Bugatti Chiron private unveling Vancouver

I think all that is BS, you show up with a bag full of cash they won't care if your kids at home are eating nothing but ramen LOL

 

I think all that is BS, you show up with a bag full of cash they won't care if your kids at home are eating nothing but ramen LOL

 

+1

I think all that is BS, you show up with a bag full of cash they won't care if your kids at home are eating nothing but ramen LOL

 

They want everyone to think that only billionaire jet setters own these cars...but the reality there's not enough of them that are interested enough in cars to move the entire production run. Cash is king and if you have it, they'll gladly take it.

I saw that but with $20 mil in the bank it wouldn't even be on my radar, I guess I am very conservative, I have few small self imposed set limits otherwise to be perfectly honest I would need 10 more garages

 

I wouldn't spend more than 5% of my net worth on depreciating, nonincome producing assets and/or frivolous purchases, cars, toys etc., in particular when you can't tax deduct it.

 

I wouldn't tap into investment funds in order to buy said "assets" I would/am only using off the top cream to play with the higher the cream the bigger the toys but that's just me maybe too conservative, at times I feel like I am but I always remind myself, I only have one ass for one seat and not many spare hours in a week maybe after I will get older and work less my attitude will change.

 

 

I am of the same mindset. Only exception IMO is if it is something you really, really, REALLY want, then you could make an exception as it's your only big toy, but even then, you still need to be able to comfortably afford it. Also one has to enjoy life of course as well, so splurges here and there are fine.

They want everyone to think that only billionaire jet setters own these cars...but the reality there's not enough of them that are interested enough in cars to move the entire production run. Cash is king and if you have it, they'll gladly take it.

 

Some who have private jets and yachts do not necessarily own them outright either, they finance them. After the 2008 crash, repossessions of such entities shot up big time.

I watched an EVO video where Henry was driving the Veyron. He said he spoke to one of the directors in bugatti and said to be invited to one of their new car showings you need a net worth of 500 million. Not sure if I believe that though, seems a bit high lol I've also read that the typical owner has 80 cars a 3 jets. Maybe the oil sheiks boost those numbers up.

 

 

That's completely absurd and not true.

On a side note, was speaking with with the Bugatti NA boss and 250 out of 500 cars have already been sold and the supposedly they've had a lot interest in the demo car.

Yeah I found that very hard to believe as well.

Some who have private jets and yachts do not necessarily own them outright either, they finance them. After the 2008 crash, repossessions of such entities shot up big time.

 

I have issues with this common misconception, just because you don't own something outright doesn't mean you can't afford it 10 times over, there are many situations where leasing makes a lot more sense financially. Tax deductions or incentives, convenience, your money are better parked somewhere else, etc. etc.

 

People think, oh if you have millions you can easily afford this, that and the other, the minute I see people making such comments, I know they don't know how money works or know how to make their money work for them.

 

Millions of dollars or billions in some instances come with equality sized problems and benefits, at those levels you don't deal in pennies anymore you deal at a level which reflects the value of what you are worth, life and business principles are the same but with few extra digits at the end, you have to hustle in the same manner, you have to be equally as smart and/or cautious. You get complacent you are gone, also making money is very easy, being able and/or smart enough to keep it is the challenging part.

 

Now if someone who is worth millions would go and buy a new Camry the story would be completely different for them but they generaly never do, that's where and how I came up with my "toys affordability formula" if the price of what I want relative to my passive income is as affordable to me as a Toyota Camry I consider myself in the position to spend it if not I will just have to work harder to get there, which is great because it creates another challenge and that's something you really need for motivating yourself because at some point you start to run out of things you can genuinely need or want and therefore motivation, I guess at that point you could start to work for love but love doesn't buy you Lambos so that's off the table for now

3,5mil net worth. I can sleep in the car or ditch and I can have a healty diet of water and air.

double

3,5mil net worth. I can sleep in the car or ditch and I can have a healty diet of water and air.

 

LOL I LOVE your style

It's a fantastic looking car. I saw one in Monaco this summer, it was in the Bugatti boutique there, the design and details on the car are mind blowing. It's so much better than the Veyron.

 

Regarding affordability, I personally take the Fortis approach, I don't ever spend on anything which I can't comfortably afford. Basically it must not affect my lifestyle or interfere with future plans or business. I'd buy one if I had an income of probably more than 10 mil a year, though I don't know how much more my lifestyle would change if I were in that income bracket... who knows... maybe even then I'd feel I can't afford it. Would love to be in that position at some point. At the moment the most I feel I can afford comfortably is my C63s (even felt guilty about that at 100k eur), so I'm pretty far away from the 10 mil a year or Chiron. Not to mention the costs of maintaining and insuring the Chiron which is probably another 300-350k a year, perhaps more, just insurance where I live would be at around 5% of the value of the car per year. Buying it would be the easy part, spending 300k a year just on one car.... you need pretty deep pockets. I guess the old adage "if you have to ask..." has never been more true than on the Chiron.

I have issues with this common misconception, just because you don't own something outright doesn't mean you can't afford it 10 times over, there are many situations where leasing makes a lot more sense financially. Tax deductions or incentives, convenience, your money are better parked somewhere else, etc. etc.

 

People think, oh if you have millions you can easily afford this, that and the other, the minute I see people making such comments, I know they don't know how money works or know how to make their money work for them.

 

Millions of dollars or billions in some instances come with equality sized problems and benefits, at those levels you don't deal in pennies anymore you deal at a level which reflects the value of what you are worth, life and business principles are the same but with few extra digits at the end, you have to hustle in the same manner, you have to be equally as smart and/or cautious. You get complacent you are gone, also making money is very easy, being able and/or smart enough to keep it is the challenging part.

 

Now if someone who is worth millions would go and buy a new Camry the story would be completely different for them but they generaly never do, that's where and how I came up with my "toys affordability formula" if the price of what I want relative to my passive income is as affordable to me as a Toyota Camry I consider myself in the position to spend it if not I will just have to work harder to get there, which is great because it creates another challenge and that's something you really need for motivating yourself because at some point you start to run out of things you can genuinely need or want and therefore motivation, I guess at that point you could start to work for love but love doesn't buy you Lambos so that's off the table for now

 

Good to know, thanks for the info.

I guess the old adage "if you have to ask..." has never been more true than on the Chiron.

 

Since we are also discussing money, is that old adage really true? The reason I ask is I had read that it is a misconception that if you ask what something costs that is clearly expensive, that you probably can't afford it, that that is what many non-wealthy people believe. The reason being that if you don't ask, you could seriously get ripped off by the seller if they see you have lots of money.

 

 

Since we are also discussing money, is that old adage really true? The reason I ask is I had read that it is a misconception that if you ask what something costs that is clearly expensive, that you probably can't afford it, that that is what many non-wealthy people believe. The reason being that if you don't ask, you could seriously get ripped off by the seller if they see you have lots of money.

 

It is a figure of speech. Words have nuances, subtle meanings, put together in phrases, they sometimes express more than their meaning taken separately. I'm surprised that I, as a non native English speaker, have to explain this to a native English speaker. What I meant by that figure of speech, translated into vulgar English, is that you really need "fcuk you money" to own a Chiron. Do you feel enlightened? Allow me to give you some more food for thought: "A candle loses none of its light by lighting another". Figure it out.

It's a fantastic looking car. I saw one in Monaco this summer, it was in the Bugatti boutique there, the design and details on the car are mind blowing. It's so much better than the Veyron.

 

Regarding affordability, I personally take the Fortis approach, I don't ever spend on anything which I can't comfortably afford. Basically it must not affect my lifestyle or interfere with future plans or business. I'd buy one if I had an income of probably more than 10 mil a year, though I don't know how much more my lifestyle would change if I were in that income bracket... who knows... maybe even then I'd feel I can't afford it. Would love to be in that position at some point. At the moment the most I feel I can afford comfortably is my C63s (even felt guilty about that at 100k eur), so I'm pretty far away from the 10 mil a year or Chiron. Not to mention the costs of maintaining and insuring the Chiron which is probably another 300-350k a year, perhaps more, just insurance where I live would be at around 5% of the value of the car per year. Buying it would be the easy part, spending 300k a year just on one car.... you need pretty deep pockets. I guess the old adage "if you have to ask..." has never been more true than on the Chiron.

 

Wealth/car purchasing ratio is non linear.

 

Hard to justify a $3.5 million purchase on a car if it can theoretically be worth nothing. At what wealth value is it ok to lose $3.4 million on a $3.5 million "asset"? Throw it in a fire and burn it?

 

That's what separates it from real estate as Fortis describes which never truly loses that much intrinsic value, plus the tax deductions.

 

Some of this applies to $30+ million homes where you're in rarefied territory and stand to lose a big amount of that value if you sell it at the wrong time. How many $80 million super homes ever get back even close to the purchase price? Very few it seems.

 

So the ratios definitely shoot up as the wealth goes up.

 

At the same time hard to imagine most people needing a $1 million net worth to own a $50k car. You almost never see that.

I have issues with this common misconception, just because you don't own something outright doesn't mean you can't afford it 10 times over, there are many situations where leasing makes a lot more sense financially. Tax deductions or incentives, convenience, your money are better parked somewhere else, etc. etc.

 

People think, oh if you have millions you can easily afford this, that and the other, the minute I see people making such comments, I know they don't know how money works or know how to make their money work for them.

 

Millions of dollars or billions in some instances come with equality sized problems and benefits, at those levels you don't deal in pennies anymore you deal at a level which reflects the value of what you are worth, life and business principles are the same but with few extra digits at the end, you have to hustle in the same manner, you have to be equally as smart and/or cautious. You get complacent you are gone, also making money is very easy, being able and/or smart enough to keep it is the challenging part.

 

Now if someone who is worth millions would go and buy a new Camry the story would be completely different for them but they generaly never do, that's where and how I came up with my "toys affordability formula" if the price of what I want relative to my passive income is as affordable to me as a Toyota Camry I consider myself in the position to spend it if not I will just have to work harder to get there, which is great because it creates another challenge and that's something you really need for motivating yourself because at some point you start to run out of things you can genuinely need or want and therefore motivation, I guess at that point you could start to work for love but love doesn't buy you Lambos so that's off the table for now

 

This is a man whose head is screwed on straight!

 

Wealth/car purchasing ratio is non linear.

 

Hard to justify a $3.5 million purchase on a car if it can theoretically be worth nothing. At what wealth value is it ok to lose $3.4 million on a $3.5 million "asset"? Throw it in a fire and burn it?

 

That's what separates it from real estate as Fortis describes which never truly loses that much intrinsic value, plus the tax deductions.

 

Some of this applies to $30+ million homes where you're in rarefied territory and stand to lose a big amount of that value if you sell it at the wrong time. How many $80 million super homes ever get back even close to the purchase price? Very few it seems.

 

So the ratios definitely shoot up as the wealth goes up.

 

At the same time hard to imagine most people needing a $1 million net worth to own a $50k car. You almost never see that.

A Chiron is a toy and so is an 80 million home. When covering a basic need for shelter or transport, its acceptable to spend a larger percentage of your income/worth. How many people who have a 300-400k house are actually worth more than their house? For most the house is their biggest asset.

 

So yeah it becomes ok imo to spend 3.5 mil on a toy when your life is simply exactly the same with or without it, I guess. At least that's my rationale.

It's all relative anyway. Just move the decimal point to the left and you can apply the logic to any income.

 

 

It is a figure of speech. Words have nuances, subtle meanings, put together in phrases, they sometimes express more than their meaning taken separately. I'm surprised that I, as a non native English speaker, have to explain this to a native English speaker. What I meant by that figure of speech, translated into vulgar English, is that you really need "fcuk you money" to own a Chiron. Do you feel enlightened? Allow me to give you some more food for thought: "A candle loses none of its light by lighting another". Figure it out.

 

Well my understanding is that it actually was not a figure of speech, which was why I asked. Also it was not meant as a criticism, just a question, so relax.

Well my understanding is that it actually was not a figure of speech, which was why I asked. Also it was not meant as a criticism, just a question, so relax.

 

It can't be anything other than a figure of speech, think about it logically, how would you know how much to write a cheque for, transfer, put in a paper bag unless you actually ask what the price is?

 

From what I can see the expression is mostly used when it comes to frivolous purchases, I deal with large corporations which can easily afford 10 times over what I am selling to them and I can assure you none of them ever placed a blank signed cheque on my desk, yes in some instances they say " just send us an invoice" I do that myself a lot of times but the value of such services is implied guided by certain market values and trends and it's mutually understood and accepted.

 

In short it's like somebody saying to you please get me a can of coke, they will not expect a $10k bill for it, they generally know the cost of said item, it's a very comfortable and affordable purchase any price fluctuations would be so insignificant that it is not even worth thinking about it.

 

The swing would be classed as cost of convenience and/or a tip for the service you've provided.

 

 

This is a man whose head is screwed on straight!

 

Thank you for the kind words, my greatest challenge is to show restrain and you guys aren't helping LOL

 

 

 

At the same time hard to imagine most people needing a $1 million net worth to own a $50k car. You almost never see that.

 

 

IMO it is irresponsible to buy a car of that value without an asset position at least there. But I guess that's why there are a lot of people living beyond their means. Ballers on a budget if you will.

It can't be anything other than a figure of speech, think about it logically, how would you know how much to write a cheque for, transfer, put in a paper bag unless you actually ask what the price is?

 

From what I can see the expression is mostly used when it comes to frivolous purchases, I deal with large corporations which can easily afford 10 times over what I am selling to them and I can assure you none of them ever placed a blank signed cheque on my desk, yes in some instances they say " just send us an invoice" I do that myself a lot of times but the value of such services is implied guided by certain market values and trends and it's mutually understood and accepted.

 

In short it's like somebody saying to you please get me a can of coke, they will not expect a $10k bill for it, they generally know the cost of said item, it's a very comfortable and affordable purchase any price fluctuations would be so insignificant that it is not even worth thinking about it.

 

The swing would be classed as cost of convenience and/or a tip for the service you've provided.

 

I see