Two outstanding mortgages and a single stream of revenue (that will certainly diminish over time) is hardly better off than just having a high paying corporate job where you don't have to go into the office very often.
Now, to point out why it is even more comparable than what you get out of it, I could liquidate those assets and have FU money (for want of a more elegant term) in a relatively short time, but as I wrote I'd rather have cash flow than cash so this is a conscious decision.
Weight Watchers and a few others have angled after the domain name for serious cash but I'd rather hold on to it for now since I'm better at managing my money and my free time when I have less of the former.
If I ever decide to change that I will probably arrange for an auction house (probably moniker) to sell off the domain and/or the rest of the assets.
That's a long way off though.
The value of those assets outweighs my debts 20 to 1 or better, in the mean time, by not liquidating the assets I've managed to make more on them than I would have ever made if I had sold out years ago. Sometimes selling is not the right option. The downside is that you have to maintain your assets, but in my case that is probably less work than it would be to maintain a pile of money.
Also, the single stream of revenues is the one associated with one website, in one corporation. I own three of those and quite a large number of websites and have a stake in a few others as well as some investments in reasonably successful startups.
On another note, I mentioned my divorce in passing, FYI, I left all the easily liquidated assets (two debt free houses and a bunch of money) with my ex wife (voluntarily) because I think my income potential is higher than hers if it should come to that. Our son lives with her, I figure if it makes his and her life more secure that's the right thing to do. So I already was out of debt and chose to go back in to it out of my own free will in the fairly sure knowledge that it would be a temporary situation.
Recently I bought back the half of the company that she got as part of the settlement as well so now the situation has slightly changed from the way it was before and I still need to work out all the implications of the change.
I admire your ability to generate passive income. Very few can do that without actively working every day. Don't discount the benefits of cashing out should your revenue begin to dwindle. You can still get the benefits of cash flow vs. cash without owning a business.
I know, but it might take a different mentality than mine to pull that off successfully. Less money to spend keeps me from doing stupid stuff.
I don't think it's right to say there are competing definitions, as if they're both equally right. I think there's a correct definition a) "set for life" and a wrong one b) "set for now". These are two very different concepts, so using the same term is causing confusion.
Someone in this thread said "I have FU money for a year", which makes absolutely no sense. This shows how misusing the term can cause confusion.
If you live (relatively speaking) from hand to mouth, and you walk into a negotiation for a small amount of work, it doesn't take much money to be able to say No and mean it; enough money to last a week may be FU money.
It might make sense after all, I can think of several situations in which that is perfectly valid.
For instance, if you have only a year left to live (an extraordinary amount of people die every year, fully 1.6% of those alive today will not be alive next year).
The younger you are the more money you'll need to last you 'forever' (or at least, until that guy with the hoodie and the scythe shows up). I'm 45 so if you're considerably younger than I am you'll probably need more of it. But having 'FU' money for a decade in your prime and then having to go back to work when you're say 55 is probably a lot better than the reverse, retiring at 65 when you're older and physically less capable seems like the wrong way around to me. Get some mileage out of your life while you can enjoy it to the fullest.
The common theme among all definitions of FU money seems to be freedom from fearing we'll go hungry and relief from risk averse behavior like holding on to an unfulfilling job.
Is FU money more satisfying when we've earned it ourselves rather than winning it (inheritance, lottery, marriage, fraud)?
I hear so, and anyway that is my only possible channel of ever having that much money. But as far as I know, people who inherit money, win the lottery, marry into money, or defraud people of money don't feel bad about having the money.