Fit
Is this for you?
The honest answer is that it depends less on what you have than on how complicated it has become.
There is a threshold, and it is published below. But the threshold is only the qualifier. What actually determines whether coordinated planning is worth your money is whether the pieces of your financial life have started working against each other.
You have good professionals. That is not the same as having a plan.
Most households at this level are well served, professional by professional. The CPA files accurately and on time. The advisor manages the portfolio competently. The attorney drafted sound documents. Each of them is doing the job they were hired to do.
The question this page is really asking is whether anyone is responsible for the space between them, and whether you have started paying for the fact that nobody is.
It usually shows up as a small number of specific moments. A tax bill that arrived after the decision that caused it. A trust that was drafted and never funded. A policy owned in a way that undoes the estate plan it was bought to support. None of those is a competence failure. Every one of them is a coordination failure.
Investable assets of $800,000 and up, or household income of $300,000 and up.
That is the floor, not the profile: the point at which coordination starts paying for itself rather than costing more than it saves. There is no ceiling. The more complex the picture, the harder this model works.
We set the entry point deliberately. Below it, a good advisor and a good CPA are usually enough, and we will say so and refer you accordingly. Above it, complexity tends to arrive faster than anyone's ability to coordinate it, and that is the problem this was built for.
Close to those numbers but not over them? That is a case‑by‑case conversation. If the complexity is genuinely there, a discovery call is still worth your time.
Assets are the qualifier. They are not the profile.
The threshold tells you whether the arithmetic works. It does not tell you whether this is for you.
The households this was built for have something more specific in common than a number: they have outgrown what one advisor can hold, and they are not large enough to justify a traditional family office, which costs upwards of a million dollars a year to operate and exists for a different tier of wealth entirely.
That gap is where most successful families sit. Too complex for a single relationship. Too small for an institution. Served, in practice, by four professionals who have never met.
Four situations we see most
These are not categories you have to fit into. They are the four shapes complexity most often takes at this level, and if one of them describes your last two years, the conversation is probably worth having.
The successful professional or business owner
A surgeon, a partner‑track attorney, a business owner with $1M–$10M in liquid assets and a company that may sell in the next five to ten years. There is a CPA, an advisor, probably an estate attorney, and none of them talk to each other. You feel the friction. You suspect you are leaving money on the table. You do not have the time to coordinate it yourself.
The pre‑liquidity‑event family
A founder approaching a sale, an executive with concentrated equity vesting, an heir anticipating a windfall. The window to design the right structures is narrow and it closes at the transaction, and you need a coordinated team already in place to execute on the other side of it.
The multi‑generational family
Wealth that is already built, with children and grandchildren in the picture and a real intention to protect it, transfer it and steward it across generations. Traditional family offices serve exactly this profile, at a scale, and a cost, that puts them out of reach for most of the families who need the same thing.
The self‑directed investor hitting the ceiling
A high‑income professional who has managed their own finances effectively all the way through accumulation, and has now hit the complexity ceiling, where the questions stop being about investment selection and start being about tax, estate, business and legacy strategy. What is needed at that point is a team, not another tool.
Who this is not for
We would rather tell you now.
This is a premium, coordinated service, and it is genuinely wrong for some people. Four cases where we will say so directly:
Below the threshold
If the numbers are not there yet, coordination costs more than it returns. We will point you toward standard advisory channels rather than sell you something you do not need.
Looking for a single product
If what you want is one policy or one transaction, this is the wrong engagement. A good agent can do that well, and quickly, without a planning fee attached.
Not willing to be coordinated
This model only works if your professionals are allowed to talk to each other. If you would rather each of them stayed in their lane and never communicated, we cannot do the thing you would be paying for.
Shopping on price
There are cheaper ways to buy financial planning, and there is nothing wrong with them. What is being priced here is the coordination layer, and if that is not the part you want, this is not the service to buy.
Not sure is a normal answer.
Most people do not arrive at this certain. They arrive because something specific happened: a sale on the horizon, a tax bill that surprised them, a parent's estate that went badly, and it prompted the question of whether the current arrangement is actually holding.
A discovery call costs nothing. It ends in one of three ways: this is clearly a fit and we tell you what happens next, this is clearly not a fit and we say so, or it is worth a closer look and we schedule one. All three are useful outcomes, and the second one happens often enough that we would rather name it here.
The fastest way to find out is to ask.
One conversation, no cost, and a straight answer about whether coordinated planning would change anything for you.
Book a discovery call