What's better? $1.5 million lump sum or $100K per year for life?

[jro9999]

1.5 million lump sum

fukk waiting years to make real money

i'd take the 1.5mill and immediately start trying to make more, dedicate my life to learning finance/investments and then reap the benefits

[MrNippers]

1. The stock market, on average, increases in value 10% a year.

2. Way to take the higher number, 75k a year would be 5% dividends - you can go buy some solid MRK right now and make that.

3. Most preferred stock pays 7-11% dividends.

Please refer to this chart:



The only thing more dangerous than misinformation is the mass distribution of misinformation

[welchyy]

$1.5 mil because of the time-value of money and the investment opportunities. You could make a hell of a lot more in 1 year off of 1.5 mill then you could off of 100k.

Anyone that's taken a basic finance class should know that.

Also, anyone would know that with great investment comes great risk.

[SipNPiz]

u retards dont realize you'll use the 100k each year and not build any wealth from it, buying depreciating cars and making mortgage payments doesn't build wealth. 1.5m is a good amount of capital to invest, buy verizon stock and get 7% dividends and buy some futures

[hideyowives]

you could take 100k today and then get hit by a bus tomorrow...


1.5m for me...auto Millionaire and invest in rest.

[rotatoo]

Does that 100k per year factory in inflation?

[09BlackSS]

Would the governement take half of the 1.5 million like they do in the US?

No, lottery winnings are not taxed in Canada. The purchase of the lottery tickets are taxed individually.

One other thing to point out is that most ontario lotteries are not for the rest of your life. They put disclaimers stating that life is classified as a maximum of 25 years. Read the fine print.

Also personally I would take the 100k/yr and limit myself. I know if I was given 1.5million I would be broke within 2 years by wasteful spending.

[jjh4]

well a dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow....really depends on what the market is doing and projected inflation.

if there was a monetary/fiscal collapse in 10 years, $100k might buy you a loaf of bread [read Zimbabwe inflation]

really depends.

assuming everything went well, id go the 100k a year route as I would expect to live for greater than 15 years...I feel it would be easier to budget.

Theres a lot of different economic factors that play into a decision like that though...Im not smart enough touch on all of them

[cannadian]

Please refer to this chart:



The only thing more dangerous than misinformation is the mass distribution of misinformation

Is that just the average annual dividends, or the average annual growth?

http://www.google.com/finance?q=INDEXDJX:.DJI#

In 1970 the Dow was like 1000, in 2000 it was like 10000. Maybe my 10% mark was off, but in 30 years that's still a 1000% increase.

Even if it's only 5%, 5% of 1.5M is still 75k.

[txx]

Time Value Money.

The time value of money is the value of money figuring in a given amount of interest earned over a given amount of time. The time value of money is the central concept in finance theory.

For example, 100 dollars of today's money invested for one year and earning 5 percent interest will be worth 105 dollars after one year. Therefore, 100 dollars paid now or 105 dollars paid exactly one year from now both have the same value to the recipient who assumes 5 percent interest; using time value of money terminology, 100 dollars invested for one year at 5 percent interest has a future value of 105 dollars.[1] This notion dates at least to Martín de Azpilcueta (1491–1586) of the School of Salamanca.

The method also allows the valuation of a likely stream of income in the future, in such a way that the annual incomes are discounted and then added together, thus providing a lump-sum "present value" of the entire income stream.

[marcFE]

Is that just the average annual dividends, or the average annual growth?


In 1970 the Dow was like 1000, in 2000 it was like 10000. Maybe my 10% mark was off, but in 30 years that's still a 1000% increase.

Even if it's only 5%, 5% of 1.5M is still 75k.

Please stop posting



Thanks

[Montre]

1.5 Mil invest > 100K

[whatkey]

after taxes the 1.5m is like 800k. No thanks..? Consider your risk/reward... 100k/yr and a job or some other type of income and you're living large. Why add unnecessary risk to the equation? Reasons why most people who win the lottery end up broke.

[cannadian]

Please stop posting



Thanks

Convincing argument, chap. I supposed 5% of 1.5M isn't 75k?

[racketteer]

u retards dont realize you'll use the 100k each year and not build any wealth from it, buying depreciating cars and making mortgage payments doesn't build wealth. 1.5m is a good amount of capital to invest, buy verizon stock and get 7% dividends and buy some futures

an extra 100k to invest per year on top of your income would leave you with a massive nest egg if you don't spend like a dumbass

[fecalneek]

That 1.5 mil will seem like nothing after taxes. And it's not really enough to say, "I'm going to invest this and make more $$$" you could easily blow through that amount if you don't know what you're doing.

[bodybuilder127]

inb4 all the "market savvy" miscers claim that they could make $100 million out of 1.5 mil.

$100K/year, without a doubt.

If you know what you're doing in the market and can average 10% a year(obviously up and down years), you'd earn 150,000 a year on interest.

[Montre]

you could take 100k today and then get hit by a bus tomorrow...


1.5m for me...auto Millionaire and invest in rest.

How does investing it make it any different than 100K a year. If you get hit buy a bus you still have unspent 1.5 million in the bank.

Unless you were planning on leaving it to kids or somethin

[09BlackSS]

after taxes the 1.5m is like 800k. No thanks..? Consider your risk/reward... 100k/yr and a job or some other type of income and you're living large. Why add unnecessary risk to the equation? Reasons why most people who win the lottery end up broke.

OP is talking about an Ontario lottery which is not taxed on payout. Posted above with additional details.

[Gunin4twohunded]

Does that 100k per year factory in inflation?

Doubtful.

[Godfrd824]

I'd take the 1.5, move to the Caribbean where most banks give at least 9% returns, and ball out of control.

[bbowsh54]

$100K per year for life, obviously....

Decision becomes harder as you get older.... And depending on health.

[soliduparrow]

if you invest all $100k every year and get 6% return then after 15 years you will have $2,680,918
if you invest the $1.5 mill then after 15 years you will have $3,681,140


$100k every year after 30 years at 6% will be $9,014,734
$1.5 mill after 30 years will be $9,033,862

$100k-45 years $24,558,511
$1.5 mill 45 years =$22,169,944


So after 30 years the $100k will start to out earn the $1.5 mill, but this is assuming that the agency doing the payouts still exists or hasnt gone bankrupt after those thirty years. If this was a computer simulation where you knew the agency would still esxist after thirty years and you knew that you would live longer than 30 years, the $100k would probably be best. in real life terms, you miss out on too much because you will probably die in the next 30 years and you will miss out on the opportunity cost of not having the lump sum.

[AsManThinketh]

They say making your first million is the hardest, therefore I'd take the 1.5 mil.

[IVEverLow]

inb4 all the "market savvy" miscers claim that they could make $100 million out of 1.5 mil.

$100K/year, without a doubt.

Um, give that $1.5m to a good broker and there should be 0 problems getting $100k returns/year. You don't have to know much about anything.

[hideyowives]

How does investing it make it any different than 100K a year. If you get hit buy a bus you still have unspent 1.5 million in the bank.

Unless you were planning on leaving it to kids or somethin

Arent we all doing it for the future of our kids??

you will accrue more interest if you have 1.5mil vs. only 100k.

you will never know what will happen in 15 years...Again, that bus could be around the corner waiting for you.


Is it possible in 15 years or more???

[Criollo]

dont worry guys, im a business major

[RMV]

100k a year fo sure

[EternallyMiscd]

At a 5% ROR break-even is around 25 years where 100k/yr option is better beyond that. 6% is 32 years. 7% is over 40 years.

This is of course assuming the entire amount is invested, when in reality most people will blow a good portion of the 1.5M lump sum right away.

I would take the $1.5M because I can control my spending. Most should take the $100k/yr.

[saiyar1]

The answer is 100k for life. ANYTHING ELSE IS WRONG.

You fuking morons need to shut up about investing the 1.5mm in stocks. You are acting like that return is risk free. You need to discount cash dividends every year at a much higher discount rate than ~2% risk free rate because of the risk of dividends being cut AND losing your principal if the stock price goes down. Go read a damn book, idiots.


(assuming it's people around our age... seniors are different)