Comments on: Grasping the Nettel: lots of cash but no time to enjoy it

By: Bernard Salt

Bernard Salt — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 04:29:38 +0000

15% is a high proportion. It’s one household in six in this demographic!

By: Bernard Salt

Bernard Salt — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 04:28:21 +0000

I’m sorry but there is just no way I would ever have made a statement like “those not living in the western suburbs are nobodys”. Not sure where you got that from. I take your point rgeading man drought and the $70k cut off.

By: Bernard Salt

Bernard Salt — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 04:26:31 +0000

I chose $100k joint income pre tax because higher filters eliminatred too many people. You may not think it’s much but income levels drop off quickly after this amount (in 2006)

By: Bernard Salt

Bernard Salt — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 04:22:18 +0000

Did I have Burnley? I meant Burnside in Adelaide!

By: Abbie

Abbie — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:35:05 +0000

Very interesting article, particularly relevant to my business as a personal concierge, helping time poor people find time. You mention Burnley in Adelaide, but perhaps you mean Melbourne? I would be interested to know which suburbs in Adelaide you feel are ‘Nettel hotspots’.

By: tina

tina — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 06:13:50 +0000

great term - am surprised only 15% of curtin ppl apply though! the question is, why do they do it? is it just oz? why don’t we stop? funnily enough, this aligns to comments about the amount of overtime we do from yesterday’s go home on time day…

By: Winston

Winston — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:09:07 +0000

I think you are missing something in your methodology. Your definition of nettle includes both parents work full time and are high income earners. In your Australian article you estimate that there are some 129,000 nettle households. This seems an extraordinarily high number of ‘alpha couples’ who use blackberries and work in the types of jobs that require mobile email access.

Perhaps I’m misinterpreting, but it seems like you are just counting joint household income greater than $110,000 with dependent children under 24? I assume this is after tax income because $110,000 doesn’t sound like a lot. Does your methodology dilineate between individual incomes, because joint income is irrelevant for this demographic. Eg husband makes 100k, wife makes 40k.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 04:04:09 +0000

Bernard Salt, just some constructive criticism, do you think that low income earners don’t matter? I read one article where you said “those not living in the western suburbs are nobodys” and in man drought you ruled out suitors who earn below 70K. While its true that many in this bracket wouldn’t understand what demographer means, its a bit offensive.