beyondfantasy3 113M
2003 posts
9/6/2015 7:33 am
Homes


I have seen some pictures of amazingly large homes with vast grounds well manicured with many attributes. I often wonder, what is the point and why is there such a need. some inhabitants have no , and its simply two people occupying these vast complexes. Then we see, some who result to meet with divorce and the ultimate sale of these properties. It appears no matter how much opulence one surrounds themselves with, it affords no assurance of a long and stable relationship.
I wonder, does the home and opulence overwhelm and over come the sensibilities of what is a relationship?
Some of late have sold in the $100 million plus cost range. I personally think even though one may have $billions, is it of a necessity to have such a vast complex? Is it symbols of status and wealth, or do they care to make it truly "home", as many have multiple complex they own.
If 90% of the home is often un-used and time is not available to walk the grounds or engage the amenities, then what is the point?

I see too many entertainers, "unloading these massive complexes" as their career slows down and they are not making the $20 million a film, it appears the mortgage and upkeep cost become more a burden than a prospering asset, as these homes require a great amount for their upkeep, utilities, staff and other fixed cost, which eats into any expected value rise. I'd assume their investment management prompted many to buy multiple homes, but the individual must realize the investment person makes their profit, regardless of the individual wins or looses in the long term.
Even some may sell for a few million more than the cost, but what were the invested expenses and how does that offset what is profit? is the net gain truly of value for the challenges faced over ownership over a the span of time many people have possession of these homes.

Today, "what is a million dollar home"? has so much to do with "LOCATION", but in some areas one can have a suitable ideal property outside of prime locations even if its in another state? Or what is the reality of having a multi million dollar penthouse or apt in a very expensive high rise, as opposed to having a home where they can actually put their feet on solid ground?

I do think in some cases it may well be a 'security and safety" component in the selection and choice, as many exclusive areas have high quality security which minimizes through traffic.

Some entertainers go for the 'entertainment value" of the homes, until they settle down and factor in what the cost of continual entertainment actually sums to be. Then they curb the entertainment, and find the home to be overwhelming.

We however do no know what is the daily reality when one reaches or passes the $100 million dollar holding valuation or the $billion dollar valuation level. it has to come with many "must do" responsibilities, then there are those who surpass the 10's of $billion of holding valuation. Their life is some ways, is not theirs in the same sense it use to be, because it takes a great deal of efforts of sorts we may not know, to manage and protect that level of asset holdings even when you have staff who handles various management aspects.

Opulence has many things it presents, but it still fits within the aspect that nothing is free even when resources make it a minimal $$ concern, it still has its needs of responsible ownership elements.

I see some public figures who find that after close to a decade and their career trajectory changes, they are left with this massive expense of home maintenance, some homes fall into dis-repair or lack "optimal upkeep" once the income changes. (this is more true in the Non-billionaire owners).

What is the nature of "home" in relation to income and asset holdings? truly all about?

I see some properties that would serve better at being a "resort" more than it functions as being a single family residence.

beyondfantasy3 113M
4740 posts
9/6/2015 1:36 pm

    Quoting  :

Precisely : (A home that is worth 20 million in my mind - is a waste of property and really can't be utilized by anyone. Maintenance alone is miserable - since a 20 million home needs around 2-3 million a year in maintenance.

Then there are costs for security, maids, and other expenses not covered in yearly maintenance.)


I agree with the rental properties, as well as the responsibility of curb appeal. These things matter greatly.
but mega million dollar homes, that sit mostly 'UN-utilized', non accessible and a mass of land consumed that is non productive.
the craziness of maintenance expense, both standard and those cost that become associated with massive homes. The heating and cooling expense is enormous, besides, to have such homes, one has a very high investment in furnishing and accessories. All which often times becomes more like a museum like atmosphere, with rooms that are rarely accessed and often go un-used.

I think some of the people who rise from poverty of near poverty or even middle income, who elevate to massive multi million dollar homes become an issue of many sorts over time. I've seen some pictures of home owned by previous people during their hey day of income earning, that simply are not very impressive after a span of time, as some get a 'dated look" which does not command what it use to.
The every man a king , in the wealth sector may well become to make many a pauper as the years take its toll on both earning and other factors.

but everyone has to learn by their own means and conditions, and sometimes the expense of learning is an atrocity of factors.
Nicholas Cage is an example of how things can go bad quickly, or as some of the sports players, mis-caculate their actual take home dollars as being very different than what is contract dollars.
I don't see how anyone can "party away millions upon millions", or accumulate a mass of vehicles which depreciate drastically in the climate of today as it relates to vehicles.

on a personal level for myself, I can't speak for others, but if I was to gain massive wealth, I don't see where I'd need a mass of multi-million dollar homes spread across the country or the world.
I also can't see where I'd paid the massive multiple $1000's a night for a room in any hotel regardless of the status claim of the hotel. but there are many people who see it as not being much of a factor to contend.

As to rental properties, one of great wealth may benefit from multi million dollar rentals, but I'd prefer to have reasonable homes where working and business people can rent at a sustainable rate and keep the units occupied with people who actually take pride to take care of it.


beyondfantasy3 113M
4740 posts
9/7/2015 9:12 am

I look at my living, In CA. I had a two bedroom house, and eventually enclosed the patio to make a Den and left enough patio to have patio room. The back yard was split into two section, the farther section had an oil easement, as pipes were buried under the ground back in the 1920's. I could use it but not build anything on that section. It was just me, so the house was more than enough room.
My home now is 4bdrm 1+1 bath (second one has a shower a vanity area and closet.) Often the door to two rooms is closed. The back yard is far big enough and I can put 4 or more cars in the driveway, plus two car enclosed garage and still my front yard is still a yard uninterrupted by parking areas.

I don't see a need for more space, I rarely go in the front room.

I see people build very big homes, some even want a vast amount of land, they don't grow anything on it, but they simply spend monthly to have it cut. It looks good, but they don't even go walking on their land. It's just a point they want to say they own it. There is lots of that in the South, people have many many acres of land. It sits 90% un-used. My step mother once took me to a relatives house who had so much land, the trees looked small from a distance when trying to look across his land, I actually never saw where it ended; he was a much older man, who could no longer even plant a small garden,

I had an aunt via family marriage, who owned many homes in a high cost area of LA. when they go old, they generally only used the den in the home they lived in, they had one daughter, who inherited the properties. the family was into Re-Estate. They lived well, but as with life, everyone gets old. They became old, the man bed bound and the lady eventually had diminished mobility. The bulk of the house remained dark, because they could not move about to utilize the other rooms.

Here in the South, when the Gas company bought mineral leases, many of the massive landowners became wealthy from their lease agreements, some eventually sold the land and some retained their land.

I could see having land if I wanted cattle, or some livestock, or if I wanted to be a farmer, but I have no aspiration to be either. I will plant a personal size garden in my back yard next year, but even at that most people can't eat everything they grow even in a small garden.

I fell bad for some entertainers who get duped like Nick Cage, and that home Tyson built looks dated and will probably be torn down.
I'm sure your read about the couple who built that massive home, which still is un-finished.

Maybe the illusion of "Every Man a King', is a lure that leads many wealthy people to ruins, in the hey day, Bruce Willis had that massive property in Colorado, now its up for sale, as well as many of the 1980's, 1990's Stars are trying to dump some of the massive homes they bought when they were the box office draw.
I think tides and times will change with the next generation, they are learning all this stuff does not increase their well being, happiness or health, and many result to liquidate much in divorce proceedings.

In a funny sense its kind like sex, no amount of make up, plastic surgery and fancy costumes is going to make the sex any better than it naturally is. The best sex anyone is going to have is that which is shared with a happy spirited person who is happy on the inside of themselves. and it won't matter if they share it in a shack, or a mansion, it only matters that they are doing it because they are happy spirited as a person who is content within themselves.

It's amazing what it takes in society for people to feel successful. When fact is, living, being healthy and being able to maintain for ones self is of much success. There are countless millions in the world who can't manage that on a daily basis due to a great many reasons.

in many ways the Kardasians is a dysfunctional family, celebrity took and is still taking a great toll in a variety of ways on this family. beyond the Tabloid stuff they still have to face the daily living matters, shopping and buying stuff and traveling for the reasons they travel has to be a very taxing duty over the span of time. Their physical appeals become very costly in a multitude of ways where it can be a blessing and a curse mixed into an alternating cycle.
They have beautiful homes, but how much does "set directors pay to have it appear as it does", which may not actually cost the cast any money at all.

We've seen even serial killer comes from communities with manicured lawns, big homes and well to do parents. Material things just does not guarantee the imagery the media presents.

When I hear of any with 10-20 bathrooms, it to me is a sign, they have lost touch with many things about life, the world and general varied conditions of society. .


beyondfantasy3 113M
4740 posts
9/12/2015 8:49 am

Their mother figured out how much society loves allure, the pretty factor and how to play up the sensual angles. they have capitalized on it all, they can now afford to make various other choices, but they are not going to get off the gravy train of this, while it still produces double digit millions for each of them on a yearly basis.
The younger ones have another good 10 yrs to play on the sensuality factor, if they don't get hit by drugs or drink, or go into a tailspin of some addictive and destructive madness of some sort