not a lot for a wealth managament firm.
by pid-1 4y ago
That's not a lot for a wealth managament firm.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago> not a lot for a wealth managament firm Not sure why downvoted. Many private banks have $1 to 10mm minimums.
- Symbiote 4y agoIt was 21 years ago. The figure on the website now is £1M.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago> figure on the website now is £1M OP’s point still stands. That’s middle of ground for a private bank. Far from “most exclusive.”
- mytailorisrich 4y agoI don't think this is the sort of bank where you can just show up with 1m and the staff will bend over backwards to open your account. For instance, if the Royal family banks there it means they think the bank will never ever make headlines for the wrong reasons or at all.
- jquery 4y agoIt just made the headlines for the wrong reason…
- kube-system 4y ago“The headlines” typically refer to coverage in a mainstream publication, not a post on HN.
- qzw 4y agoRight, because the Royal Family themselves never ever make headlines for the wrong reasons.
- RC_ITR 4y agoIn practice, if you’re over 40, the limit is closer to $5-10m USD at anywhere good, but the idea of banks being “exclusive” is sort of out of date. Anyone will take your cash if there’s enough of it.
- qzw 4y agoProof of stake before it was cool.
- ricardobeat 4y ago£500k in 2001 was ~720k USD, or, adjusted for inflation, $1.2 million in todays money.
- boringg 4y agoI'd agree with you - that's barely exclusive in the world of exclusive fund management. It's table stakes.