A young Swedish woman, who described herself as “extraordinarily beautiful and blessed with irresistible charm,” posted an anonymous advertisement on Craigslist.
Her message was simple yet bold:
“I’m looking to marry a man who earns at least $500,000 a year.
I know what I’m worth, and I won’t settle for less.
Maybe there are men who think I’m greedy, but I’m just being honest.
If you want beauty, you must pay for it — the same way you pay for a luxurious home or a fine car.
I’m looking for a wealthy man who understands the value of a beautiful woman.”
Her post received many comments, but one reply stood out — a calm, analytical message from someone claiming to be a professional investor.
The Investor’s Reply:
My dear beautiful lady,
I read your post with great interest, and I believe that many girls share your questions, even if they don’t express them so directly.
Let me analyze your proposal as an investment professional.
First, your requirement: you’re looking for a man with an income of over $500,000 a year. That’s reasonable and clear. I happen to meet that condition easily. So, on paper, we could be a match.
However, from a businessman’s perspective, marrying you would be a terrible decision.
Here’s why.
What you’re offering is a straightforward transaction — your beauty in exchange for my wealth. Person A provides beauty; Person B provides money. A simple deal.
But this deal has one fatal flaw: your beauty is a depreciating asset.
Over time, your beauty will fade, while my income — if I manage my assets properly — will continue to grow. In economic terms, I’m an appreciating asset, and you are a depreciating one. And not just any depreciating asset — one with an exceptionally high rate of depreciation.
Let’s say, for argument’s sake, that your beauty today has a market value equivalent to $500,000 per year. Five or ten years from now, that value will decline — and eventually reach zero.
Meanwhile, my financial worth will likely continue to increase with time. So, in a few years, you’ll be a liability, not an asset.
From a pure investment standpoint, this is a bad trade.
Now, if you say, “But I can still attract another rich man when I get older,” then that’s just like selling off an old, depreciated product in the secondary market — a concept known in finance as liquidation value.
So the only logical way for me to proceed with such a transaction is not through marriage but through leasing.
Yes, leasing.
This way, I can enjoy your beauty for a fixed period of time, say, one or two years, and when depreciation sets in, I can replace you with a newer model.
In simple terms, while you are an attractive investment for the short term, you are a very poor investment for the long term.
Therefore, based purely on financial reasoning, I would advise you to stop looking for a wealthy husband. Instead, find a man who truly loves you — someone who values you for who you are, not for what you can offer today.
Because eventually, time will take away your beauty — but a genuine relationship based on love and respect can increase in value forever.
Sincerely,
A Professional Investor
0 Comments