The median cost of a wedding is somewhere around $18,000 according to TheKnot.com while the median net worth is around $57,000. In other words, the median wedding cost / net worth ratio is around 1/3.
Mr. Parker's wedding costs were around 1/168th of his net worth. It wasn't extravagant by that measure.
>Mr. Parker's wedding costs were around 1/168th of his net worth. It wasn't extravagant by that measure.
That's a silly measure, thought, because it would imply that a $1 billion dollar wedding for a $3 billion dollar net worth guy would not be "extravagant".
The costs are not tied to the net worth, they are about sitting so many people, feeding them, closing the venue, the flowers, photographer etc. Poorer people make do with less expensive restaurants and venues, and richer people go for more expensive. Still, there's only so much you can spend of a venue, food, wine, etc before it becomes extravagant.
Similarly, a guy that makes $100 million per year does not eat meals that are 2500 times more costly than those of a guy that makes $40.000 a year.
If he did, that would put those meals in the 25.000-50.000 dollars per meal region. Which would be extravagant by any measure.
Agreed, though I suspect that the median net worth of the general population and the median net worth of people when they are married are likely different.
The median cost of a wedding is somewhere around $18,000 according to TheKnot.com while the median net worth is around $57,000. In other words, the median wedding cost / net worth ratio is around 1/3.
Mr. Parker's wedding costs were around 1/168th of his net worth. It wasn't extravagant by that measure.