The 50/5 Split
Kathryn has been the primary earner in our family since we started living together. She makes a living as a highly skilled and respected screenwriter while I have dedicated myself to moon shots. Since I started working at the hamburger restaurant I've been giving Kathryn half of what I make as a symbol of my appreciation for her support,
As we start on a new year, full of new possibilities, we have talked about formalizing our finances in a 50/5 Split. The agreement we have discussed is that for all of 2025, I will hand over 50% of anything I make to Kathryn in exchange for 5% of what she makes.
While a little back of the napkin regression analysis shows that I would benefit more from this arrangement, we are both expecting this to be a banner year for me. Having already booked a speaking gig (thank you to NM!) and looking forward to the launch of some bigger projects, there is a chance that Kathryn will come out ahead (which is to say, I would in some small way be able to offer her some ROI for her long running support).
But also by guaranteeing 5% of her potential gains, I would create a financial safety net for myself and continue to shoot for the moon.
45 users voted with 6997 shares
The big missing piece of this question is a description of how household expenses are currently paid. Are you splitting rent equally? Are you "renting" from her? Is she paying the entire rent? How do you split food?
I am also confused about the positioning of this as a direct exchange of money, as opposed to a more "traditional" discussion about how household expenses are split.
I definitely need more clarity in these aspects before I could vote yes on this.
What's Kathryn's take on it? Is she into the idea?
we are a currently operating on a very "ad hoc" basis that has been in my favor, but i'm working on integrating more policies in the coming year. this idea obviously has kathryn's support but as a non-publicly traded person she wants to keep her finances private, so that is why i'm just using the percentages.
i agree with aaronpk.
also.. why not just agree to a split of just your hamburger earnings, and moonshots can have a different division.
My 2 cents here, btw is that you need to tokenize all of our shares onto a blockchain. much bigger likelihood for a moon shot
I don't think this sort of money focused thing will be good for your relationship. You should pay whatever you and Kathryn agree is a fair share based on your circumstances. If your ventures prove successful and you feel you can contribute more at a later date, then discuss it with her.
I'll vote to do it because it sounds like if you are talking about it at all that she feels like she has something coming to her, but this does not sound like the best use of funds.
@KevinGabbert This is a bit of a tangent, but I have been interested in the idea of tracking stocks for years and I think that would be a fun way to create some sort of blockchain derivative of K5M - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracking_stock
I agree with the need for more clarity on this one. Maybe an opportunity for mike to meet with the board to discuss the plan in more detail. The board could then follow up with a statement providing some additional info (and optionally a statement of support or opposition for the proposal)
The perfect storm of 1) money talk, 2) contracts, and 3) a wager!! But as others have offered, it's difficult to know how to vote given the impact on Kathryn and the relationship. If this will de-stress finances in the relationship, yes. If this has the potential to add stress to the relationship, no. Truly a tough call this one!
Something about this feels absolutely right. Setting math and logic aside, this feels like a win win situation. As long as this has a greater potential to strengthen your relationship than not, I’m all for it.
@mike is there any amount of earnings for either of you that you think would make one or both of you feel upset with this arrangement? Or more upset than you would have been in the absence of the arrangement?
@mike you can do that as one type of token, and also issue another type of token that is simply collectible, or an NFT awarded to current K5M owners (as "founders", etc) which can then be used as a way to unlock future rewards (like tickets to a possible movie about you one day, etc)
what is nice about blockchain is that it does all of the accounting for you. also, any NFTs or tokens you create have value in and of themselves due to rarity. The Trump admin has recently declared meme tokens as collectibles
Now that Trump is in office, the US Government will finally support blockchain and not seek to find ways to criminalize people that use it.
I'm suspicious of any life partnership situation where one party might claim to 'come out ahead'. Just doesn't land right. I'm against.
+1 to other calls for clarity on the mechanics of how this would work.
I appreciate the note above that this has Kathryn’s support.
@mike @KevinGabbert We could always do "wrapped" shares (would be transferred to a designated account on the site to hold the shares and a token/nft would be created 1:1, Would recommend a small fee to wrap/unwrap. when you unwrap token is burned and share is transferred to account)
Obviously some kind of kink thing. I'm voting yes.
@smikeyw We have talked about there being an "upper limit" on the amount as it might seem weird if the numbers got incredibly large, but even as I think about something like winning millions in the lottery I still think the matter holds. Also, if it matters, we've agreed this is net and not gross income.
Voting against because it's for all of 2025. If this was a monthlong experiment or something, I'd be in favor, just to try it out. But you have no idea how the rest of the year is going to go.
I'll give a comparison from a few years back. In late 2020, Warner Bros. announced that they would release all of their 2021 movies under a "hybrid" model, simultaneously in both theaters and streaming on what was then called HBO Max. They figured that Covid would be bad for the rest of the calendar year, so this would give consumers options.
But the plan went horribly awry. The virus was almost nothing by June, yet the simultaneous streaming option absolutely screwed over the theatrical grosses for second-half-of-2021 films like 'Dune,' 'King Richard,' and 'The Matrix Resurrections.' Not to mention prompting longtime Warner Bros. filmmaker (and theatrical advocate) Christopher Nolan into Universal's arms to make 'Oppenheimer.' The mastermind behind the plan, WarnerMedia CEO Jason Kilar, was run out of town.
Don't make this kind of decision for an entire year. If you shorten the timeframe, I'd reconsider.