The Beverly Hillbillies were right.

[Bill Douglas]

Yes, they were right to move to Beverly Hills (Bel Air actually); it just listed for 350 million. https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/latest/95552631/most-expensive-house-for-sale-in-us-is-475m-mansion-from-beverly-hillbillies

[MRM]

That's funny. It's actually in Bel Air, which makes true 90120 real estate look like tract housing. The Bel Air Hilbillies wouldn't have made as good of a title, but the Fresh Prince of Bel Air kind rolls off the tongue. The broker, Hilton & Hyland is the local celebrity brokerage. The Hilton Head is Paris' dad. The acreage probably adds to the value since it can be subdivided into several lots, but it's still not worth nearly $350 million. The $475 million figure is in New Zealand currency. The $350 million figure is the listing price. For reference, the second most expensive house listed in the country is "only" $250 million. That house was spec built and has been on the market for a while. It probably cost $20 million in land acquisition, $15 million in construction and a million and a half in furnishing but still they're "listing" it for $250 million. Who knows, a fool and his money could be parted. Years ago, in 2006 or 2007 I was working with the Hilton & Hyland agent who had the listing for the real Pickfair and he listed it ay $60 million. He confided in me that he knew it wasn't worth $60 million, but he'd throw it out there and see what happened. The real issue with real estate like this is location. You can improve the structure but you can't improve the lot and there is only so much land in the exclusive areas of the exclusive neighborhoods.

[RKDinOKC]

Guy built a huge house in an exclusive neighborhood. It burnt to the ground 2 days before they were to move in. Something about sawdust in the heater vents. Then they built the exact same house 8 foot farther back on the property.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by Bill Douglas

Yes, they were right to move to Beverly Hills (Bel Air actually); it just sold for 350 million. https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/latest/95552631/most-expensive-house-for-sale-in-us-is-475m-mansion-from-beverly-hillbillies

Where does it say that it, "just sold?"

[Drbraunsr]

The property uses 6.1 million gallons of water / year in drought ridden So California for 13 acres. I guess the drought is somebody else's problem....

[speeder]

Oh, those people in the mega-mansions up in Bel Air definitely think that the drought is someone else's problem. Steve Lopez of the LAT did a series of articles about the worst water wasters in Los Angeles and they were all in Bel Air, if not mistaken.

One uses an amount that's the equivalent of flushing 2000 toilets constantly, day and night. Or something like that.

I personally don't get the whole mega thing where people live in a house the size of a hotel. There are plenty of other manifestations of wealth that I understand just fine but not that one. I've always thought that one of the best things about being rich would be the privacy you could engineer. Poor people have to live on top of each other, I'd be so alone on my property or w family and friends only. These big houses, (even one quarter this size), have staffs and several people are always milling around doing things like cleaning/yard cleaning/etc. That would annoy me.

[URY914]

How many "Tiny Houses" would fit in there?

[MRM]

It's on just under 10 acres and I'd guess the house itself is around 40,000 square feet. So you could put at least 80 tiny houses inside the mansion if you could stack them on top of each other.

The water resource issue is stems from the fact that water remains mostly free. The property owner pays for the cost to transport the water and his own cost of electricity to pump it once it gets to his property. If the owner had to pay the actual value or cost of the water, you'd see a lot of dry landscaping in front of the big mansions.

I agree with Denis about big mansions like this. There is something almost sad about being in them. They are like being in a museum and they're so big and cold that they seem oppressive. I could never be comfortable in one, and as Denis pointed out, you're never alone. You have to have an army of inside and outside staff to maintain the property. It really is like running a hotel.

[Racerbvd]

Covered parking for 40 cars, nice....

[speeder]

A lot of land comes with it so it's worth a fortune but I still think that price is not going to happen. Good way to get about a million's worth of free publicity, though!

[epbrown]

Originally Posted by MRM

That's funny. It's actually in Bel Air, which makes true 90120 real estate look like tract housing. The Bel Air Hilbillies wouldn't have made as good of a title, but the Fresh Prince of Bel Air kind rolls off the tongue.

Funny thing is they often make a fuss about how everyone knows the lyrics to the Fresh Prince opening, but I'll be just as many people could recite the lyrics to Beverly Hillbillies. My grandmother had a bone to pick with Irene Ryan- we never would have called her "Granny" if it weren't for the show. :-)

Mansions rarely make sense to me, but I remember seeing one in Chicago that worked - some insurance exec and his wife had 12 kids so all the beds and baths were needed.

[sugarwood]

Originally Posted by speeder

I've always thought that one of the best things about being rich would be the privacy you could engineer. Poor people have to live on top of each other, I'd be so alone on my property or w family and friends only.

Funny how the wealthy live in cities, and the less wealthy live in rural areas.

[speeder]

Originally Posted by sugarwood

Funny how the wealthy live in cities, and the less wealthy live in rural areas.

With $$, you can live in a city w plenty of privacy and still have everything a city has to offer at your fingertips. Or live in a place like Westchester, and be minutes from the city w plenty of nice amenities right in your community.

There is no value in living far from a city, IMO.

[URY914]

Same with those mansions/ranches out in the mountains of Montana, Colorado and Idaho I see in magazines. They are HUGE and in the middle of nowhere. 3 hour round trip to get a gallon of milk.

[unclebilly]

Originally Posted by speeder

There is no value in living far from a city, IMO.

Citiodiots will never understand this (and that is part of what is great of rural living).

We enjoy our peace and quiet. We enjoy our freedom to do what we wish, when we wish (including firing off 1000s of rounds like we did at my place this afternoon with some colleagues). We enjoy our views of the Rockies. We enjoy that our closest neighbor is 3/4 of a mile away and we never hear them, their kids, or their animals. We enjoy that our kids can play outside in our yard unsupervised. We enjoy that our kids can ride motorbikes and quads at home. We enjoy sitting around a camp fire in our yard and watching the sun set over the Rockies - we can do this when ever.

Everything that city people do when they go camping, we can do at home in our yard, when ever we want and we don't have to listen to the generator in the RV in the campsite 30 feet away from us.

[ckissick]

Actually, it was their kinfolk who said, "Jed move away from there"
Said "Californy is the place you ought to be"
So they loaded up the truck and they moved to Beverly.

[Grog]

Originally Posted by URY914

Same with those mansions/ranches out in the mountains of Montana, Colorado and Idaho I see in magazines. They are HUGE and in the middle of nowhere. 3 hour round trip to get a gallon of milk.

Yes, those poor cattle ranchers have to drive 3 hours to get milk. LOL

[URY914]

Originally Posted by ckissick

Actually, it was their kinfolk who said, "Jed move away from there"
Said "Californy is the place you ought to be"
So they loaded up the truck and they moved to Beverly.

Hills that is.
Swimming pools and movie stars.


I used to sing it to put my daughter to sleep.

[flipper35]

For us the nearest big city is Chicago and it is 2.5 hours away. About far enough. The nice thing about living out in rural areas is the price of homes lets me have more disposable income to go do things I like to do instead of paying taxes. There is nothing a big city offers that I would need that I can't get or do with a 20 minute drive on rural roads with scenery on the way there.

I have driven in Chicago and LA enough to know that it would take a 7 figure salary to get me to live there.

That said, to each their own. Some people like the hustle and bustle and busy life of the city and that is fine with me. It leave more outdoor space for those of us that don't need a big city.

[GH85Carrera]

Yea, the big city life and traffic is not for me. Oklahoma City is right at one million people for the metro area. It covers a 1,000 square miles but a lot of that is pretty rural.

We live on the edge of OKC and the suburb city is just 1/2 mile away. The vast majority of the shopping we do is on-line or in that suburb. Back when I commuted 12 miles to work I often drove 2 miles and never saw another vehicle on my way into a building 6 miles from the center of town.

There is a house just 1/2 a mile from mine that sits on 80 acres. The winding private paved road up to his house is two lanes wide, crosses a bridge that goes over a creek or small river next to his 12 acre pond and that road is 1/3 of a mile long. He must have a large staff of gardeners and groundskeepers. The place looks like a park. They are in the garden club so we have been up there to look around. The property is mostly wooded but he has a 4 or 5 hole golf course and he a barn with a lot of tractors and a garage with storage for 20 or more cars.