MovieChat Forums > Brewster's Millions (1985) Discussion > Wimp Clause

Wimp Clause

posted 15 years ago by crunchman74
43 replies | jump to latest

I got to ask so how many people would be tempted or take the wimp clause of the million dollars instead of the 30 million to spend in 30 days then the 300 million ??

I myself I say give me the million and I would be happy because all that stress then if you fail you end up with nothing. I would rather take the million put it in a high intrest account, which I have heard can be 12% which of course that is $120,000.00 and even if they took half or taxes that still leaves me with $60,000.00 give it to me that is $5000.00 a month I am use to living off of $1000.00. I would either buy some cd's or invest some, might be just me though.

Signature:

I Will Take A Chocolate Coke Please!

[–] msennel1 14 years ago

First off, the wimp clause math is very different from what people are posting. Today, you'd be extraordinarily lucky to even find 10% interest on any asset, so 100k in interest would be tough. However, in 1985 he was offered 24% interest, bringing the total interest value up to $240k a year. Double that for inflation, that's 480k. Split in half for taxes that's a guaranteed $240k a year. If you accidentally drop a penny between the couches, you leave yourself with nothing, according to the rules. Unless you extended 60mil today to credit to wind up spending like 80mil to cover your ass, the risk/reward ratio is far too high (0/300,000,000). $240k a year after taxes is enough for me to retire at 25 to a beach house in California and never worry about money again. Definitely taking $240k a year.

[–] fistoffury 14 years ago

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

9. Buy a Cray supercomputer, turn off the virus protection, and visit tons of porn websites. Before long you'll have so many infections that the thing will be worthless.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

That might be destroying something of inherent value so you might not be able to do that without losing.

[–] msennel1 14 years ago

I feel like the fastest way to blow it all would be to just spend a month at the bunny ranch.

[–] mcfly-31 14 years ago

But then you come away (pun intended) with an array of STDs that kill you within a year, thus the $30 mil is worthless to you.

Anyway, the divorce one wouldn't work because of how it usually takes around six months for a divorce to finalize.

Another thread said -- to adjust for the times -- that the wimp clause would be 10 mil. That's too much money to live comfortably on the rest of your life (even if you were in your late 20s, say), esp. with investments that appreciate. 1 mil would still be a good halfway point between stinking rich and kinda.

But to answer...yeah, I'd go for it. In this day and age of even more indulgent things to blow dough on, should be easy. Even if it was 50 some-odd mil.

"If I had ya where I wanted ya, they'd be pumpin your ass full of formaldehyde!"

[–] msennel1 13 years ago

haha there has never been a reported case of an STD at the bunny ranch. They're excessively sterile there.

[–] ShangriLaDeeDa 13 years ago

Speaking of spending your money at the Bunny Ranch, I don't think you would even come close to spending the money in time if you spent the entire month there...

Let's say you give each "person" there 10,000 a pop (so to speak), and you have two at a time. I don't think you could pop more than 4 - 6 times a day!... Let's go with the high estimate:

10,000 x 2 = 20,000 x 6 = 120,000/day x 30 days = 3.6 million.

I think buying AD space on TV so promote lavish parties with high end rockstars in attendance would be the way to go... Rent out Cowboys Stadium, and have free attendance to see Aerosmith, the Who, Paul McCartney one night, Jay-Z, Kanye West, and Alicia Keys another... And so on... You would be broke in a couple of weeks!

In Rockstar We Trust

[–] luiz4200 13 years ago

I'd take the wimp clause and put the one million in a savings account. Where I live, I'd get at least five thousand per month from interest. Or, provided I can tell people about having a condition as long as I don't tell which condition it is, I'd use a part of the 30 million to investigate the law firm and be sure they wouldn't embezzle the charity money. Who am I kidding? Better be a wimp with a million dollars than a risk-taker with nada.

[–] nywilson 13 years ago

I think I'd take the Wimp Clause. the "no assets" and "no destroying" conditions would get you everytime. Plus keeping receipts for everything he spent is crazier. You know damn well more than half would get lost in the shuffle, and they would be quick to discredit you without the receipt. Too many things can go wrong.

[–] zeeboe82 13 years ago

I'd also accept the wimp clause. I'd be happy with one million dollars.

[–] bgva 13 years ago

I'd wimp out...with a million I could tithe, pay my student loans/car/credit cards off, and put a good chunk in savings, maybe collect a little interest. Oh, and buy a house. :-)

I'd rather take the sure thing, considering my chances of seeing that kind of money ever again are slim to none.

Besides, I'd lose my mind trying to abide by all the rules. :-P

Oh stewardess...I speak jive.

[–] the_bamboo_spear 12 years ago

I'd take the "wimp clause". I'm not a greedy guy or a big spender. That amount of money would easily cover all my plans.

"Two tigers cannot live on the same mountain"

[–] estcst-3 12 years ago

But the wimp clause would make a boring film.

More seriously, you'd probably lose about half the money in the first year from taxes. It would have to be a million after taxes in this case. And I'm not sure where you're going to get a relatively safe investment that pays anywhere close to 12%, certainly nothing like a savings account of a CD.

Given the circumstances of how Monty spends his money I wonder what the boundaries of spending really are. My attempt to win would be to pay 30,000,001 for a hotel room for 28 days with unlimited room service. Sure, it's boring but Monty overpaid for hotel rooms. Maybe not on the same level as me but he didn't pay the going market rate for the rooms.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] frank-bertelsen 10 years ago

This whole plot is very badly thought out.

Instead of taking the one million dollars to spend as he pleases, he can just take the 30 million dollars. Deliberately failing the job gives him 30 million instead of only one million.

Aside from that, it is the simplest task in the world to spend 30 million without having anything of value left. He can hire anyone, for any job, for any amount of time, and pay them 30 million dollars in salary. Stop any stanger on the street, ask them to go and buy you an ice cream, and pay them 30 million for their trouble. Problem solved.

He does in fact hire people in the move for salaries like $10,000 and $5,000. Why doesn't he just offer them $30,000,000 in salary?

[–] cabal24 10 years ago

Instead of taking the one million dollars to spend as he pleases, he can just take the 30 million dollars. Deliberately failing the job gives him 30 million instead of only one million.

I think thats incorrect. I always assumed If he had any money leftover, he has to give it back and it goes with the rest of the $300 million to the law firm.

He does in fact hire people in the move for salaries like $10,000 and $5,000. Why doesn't he just offer them $30,000,000 in salary?

Because you have to get value for your money. It has to be reasonable to the executor. You can somewhat over pay. In fact, it is expected. But you cant just give out a million dollars to every random security guard.