Money and Me: ‘I became a millionaire at the age of 35'
Michael Belton, chief executive of property development company Mered, grows his wealth by spotting attractive opportunities in real estate and investing in them early on. The American, 55, who was born and raised in Alaska, worked in Russia for more than 20 years and has been in the UAE for six months now. He graduated from the University of Massachusetts in arts and political science and went to Russia on a foreign exchange programme and 'fell in love with everything there'. Mr Belton started working for Hines, America's largest property development company, in 1993, and was with them for eight years in Russia. He started as a leasing consultant and ended as the head of development after 10 years. He also had a short stint in Saudi Arabia, where he worked for the giga project Qiddiya as head of development for one of their business units. 'The parent company of Mered is headquartered in Russia and has been involved in real estate development for 25 years, predominantly in residential real estate, and built more than three million square metres of space,' he says. 'They saw the market in Dubai as one where they could add value with their expertise. They are a master developer like Aldar and Emaar and have the capabilities and cash flow to expand in a new market.' Mered is currently developing three properties, one in Dubai and two in Abu Dhabi, with a total sales value of $1.4 billion. 'Since my arrival in October as chief executive of Mered, we have sold $120 million worth of apartments in Dubai,' says Mr Belton, who lives in Dubai's Bluewaters Island with his wife and a daughter. I grew up in a middle-class American family with hard-working parents. We had enough for the essentials. I admired my wealthy New York relatives and learnt that dressing smartly could positively influence people's impression of me. I learnt the value of money and education by seeing them and going out with them. Like most Americans, my first job was when I was 12, delivering newspapers. My first professional job was with Hines in Moscow, earning $1,500 a month. No, I'm a very curious person, so the harder I worked, the more responsibilities I was given and the more I was able to earn. I've received consistent salary increases through promotions due to hard work. There are always cycles in the real estate market, but I've somehow been shielded from many of them. As we are in the business of residential real estate, we understand where the market is headed. So, I'm able to buy in early at a good price to get attractive investments that I take advantage of. I hire financial managers to reinvest those profits. Real estate development is a more high-risk profile, but that's why the returns are usually 30 per cent to 40 per cent on my investment. I also have a very wide investment portfolio, which is preserved more for growth and not for quick returns. My financial managers aim to offer me 6 per cent to 8 per cent returns, so it's a very different risk profile, and it's something that is more generational for me as an investment. I am neither, instead, I am an earner. I'm more focused and interested in finding ways to earn money. I reinvest earnings in short-term, mid-term and retirement vehicles. As far as saving, I try to save money every month and invest it. I'm not a shopper. I believe so. You make some mistakes, you make some good choices. But overall, when I see what I started with and where I am now, what I'm able to pass on to my children, I would say, it's been pretty good. Investing in myself and my business, specifically purchasing properties I develop. I founded my own business in 2007 called Storm Properties and sold it to one of the largest home builders in Europe in 2008. The majority of my wealth is created due to the sale of that company. No. I value people and experiences over physical possessions like cars or jewellery. I'm not attached to houses, apartments or cars. I have many of them, but when I sell them, I don't have much attachment to them. It's an important tool to provide comfort to my family and me, especially in later years. The more money you make is not equivalent to how happy you are as a person. Many people have lots of money and are miserable, and some people have no money and they're happy. Start investing in residential properties earlier. I wish I had bought my first property when I was 25 years old. Many of them cost $50,000 then and five years later, they were worth around $500,000 to $600,000. Also, maximise pension contributions to take advantage of tax-deferred retirement products. I always maximised my 401(k). By putting in maybe $300 to $400 a month when you are younger, you don't notice the money going out. But after doing it for 25 years, there's millions of dollars in my pension fund because of that. Flying business class, staying in five-star hotels and enjoying dinners with friends without budget limits. It's not necessarily to go out and buy a new Patek Philippe watch or a new Lamborghini, but I derive pleasure out of these comforts for me, my family and friends. Becoming a millionaire by age 35. I'm 55 years old and fairly wealthy. My goal is to continue to grow my family's income to pass on to the next generation. I don't have a goal to become a billionaire. It's not my thing. Financially, I've hit all the goals that I set for myself. Right now, I'm at the age where legacy is more important for me. I'm a real estate developer, so I want to build beautiful projects, which will stand for many years after I'll be gone. I enjoy taking my children around to see a project when the foundation is being poured, and then, when the building's up, they come back five years later and say: 'Wow, my dad built that.' That's my goal. It's not financial anymore. I also own three properties. I plan to maintain two to four properties, buying and selling as market conditions allow. I aim to own a property at a ski resort in Switzerland or Montana.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
2 days ago
- Gulf Today
Trump approves Nippon Steel's $14.9 billion purchase of US Steel
US President Donald Trump approved Nippon Steel's $14.9 billion bid for US Steel, capping a tumultuous 18-month effort by the companies that survived union opposition and two national security reviews. Trump signed an executive order saying the tie-up could move forward if the companies sign an agreement with the Treasury Department resolving national security concerns posed by the deal. The companies then announced they had signed the agreement, fulfilling the conditions of Trump's directive and effectively garnering approval for the merger. 'We look forward to putting our commitments into action to make American steelmaking and manufacturing great again,' the companies said in the statement, thanking Trump. They added the agreement includes $11 billion in new investments to be made by 2028 as well as governance, production and trade commitments. Nippon Steel will buy a 100 per cent stake in US Steel, a spokesperson for the Japanese company in Tokyo said on Saturday. The steelmakers provided no detail on the 'golden share' they pledged to issue to the US government, raising questions about the extent of US control. ' 'US Senator David McCormick of Pennsylvania, where US Steel is headquartered, said last month the golden share would give the government veto power over key decisions relating to the American steel icon. Reuters has reported that Nippon Steel would invest an additional $3 billion for a new mill after 2028. The takeover will set up the ailing US firm to receive the critical investment, allowing Nippon Steel to capitalise on a host of American infrastructure projects while its foreign competitors face steel tariffs of 50 per cent. The Japanese firm also avoids the $565 million in breakup fees it would have had to pay if the companies had failed to secure approvals. For Nippon Steel, the world's fourth-biggest steelmaker, securing a foothold in the US is key to its global growth strategy. The US steel market, including high-grade steel, Nippon Steel's specialty, is growing amid rising global trade tensions. Still, some Nippon Steel investors are concerned about short-term financial pressure due to the scale of the additional investment commitment. The Japanese government, rushing to try to secure a trade deal with the US by the time Trump and Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba meet at the Group of Seven summit starting on Sunday, applauded the Nippon-US Steel agreement. 'The government of Japan welcomes the US government's decision, as we believe this investment will enhance innovation capabilities in the US and Japanese steel industries and further strengthen the close partnership between our two countries,' Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Yoji Muto said in a statement on Saturday. Friday's announcement was hardly guaranteed, even if many investors had seen approval as likely after Trump headlined a rally on May 30 giving his vague blessing to an 'investment' by Nippon Steel, which he described as a 'great partner.' Shares of US Steel had dipped earlier on Friday after a Nippon Steel executive told Japan's Nikkei newspaper that the takeover required 'a degree of management freedom' to go ahead after Trump said the US would be in control with the golden share. The bid has faced opposition since Nippon Steel launched it in December 2023. After the United Steelworkers union came out against the deal last year, both then-President Joe Biden, a Democrat, and Trump, a Republican, expressed their opposition as they sought to woo voters in the presidential campaign in the swing state of Pennsylvania. Shortly before leaving office in January, Biden blocked the deal on national security grounds, prompting lawsuits by the companies, which argued the national security review they received was biased. The Biden White House disputed the charge. The steel companies saw a new opportunity in the Trump administration, which opened a fresh 45-day national security review into the proposed merger in April. But Trump's public comments, ranging from welcoming a simple 'investment' in US Steel by the Japanese firm to floating a minority stake for Nippon Steel, spurred confusion. While many investors saw approval as likely after Trump headlined a rally on May 30 giving his vague blessing to an 'investment' by Nippon Steel, which he described as a 'great partner', Friday's announcement was hardly guaranteed. The bid, first announced by Nippon Steel in December 2023, has faced opposition from the start. Both Democratic former President Joe Biden and Trump, a Republican, asserted last year that US Steel should remain US-owned, as they sought to woo voters ahead of the presidential election in Pennsylvania, where the company is headquartered. Reuters
Gulf Today
2 days ago
- Gulf Today
Trump's tax-cut bill could hold back projects
US President Donald Trump's tax and spending bill would make it harder for American critical minerals companies to compete with China because it eliminates a tax credit for boosting domestic production of nickel, rare earths and other materials used in advanced electronics and weaponry, reported Reuters. With Trump and Republican lawmakers aiming to cut government support for green energy projects, the US House of Representatives passed a version of his "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" last month that eliminates the so-called 45X credit. The Senate is now debating the bill. Former President Joe Biden's 2022 climate change law, the Inflation Reduction Act, created the 10% production credit — a reduction in corporate taxes for critical minerals extraction and processing. The tax break also covers solar, battery and wind projects. The version of the bill that passed the House treats government incentives for wind turbines the same as those for mining projects that many view as crucial for national security. Critical minerals companies now say their projects are collateral damage to the political feud over renewable energy. The tax credit is already law and part of the current federal budget. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which scores the cost of legislative proposals when asked by Congress, has not studied how much would be saved by removing the credit. The Republican majority in Congress is seeking savings to fund other priorities such as tax cuts, defense and balancing the budget. This month, the hard-right House Freedom Caucus said it "will not accept" attempts to "water down, strip out, or walk back the hard-fought spending reductions and IRA Green New Scam rollbacks achieved in this legislation." Miners, though, say they need the credit to compete with China. Beijing has halted exports of some critical minerals, used its control of rare earths to strike a trade agreement with Washington, and flooded global markets with cheap supply of nickel, cobalt and lithium. The traditionally conservative mining industry now finds itself in the unusual position of needing Washington's support to grow and, in some cases, survive. The owner of the only US cobalt mine went bankrupt this year after Chinese miners depressed global prices of that metal. "If we do not have that tax credit, critical minerals producers in the U.S. are at risk of succumbing to closures," said KaLeigh Long, founder and CEO of Westwin Elements, which is building the country's only commercial nickel refinery. Westwin might not be able to service its debt without the tax credit, Long said, noting the company's loans were modeled using the expectation it would be permanent. Last month, Long wrote a letter asking the Senate to keep the credit. It was co-signed by 30 industry executives. Any changes the Senate makes to the bill must be reconciled with the House version before being sent to Trump, observed Reuters. Several House members have admitted they did not read the entire bill before voting for it, including Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green, a Georgia Republican, and Congressman Mike Flood, a Nebraska Republican. The House version does include $2.5 billion to fund a critical minerals stockpile and $500 million for a Pentagon mining loan program, although large mines often cost far more, noticed Reuters. House Democrats unanimously voted against the bill but their criticism has focused on tax cuts they say will widen the deficit while requiring cuts in health care, food assistance, education, scientific research and other programs. "There's so many issues right now under consideration in Congress and this one isn't breaking through, but it will certainly break through when we have a shortage of minerals in five years," said Jeff Green, a critical minerals industry consultant.
Arabian Post
2 days ago
- Arabian Post
The High Stakes of the Latest U.S.-China Agreement
Dr Imran Khalid 'We made a great deal with China. We're very happy with it.' So declared President Donald Trump in his familiar tone of triumphant ambiguity on June 11, fresh off what was touted as a breakthrough agreement to restore a trade truce between the United States and China. But if history has taught us anything, it is that 'done deals' in the Trumpian lexicon tend to be either dangerously fragile or conveniently fungible. The latest accord, emerging from two days of intense talks in London, follows an alarming spiral in trade tensions that had once again threatened to upend global markets and rekindle the tit-for-tat tariff warfare that haunted the latter years of Trump's first term. According to Trump, China has committed to lifting its restrictions on the export of rare earths – materials critical to the global technology and defense sectors – while the U.S. has agreed to a calibrated rollback of punitive measures, including the threatened revocation of visas for Chinese students. ADVERTISEMENT As ever, the devil is not just in the details, but in their implementation. Much like the May Geneva agreement that this deal purports to reinforce, the London framework is conditional, tentative, and, crucially, subject to 'final approval' by both President Trump and President Xi Jinping. That qualifier alone renders the euphoria premature. Still, to be charitable, the very fact that Washington and Beijing are speaking the language of dialogue rather than confrontation is an encouraging sign. Following a phone call between the two leaders earlier this month, there appears to be a renewed willingness – albeit under duress – to keep diplomacy afloat. For a world economy battered by uncertainty, this resumption of talks is, if nothing else, a stabilizing force. Yet, Trump's boastful framing – that the U.S. walks away with a 55% tariff shield while China gets 10% – betrays a zero-sum worldview that continues to inform his trade doctrine. The truth, however, is far less tidy. Tariffs have proved to be a double-edged sword, inflicting damage on American consumers, industries, and allies as much as they have squeezed Chinese exports. The World Bank's recent downward revision of global growth forecasts points to tariffs and unpredictability as 'significant headwinds,' underlining the global costs of such brinkmanship. Beijing, for its part, has projected a more measured tone. Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, in remarks following the London consultations, emphasized mutual benefit, calling on the U.S. to 'honor their words with actions.' The Chinese side welcomed the 'principled consensus' as a foundation for predictability and stability in bilateral economic relations. While Beijing's rhetoric may be couched in diplomatic platitudes, it signals a strategic patience that stands in stark contrast to Trump's performative deal-making. Indeed, despite facing considerable pressure – both domestic and international -China has remained consistent in its emphasis on dialogue, reciprocity, and multilateralism. It is no secret that Beijing is playing a longer game. From its support for a multilateral trading system to its efforts in promoting South-South cooperation, China has positioned itself as a steady hand amid a turbulent global order. ADVERTISEMENT In this light, the reestablishment of a U.S.-China economic and trade consultation mechanism should be viewed as more than a temporary fix. It offers a framework through which recurring disputes can be ironed out, interests aligned, and trust slowly rebuilt. Importantly, it provides a venue for strategic communication -something sorely missing during the height of tariff wars in 2018–19. However, for this framework to bear fruit, both sides must resist the urge to revert to maximalist posturing. The United States must accept that unilateralism – whether in tariffs or technology controls – cannot substitute for a sustainable policy. Likewise, China must be prepared to meet the U.S. halfway, especially on issues of market access, intellectual property, and transparency. The elephant in the room, of course, is the technological cold war that continues to simmer beneath the surface. While rare earths and tariff percentages dominate headlines, it is the battle over semiconductors and AI supremacy that threatens to define the next phase of U.S.-China relations. Washington's decision to maintain restrictions on high-end AI chips – particularly those from Nvidia- while easing others, reveals both the complexity and the stakes involved. Beijing, not surprisingly, has responded with innovation. The resurgence of Huawei, once a poster child of American sanctions, stands as testament to China's determination to chart its own technological path. As Huawei's founder Ren Zhenfei put it bluntly this week, China may still be a step behind, but it is catching up – by stacking and clustering if necessary. In the short term, these dynamics will continue to fuel friction. But in the long term, they offer a compelling reason for structured cooperation. For neither side can afford the costs of sustained decoupling. The global economy – still reeling from inflationary shocks, supply chain disruptions, and climate-induced volatility – desperately needs the world's two largest economies to find common ground. To that end, the inclusion of Chinese students in American universities, affirmed in this deal, is more than a diplomatic gesture. It is a recognition that people-to-people ties remain a cornerstone of bilateral engagement. Academic exchanges, research collaboration, and cross-cultural education build bridges that tariffs and bans cannot destroy. They plant the seeds of mutual understanding in a landscape too often scorched by suspicion. The road ahead remains bumpy. Structural trade conflicts persist, strategic mistrust abounds, and electoral politics – particularly in the U.S. – can derail even the most promising of frameworks. But the London agreement offers a glimpse of what is possible when mutual interest outweighs mutual animosity. This development not only helps stabilize U.S.-China relations but also injects much-needed momentum into the global economy. It serves as a reminder that even amid intensifying geopolitical rivalry, there is still space – indeed, an urgent need – for pragmatic cooperation. Trump may brand it a win, but real victory lies not in tariffs or trophies, but in the hard, unglamorous work of sustained diplomacy. For now, both sides have stepped back from the precipice. The challenge will be to keep walking forward – together. Also published on Medium. Notice an issue? Arabian Post strives to deliver the most accurate and reliable information to its readers. If you believe you have identified an error or inconsistency in this article, please don't hesitate to contact our editorial team at editor[at]thearabianpost[dot]com. We are committed to promptly addressing any concerns and ensuring the highest level of journalistic integrity.
