[–] MinorLeakage 0 points 19 points 19 points (+19|-0) ago
Always take a sure thing over a chance at something better. Anything else is crazy I tell you!
[–] Whizwicky 1 point 15 points 16 points (+16|-1) ago
100 million. If I lose, it's not a huge deal, because nothing in my life changes. If I took the million, I could invest it and pay down some debt, but nothing in my life would really change, I still have to show up to work the next day, and I'd probably regret not taking a chance for the next 60-70 years.
[–] ForgotMyName 0 points 7 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago
Then you would have just blown 100 million instead of one. It's the same reason lottery winners end up broke - they suck at managing money. If they were good at it, they wouldn't be playing the lottery.
[–] TremorAcePV 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
I still have to show up to work the next day.
Bro, annuities are great "For life" things. So for example, if I had $50K, I could invest it in an annuity and get paid $200ish per month for life.
If it scales, which I don't remember if it does, $500K would be $2000 per month. $1Mil would be $4000 per month.
$48,000 a year for life means no work necessary. :D Even then, if you did work, it'd be great supplemental income.
[–] brucethemoose 0 points 11 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago (edited ago)
That's easy.
Sell the $100 million gamble to a rich investor for $40 million, walk away.
[–] goatsandbros 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
An investor this rich would probably be smart enough to offer you $2 million (take it or leave it).
[–] brucethemoose ago
It's a competitive market. Just ask someone else, play them off each other.
[–] SocratesOP 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Don't know why everyone would take the milli. It really doesn't go as far as it used to. With the other option I have a 50% chance of retiring before I hit 30. If I don't win it, then life hasn't changed for me. Things aren't so bad now, so the 50% chance is a much more lucrative offer. On average, people would get 50mil from the latter option, while you can only get 1/50 of that with the first.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
[–] SocratesOP 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Are you assuming 100% of people who invest their million will exceed the 100mil? If anything you've now traded a concrete 50% to bank on your ability to invest and multiply that million (which will be significantly less than a mil after taxes). I know - and I hope you know too - that many times your business ventures don't turn out "all profit" like you planned them. The investors making real money have a lot more to work with than a measly 1mil. To always come out in the green you need to be a big fish now, or have good luck. I think I'd rather take the 50% chance at an early lavish retirement.
Just my perspective.
[–] oedipusaurus_rex ago
I don't want to retire. I love what I do for a living. A million bucks is more money than I know what to do with, to say nothing of 100 million. It makes more sense to me to take the million than to gamble with that much money.
[–] SocratesOP ago
It's not gambling since you didn't put any money up against it. It is just a chance. Obviously you don't have to retire, that's just a personal plus I see out of the 100mil.
If the trade off was you are either broke or you get the 100mil then I could see how this is gambling, but not getting it would mean you keep working at the job you say you love. Doesn't sound so bad to me
[–] [deleted] 0 points 24 points 24 points (+24|-0) ago
[–] flarflar 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I know I would too knows my luck I would have to hand over my life