LogFAQs > #960480787

The 2nd option is basically a lump sum of $520K.

First option takes 14.25 years to equal that. But for over 13 years, that $520K can be collecting interest/returns, so in reality it's probably more like 20 years to break even.

And that's just when it equals out. First option was better for two decades prior to that, so I'd say you'd need to be collecting that $100/day for at least 30 years to truly feel like you came out ahead.

Futhermore...I'd rather have the money when I'm young and healthy, what good does it do you when you're old and bed-ridden.

So...my rough analysis comes down to:

If you're under 40 and in good health, take the 1st option, you'll presumably live and be healthy long enough for it to surpass the up front payout.
Otherwise, take the 2nd option.
And really, 2nd option still is attractive if you're really young. Like, fuck would it be nice to have gotten my forever house in cash at 25, instead of wasting well past $100K in rent all this time...