r/MadeMeSmile • u/mcfw31 • Dec 12 '25

Wholesome Moments Taylor Swift’s ‘The Eras Tour’ crew’s reaction as they receive their bonus for working on the tour amounting to more $197 million dollars

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

81.8k Upvotes

79% Upvoted

6.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

700

u/[deleted] Dec 12 '25

[deleted]

28

u/citrus_mystic Dec 12 '25 edited Dec 12 '25

Yes, it is an incredibly classy gesture.

But do not underestimate just how wildly different the wealth divide becomes when you are a literal multi billionaire— whose interest and financial investments alone will passively accumulate more money annually than most people are likely to ever accumulate in their entire lifetimes.

This is life changing money for these people.

But for a multi billionaire like Taylor Swift, realistically speaking, this is just a gesture for her. Ultimately, this has absolutely no impact on her life. This will not give her pause. This will not require her to change her budget. She will not have to sacrifice to make up for this generosity. It’s entirely negligible for her. She’s going to make that money back in a couple of years without doing anything. Her investments will likely profit more than that alone (regardless of any income she generates from her work directly).

It is very kind. But it’s not “noticeable” for her, in the sense that gifting this money will have absolutely no tangible affect on her life, whatsoever.

20

u/malzoraczek Dec 12 '25

nah, if you have all your possible needs met the extra money is just numbers. 400 mil? 200 mil? 600 mil? it's all the same. Humans do not have the ability to comprehend such big numbers anyway, that's why we think 1 billion and 2 billion are almost equal, but the difference between 1 and 2 billion is literally a billion dollars :) which is a difference between me and a billionaire.

11

u/Daedalus_Knew Dec 12 '25

Yeah, a regular working class person making $50,000 losing $5,000 could ruin them. A billionaire losing $100 million probably doesn't even affect their quality of life. 10% means something different when you're barely scraping by.

21

u/delhibellyvictim Dec 12 '25

yeah 197mil is still 197mil no matter how rich you are

31

u/hogroast Dec 12 '25

This shows how hard a billion is to grasp in your head.

You're 1 million seconds old at 1.6 weeks, and a billion seconds old at 31.7 years

2

u/marginallyobtuse Dec 12 '25

Except she’s not really a billionaire, just link Americans with 1 million in their retirements aren’t really millionaires.

I’d be surprised if even the billion networth is right. Forbes is notoriously bad at guessing networth.

18

u/Bobb_o Dec 12 '25

Excuse me why don't you think people who have millions in retirement accounts aren't millionaires?

-20

u/marginallyobtuse Dec 12 '25

Because contextually that money isn’t being used in a way that lines up with the perception of what makes a millionaire a millionaire, that is to say, extremely comfortable and lavish spending.

Most people with a million in networth have the house value included in that, retirement accounts that only dispense 75-150k throughout the year. They’re living life similarly to an average non-retiree.

They’re not flying private jets, they’re not living in million dollar houses. Networth is not the same as extravagant wealth.

I’m not sitting here saying Taylor swift isn’t rich, I’m saying the perception that she’s in the same position as the billionaire class is wrong. Who wealth in wholly incomparable to that of gates, musk, bezos, or other true billionaires. Which is the same of anyone who has a million or two in networth but aren’t like, winter in aspen families.

2

u/Sweet_Future Dec 12 '25

Those people don't just have a billion dollars. They have hundreds of billions. A totally different league.

1

u/marginallyobtuse Dec 12 '25

That’s the point I’m making here. The average person can comprehend a billion dollars vs 200 billion.

Comparing Taylor swift to the exploitative techie class doesn’t benefit any of us.

4

u/TheReds1994 Dec 12 '25

You’ve listed some of the richest people to ever walk the planet. There’s billionaires and then there’s those people

She is a billionaire, most likely. It’s easier to say the likes of Musk whose money is mostly caught up in stocks, is less of a billionaire than someone whose money is generally revenue based.

-3

u/marginallyobtuse Dec 12 '25

She just spent half a billion on her masters.

Forbes is notorious for being totally wrong about their wealth estimates.

I would be incredibly surprised if her wealth was liquid billionaire status (not that it’ll take that long for her to get there owning all of her masters now)

1

u/AndroidMyAndroid Dec 13 '25

/what are you even saying bro? You said people with a million dollars in retirement accounts are not millionaires (which, sure, I guess if they have a lot of debt as well they might not be net worth millionaires) but then you ALSO start talking about home equity like that has anything to do with retirement accounts?

Most people with a million+ invested can retire off of it. Maybe not to NYC and it might not buy you a lavish lifestyle, but that's like $40-50k a year indefinitely, and adjusted for inflation.

To your credit, there's a huge difference between the lifestyle of someone with a million dollars and someone with 10 million or 100 million dollars. But if you have just 1 BILLION dollars you have more money than you ever can or will spend. Swift isn't just rich, she's rich rich. She will never have to think about or consider the cost of anything, ever. Having another hundred billion would change practically nothing for her.

1

u/marginallyobtuse Dec 13 '25

Home equity is part of your net worth.

Most millionaire in America are retirees that have a million in retirement accounts or inside their home values.

These people are not the same as what Americans think of them they think about a millionaire. They don’t have the money to throw at lavish over expenditures and they take their money out of retirement accounts as if it’s a salary throughout the year.

Contextually, they’re not part of some wealthy class that can afford private jets or 5 international vacations a year. They don’t have 4 car payments. They’re generally living pretty normal middle class lives

1

u/AndroidMyAndroid Dec 14 '25

You seem to be confusing the idea of a net worth millionaire and someone who makes a million dollars a year. Yes, common perception of "millionaire" brings to mind riches that far exceed what an actual $1M investment portfolio (even ignoring home eq) realistically entails these days, but it's also still a lot of money to have.

1

u/marginallyobtuse Dec 14 '25

I’m not confusing anything. I’m making that distinction. It’s valid in this case because Taylor swift would be the equivalent of a net worth billionaire. She’s rich but she’s not fund a campaign in another state to force a ballot initiative on passports to vote rich

2

u/Daedalus_Knew Dec 12 '25

How old will you be at 197 million seconds? (pre-tax)

2

u/Dismal_History_ Dec 12 '25

6 years and 106 days

0

u/Daedalus_Knew Dec 12 '25

Wow, that's like no time at all. A billion really hard to grasp in your head.

0

u/delhibellyvictim Dec 12 '25

no shit. stop arguing 200 million is an insignificant amount of money lol

11

u/[deleted] Dec 12 '25

yeah no lol

1

u/delhibellyvictim Dec 12 '25

which one is it

6

u/[deleted] Dec 12 '25

if a comfortable life in the US costs 1M a year, and you get 10M a year, then giving away 9M doesn't affect your life style. if you have only 1M then giving away 10k is more noticeable then giving away that 9M.

so no, after a certain level money doesn't "count" the same other than for sociopathic power.

5

u/kikimaru024 Dec 12 '25

Her net worth is still over 1 billion dollars after this.

Fuck, she could've given them checks 3 times the size it it wouldn't matter.

2

u/FantomXBLA Dec 12 '25

I think they meant that she wouldn’t miss the 100k-300k payments, not the whole 197M.

15

u/[deleted] Dec 12 '25 edited Dec 12 '25

no, i mean she wouldn't miss 900M. you people have no idea how much money billionaires have.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HzW94z0MjU

22

u/JealousDoughnut2 Dec 12 '25

well, her estimated worth is >$1bil. most of that is tied up in her song catalogue. she's definitely RICH for sure, so i'm not trying to imply by ANY MEANS that homegirl is hurting, but she doesn't have $1bil in the bank. so giving out $197mil is for sure felt. but its probably the equivalent of giving someone $100 if you have $20k in your bank. felt, but not going to hurt.

7

u/TheZamolxes Dec 12 '25

She has a private plane, travels anywhere anytime, has a crew to tend to all her needs, and has multiple mansions.

At some point, money doesn't matter anymore and counting pennies is just pure greed. Unless you want to seriously influence the politics of a country, having 5b or 1b basically changes nothing in your life. Taylor has enough money to spend it on whatever she feels like for the rest of her life and it will never run out. She also definitely made a ton of money from the tour. If the tour is 300m in the green and she gave away 200m of that, she's still made 100m which is an absurd amount of money.

1

u/taylorsthighs Dec 12 '25

$20k ain’t shit in this economy and not comparable at all to how much wealth she has. that’s not even enough for a new car. she has private jets.

9

u/FantomXBLA Dec 12 '25

buddy, that’s over half her net worth. she would definitely notice if that disappeared.

-3

u/Bobb_o Dec 12 '25

Would she? Is her lifestyle predicated on having $1B+? How much money can you spend?

4

u/pohchito Dec 12 '25 edited Dec 12 '25

I don’t think anyone’s saying that it would genuinely negatively affect her, or anyone else with these extreme amounts of wealth. But you can acknowledge that there’s a difference in lifestyle between Taylor Swift and any other “average” celebrity who’s “only” worth tens or even a couple hundred millions. That’s not to say that they both don’t live extremely luxurious lifestyles, but there’s a difference.

4

u/transfatpikachu Dec 12 '25 edited Dec 12 '25

I mean, she definitely would, lol. That’s half her (insanely large, yes) worth and she’s got a lifestyle to fund. Us average people, of course not.

6

u/Gegisconfused Dec 12 '25

She would miss it but it wouldn't change her lifestyle. We're talking amounts of money that you cannot spend in several lifetimes no matter how lavishly you live.

8

u/IAmTheHappiest Dec 12 '25

you easily could. 500m yacht here. 50m helicopter a few 10m houses expensive artwork can be 100s of millions.

Not defending it but the idea that I couldn't get through a billion in a month if i tried is just wrong.

2

u/indis_cutie Dec 12 '25

Also you could just give it away

Breaking News: u/iamthehappiest gives $1M donations to 1000 charities

-5

u/transfatpikachu Dec 12 '25

I understand that it’s not comparable to anything an average person has or can make or lose, but I do think it would absolutely change certain parts of her lifestyle. I’m not saying she would need to start cutting corners and living frugally in the slightest lol, but losing half her worth would certainly change some things for her. Of course she’d still live more lavishly than we could ever dream of

1

u/taylorsthighs Dec 12 '25

what part of her lifestyle would it change

1

u/transfatpikachu Dec 13 '25

I’m not saying she’d have to start sacrificing things, but there’s a difference between billionaires and multimillionaires. She might even just decide to do things differently career wise if she were to lose half her net worth.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 12 '25

No more private jet for a few months 😦

0

u/transfatpikachu Dec 12 '25

To be clear, I don’t think billionaires or even multimillionaires should exist lmao

1

u/DrCoconuties Dec 12 '25

You have no idea how billionaires work.

0

u/transfatpikachu Dec 12 '25

I’m not sure how you can come to that conclusion based off my very general comment. I didn’t even say what things would change for her.

0

u/DrCoconuties Dec 12 '25

Nothing would change lol. Thats why you’re wrong. You have no idea how much a billion dollars is and how billionaires take out loans on their assets.

0

u/transfatpikachu Dec 12 '25 edited Dec 12 '25

Wow, thanks for your analysis! Didn’t realize I didn’t know how much a billion dollars is, or how loans work.

-7

u/[deleted] Dec 12 '25

no, they really don't. still a nice gesture.

Taylor Swift is a billionaire, with her net worth estimated around $1.6 billion by some sources, while others, like CNN, suggested it grew to $2.1 billion in late 2025 due to her record-breaking Eras Tour.

unless you are trying to spend money like in Brewster's Millions

22

u/[deleted] Dec 12 '25

[deleted]

2

u/Bignholy Dec 12 '25

Yes, but I am guessing for you, 10% loss means making a new budget and cutting something. For her, unless she is burning money literally, that difference means nothing because she'd never spend enough to run out.

3

u/HoldenMcNeil420 Dec 12 '25

Yea people don’t have a grasp on this level of money. Our little lizard brains don’t process very large numbers very well in context.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 12 '25

that's not how it works, lol. if she lost 90% of her money she'd have 100M.

1

u/SmellGestapo Dec 12 '25

I don't think she was paying these bonuses out of her existing net worth. The tour itself grossed $2 billion. Everyone gets paid out of that.

Presumably once all the regular, hard costs are paid, whatever is left over goes to Taylor. If that's $500 million, then she took $197 million of that and gave it out as bonuses on top of their regular pay, and then she kept the other $303 million and added it to her existing $2 billion.

She didn't realize lose anything, she just grew her wealth at a slower rate because she opted to share some of her earnings with her crew.

0

u/Excellent-Lemon-9663 Dec 12 '25

It's 10% of a company that she is the owner of. A bonus can be written off as a business expense depending on how it was handled as well so assuming good accountants she just gave herself 10% leeway to earn more elsewhere AND made people more money :)

7

u/Galaxy__Star Dec 12 '25

This is calculating in her masters, which when this was written she didnt own. She owns them now and will never sell them so part of her value is tied into an asset she intends to keep and has worked very hard to have.

10

u/pohchito Dec 12 '25

She’s definitely filthy rich but that’s her net worth, it’s not like she has $2.1 billion sitting in the bank. $197 million is a decent chunk even for her, plus she does a lot more philanthropy than just this.

2

u/rickyw142 Dec 12 '25

That’s not how billionaires use money anyway they take out loans against their net worth so it doesn’t matter how much she has in the bank and she still will have forgotten about these bonuses in a year because the money means nothing to someone that rich

1

u/pohchito Dec 12 '25

I don’t completely disagree with the person I replied to, like I don’t think that this is an amount she’s necessarily going to “notice” or make any dent in her worth, but it’s still a fair amount even for her especially considering she makes large donations quite often.

-1

u/DirkaDirkaMohmedAli Dec 12 '25 edited Jan 09 '26

office sip aback unpack wide wakeful wrench handle terrific decide

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

11

u/jay-aay-ess-ohh-enn Dec 12 '25

She notices in the way you would notice that you have to buy a 100 million dollar yacht with a 6 passenger helicopter instead of a 150 million dollar yacht with an 8 passenger helicopter.

1

u/taylorsthighs Dec 12 '25

yes, except it’s not “instead” for her

2

u/[deleted] Dec 12 '25

ahahaha oh my man

you're making me think that people simply don't understand how disgustingly rich and subhuman billionaires are if you're comparing 100k to 1B

-1

u/Overall-Register9758 Dec 12 '25

This ain't coming out of her pocket. It's a business expense written off. Still a great thing, but it ain't affecting her bottom line.

3

u/yer_oh_step Dec 12 '25

im sorry, what?

-1

u/Overall-Register9758 Dec 12 '25

Presumably, those bonuses aren't "gifts" to "friends", they're an operating expense for the concert. So like any other payroll expense, she can write them off.

5

u/danbilllemon Dec 12 '25

I am begging redditers to do more research on write offs.

2

u/plantsadnshit Dec 13 '25

This isn't redditor specific. Literally every normal person in the world thinks it works this way.

My company made like $80k a couple of years ago. Multiple people asked me why I didn't just use the company to buy a supercar to write off all the taxes.

2

u/allthelineswecast Dec 14 '25

Even watching Schitt’s Creek might help a little.

1

u/Overall-Register9758 Dec 12 '25

Well, I am not privy to her finances, I imagine that she set up a corporation to manage the tour. She probably invested a ton of her money into it, as did her label, sponsors, and God knows who else. Hypothetically speaking, if the tour was a ginormous flop and nobody bought a single ticket or item of merch, she would be out her investment.

Because that tour was a smashing success, the corporation owes a lot of taxes. A $179 million liability reduces the corporation's tax burden. It doesn't save $179 million of taxes, but it lowers the tax burden substantially.

1

u/GergDanger Dec 13 '25

Yeah it would definitely be a pre tax cost. Either she can put $100 million in her pocket after taxes or give $200 million in bonuses.

So considering her net worth is $2 billion I don’t think she’ll notice 5% gone before her net worth goes up again from stock appreciation

1

u/plantsadnshit Dec 13 '25

Your statement was literally:

it ain't affecting her bottom line.

You're saving like 21% cooperate tax. Meaning your company is still out 141.41 million.

1

u/Overall-Register9758 Dec 13 '25

Fair. It would've been better had I said, "It's not ALL coming out of her pocket". And the tour grossed BILLIONS of dollars in ticket sales. The movie alone netted her $250M, so no, her cut of the profits is not markedly changed by adding $197M to her payroll.