No need to debate this, but I
No need to debate this, but I had a typo in my comments as the AARC survey was done in September 2008, which I consider to be a "few" years ago and just after the economic problems began to appear.
I guess ithe accuracy of my comment depends partially on how he defines "few" years for the $100K observation and the source of that number. The article did not say the number was from a survey in the early 2000s or provide details on the survey methodology or calculation of the number.
Also, by using a median value, I was showing that half of the highest net worth respondents (with an average income of over $600,000) were willing to spend over $60,000 in the AARC survey. This, and the other price points cited in my original comments, suggests very little change when compared to the results of the more recent Luxury Institute survey.
Perhaps the $100,000 number was inaccurate or misleading. That, and the indications there have been no major changes in price expectations as a result of the great recession, are my main points.