$200k is not even remotely close to generational wealth, particularly when structured as $100k 20 years from now and another $100k 50-ish years from now. Those would be worth an estimated $55k and $22k in inflation-adjusted dollars.
It’s a totally different story if those are in a trust which is invested on behalf of the athletes, which pays out the invested value at time of disbursement. But I would be shocked if it were set up that way. Pleasantly shocked but shocked nonetheless.
An athlete who competes for a couple seasons would have the down payment for a house in each of those pay-outs. (And be able to, in all likelihood, borrow against it if they needed it earlier.)
Given how old most Olympic athletes are when they debut I'm sure that could be helpful if they don't incur any living expenses for another 2-3 decades afterwards
We have now moved the goalposts from starting to build generational wealth to maybe part of a down payment on a house in a low-demand area in their mid-forties, assuming they have enough income to still qualify for the loan on the property.
This is a great gift to the athletes, don’t get me wrong. There was just no need to oversell it.
> moved the goalposts from starting to build generational wealth to maybe part of a down payment on a house in a low-demand area in their mid-forties
On what planet are hundreds of thousands of dollars not generational wealth if played right? You’re talking about sums that are on par with the 401(k)s of retiring union workers.
It’s not riches. But it’s enough to pass along to your heirs. That’s generational wealth.
On the planet where inflation turns $100k into an effective $20k by the time you family sees it.
If your only metric for generational wealth is that the next generation of your family gets it, then sure, tautologically the second amount paid out to your surviving family qualifies. I don’t think most people would consider splitting $20k amongst your heirs to be generational wealth, and I don’t think retiring union workers are a classic generationally-wealthy example that comes to mind for most people.
And again, note that retiring union workers today might hand down a $100k 401(k) to their families. At the time of the athlete’s death ~50 years from now, that number will likely be closer to $500k.
It’s a totally different story if those are in a trust which is invested on behalf of the athletes, which pays out the invested value at time of disbursement. But I would be shocked if it were set up that way. Pleasantly shocked but shocked nonetheless.