Net worth before you can "afford" $500 shoes?

Simple question:
In your opinion, what should a guy's liquid net worth be before he can "afford" $500 shoes? (Your answer is a number)
Conversely, below what level would your natural reaction to his $500 shoes be: What a jackass!

First, please note the use of quotations above.
This is not a literal question. (eg: When he has $500.01, duh!)
That said, $500.01 certainly is a valid answer.

I am using net worth and not salary because the latter can be a very weak gauge of one's financial solvency.
Free Cash Flow (FCF) paints a more direct picture.

I also deliberately picked the $500 threshhold, and not $300 for AE's, et al.
$500 is a different pricing paradigm entirely, and is probably 3 SD's over the average shoe expenditure.
At this level, one has deliberately groomed himself as a "serious shoe guy".

So, at what point does a guy have no business wearing $500 shoes, and be viewed as a fraud/idiot?

Alternate question: What other criteria would you use in deciding whether a guy can afford $500 shoes?

..

As you stated, it depends more on his cash-flow than his LNW. After all bills are paid, investments are invested and savings are saved, you would need to have about $1000 in expendable income of which half could go to shoes.

Reevolving, you are an awful poster.

you can afford $500 when you have $500.

Originally Posted by edmorel

Click to expand...

Reevolving, you are an awful poster.

Why? This could lead to an interesting discussion. As a male prostitue, I'd much more readily invest in quality slim fit pants, than expensive shoes.

Well you would need enough discretionary income to pay for the $50 a jar Conditioner, the $30 a can polish, the $100-300 resole every year or two, $100 for Galoshes, then those costs (including the shoe) x4 for a minimal rotation.

When you can wear them without fear of ruining them.

Originally Posted by DerekS

Click to expand...

you can afford $500 when you have $500.

Clearly this is the answer. I would say he is a jackass if he has less than $500 and he buys $500 shoes.

Depends on other expenditures in addition to his cash flow. I could 'afford' $500 shoes if I dumped my girlfriend, lived on ramen and moved back in with my parents.

Originally Posted by JGloger

Click to expand...

Depends on other expenditures in addition to his cash flow. I could 'afford' $500 shoes if I dumped my girlfriend, lived on ramen and moved back in with my parents.

Sounds like a great life.

Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH

Click to expand...

Clearly this is the answer. I would say he is a jackass if he has less than $500 and he buys $500 shoes.

Haven't you heard? Credit is the new cash.

Originally Posted by viator

Click to expand...

When you can wear them without fear of ruining them.

Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH

Click to expand...

Clearly this is the answer. I would say he is a jackass if he has less than $500 and he buys $500 shoes.
First, please note the use of quotations above. This is not a literal question. That said, $500.01 certainly is a valid answer.

I'm sorry but this is not a good question as there is no answer to it. It's like dividing by zero.

If you have access to food and housing and $500 on top of that and you want to spend $500 on shoes then I think you can afford them.

Net worth is pretty meaningless unless you are talking about retiring or becoming disabled.

FA

Originally Posted by JGloger

Click to expand...

Depends on other expenditures in addition to his cash flow. I could 'afford' $500 shoes if I dumped my girlfriend, lived on ramen and moved back in with my parents.

Clearly, it's a worthy sacrifice.