Latest news with #affluence
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Lifestyle
- Yahoo
Why the Ultra-Wealthy Are Betting Big on America's Luxury Ranch Estates
There's a new status symbol emerging among the ultra-affluent, and it's not worn on the wrist, parked in a garage, or framed and hung on the wall. Instead, it's sprawling, outfitted with panoramic views, sometimes off-grid, and often comes with a herd or two. From Montana's high plains to the rolling scrublands of Texas, expansive ranches—some rivaling national parks in size—are being scooped up at staggering prices. What was once the domain of multigenerational farmers and cattlemen has transformed into a magnet for billionaires, celebrities, and investors chasing space and solitude. Media magnate Ted Turner owns more than a dozen ranches across half a dozen states; retired golfer Greg Norman has an almost 12,000-acre game ranch in Colorado's White River Valley; and Kanye West has two Montana ranches totaling more than 10,000 acres. More from Robb Report This 137-Acre SoCal Estate Has a Massive Car Museum. Now It Can Be Yours for $125 Million. This Historic Boston Brownstone Was Given a Modern Makeover. Now It Can Be Yours for $15.5 Million. You Can Land Your Helicopter at This $8.3 Million Private Island in Nova Scotia Legacy ranch brokers say the demand is as intense as it's ever been, with multi-thousand-acre properties changing hands both in blazes of publicity and also privately, quietly, and quickly, with per-acre pricing reaching new heights. This cultural shift isn't happening in a vacuum. A perfect storm of post-pandemic wanderlust, Hollywood romanticism, and pop culture obsession—led by smash hits like Yellowstone—has vaulted ranch life into the UHNWI mainstream. While streaming numbers for a blockbuster western TV series may not directly correlate with ranch sales, the rustic lifestyle they glamorize is undeniably fueling the market. 'We're seeing a luxury ranch renaissance unfold in real time. These properties offer more than just privacy and scale—they deliver a lifestyle rooted in adventure, legacy, and connection to the land,' Latham Jenkins, a Jackson Hole–based broker with Live Water Properties who has recently sold several guest ranches in the region, tells Robb Report. And while the cowboy aesthetic is trending, the motivations for buying are more nuanced. Though some do seek a working ranch, increasingly, these buyers aren't ranchers by trade—they're founders, financiers, and heirs who view acreage as a solid, long-term store of value. They may also seek a recreational escape, a family compound, or a hedge against economic uncertainty. There is only so much land, however, and the strong demand for ranch properties is playing out in eye-popping transactions. A 1,507-acre spread near Austin, Texas, shattered local records with a $90 million sale last year. Elsewhere, the 50-acre Lost Creek Ranch in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, operated for decades by late developer Gerald T. Halpin, sold to Thomas E. 'Teddy' Gottwald after listing at $39.5 million. Meanwhile, a Montana cattle ranch held by one family for over a century sold in 2024 for more than $50 million, making it one of the state's priciest deals, The Wall Street Journal reported. Those sales, however, look like small potatoes compared to some of last year's biggest transactions. They include the 353,000-acre Brewster Ranch in West Texas—listed for nearly $246 million and sold to the Texas General Land Office for $164.6 million—and the 62,000-acre Cañon Blanco Ranch in New Mexico, now part of billionaire Stan Kroenke's staggering 1.8 million-acre land portfolio. As younger generations move away from ranching, these rural properties are increasingly passing into the hands of outside buyers with big visions—and even bigger checkbooks. The practical appeal is also undeniable. Ranches offer space to roam, low population density, and often, income-generating potential. Many buyers are also drawn to the mix of personal sanctuary and passive investment. 'Whether it's private families seeking generational retreats or hospitality groups curating immersive experiences, demand is strong,' adds Jenkins, who represented the Halpin listing. 'You just can't replicate the access to wild landscapes and the memories made riding horses, casting flies, or simply unplugging in places like this.' For example, Hollywood's cowboy-in-chief, Yellowstone creator Taylor Sheridan, purchased the iconic Four Sixes Ranch in Texas—a 267,000-acre spread that appeared in the series—for a reported $350 million in 2022. He's since monetized his holdings with equestrian events, concerts, and location rentals. He reportedly leased the property to Paramount for up to $50,000 a week to film. Meanwhile, Yellowstone star Kevin Costner has also embraced the ranch lifestyle. His 160-acre Dunbar Ranch in Colorado—complete with a private lake, baseball field, and treehouses—is available to those not ready to commit to ranch ownership as a vacation rental at a whopping $36,000 per night. For those looking to own a slice of the West, Wyoming currently boasts two standout options. The 190-acre Red Hills Ranch, once owned by Senator Herb Kohl, recently returned to the market for $65 million, while just down the road, the historic Antlers Ranch—spanning more than 16,500 acres of pristine wilderness—is asking $85 million after remaining in the same family for over a century. Out in California, Steven Seagal and Kelly LeBrock's former ranch, now known as Rancho Arroyo Perdido, is on the market for a cool $14.5 million. The 190-acre spread in the Santa Ynez Valley near Santa Barbara includes a hacienda-style main house, guest and staff quarters, horse breeding and training facilities, and about 75 acres of arable farmland. Clearly, in the eyes of America's wealthiest, the West has never looked so wild—or so worthwhile. Best of Robb Report The 10 Priciest Neighborhoods in America (And How They Got to Be That Way) In Pictures: Most Expensive Properties Click here to read the full article.
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Business
- The Guardian
Poorer children more likely to age faster than affluent counterparts, study finds
Children from poorer backgrounds are more likely to experience biological disadvantages such as ageing faster than their more affluent counterparts, according to a study. Academics at Imperial College London looked at data from 1,160 children aged between six and 11 from across Europe, for the study published in the Lancet. The children were scored using an international scale of family affluence, which is based on a number of factors including whether a child had their own room and the number of vehicles per household. Children were split into groups of high, medium and low affluence groups, and blood samples were used to measure children's average telomere length in white blood cells, while the stress hormone cortisol was measured from urine. Telomeres are structures found within chromosomes that play an important role in cellular ageing and DNA integrity, and their degradation is linked to ageing. Telomeres become shorter as humans age. Previous studies have suggested a link between telomere length and chronic diseases, and that acute and chronic stress can reduce telomere length. The study found that children from the high affluence group had telomeres 5% longer on average compared with children from a low affluence group. Girls were found to have longer telomeres than boys, by an average of 5.6%, while children with a greater body mass index (BMI) had shorter telomeres by 0.18% for each percentage increase in fat mass. Children from the medium and high affluence groups had cortisol levels between 15.2% and 22.8% lower than children from the low affluence group. The authors acknowledged the study had some limitations in that the children analysed were not from families living in poverty, and that the study should not be interpreted as showing a link between affluence and 'quality' of genes, but rather showing the indirect impact of environment on a known marker of ageing and long-term health. Dr Oliver Robinson, from Imperial's school of public health and senior author of the study, said: 'Our findings show a clear relationship between family affluence and a known marker for cellular ageing, with potentially lifelong patterns being shaped in the first decade of a child's life. 'It means that for some children, their economic background may put them at a biological disadvantage compared to those who have a better start in life. By failing to address this, we are setting children on a lifelong trajectory where they may be more likely to have less healthy and shorter lives.' Robinson added: 'Our work suggests that being from a low affluence background is causing additional biological wear and tear. For children from the low affluent group this may be equivalent to approximately 10 years of ageing at the cellular level, compared to children from high affluence backgrounds.' Kendal Marston, from Imperial's school of public health and the first author of the study, said: 'We know that chronic exposure to stress causes biological wear and tear on the body. This has been demonstrated in animal studies at the cellular level – with stressed animals having shorter telomeres. 'While our study couldn't show that cortisol was the mechanism, it does demonstrate a link between affluence and telomere length, which we know in adulthood is related to lifespan and health. It may be that children from less affluent backgrounds are experiencing greater psychosocial stress. For example, they may be sharing a bedroom with family members, or they may not have the resources they need for school – like access to a computer for homework.'
Telegraph
07-05-2025
- Lifestyle
- Telegraph
The cost of being ‘middle class' is now extortionate
Join Katie in the comments from 1pm It used to be that if you excelled at school, went to university, got a high-flying job and worked your way up the career ladder by your late 30s or 40s, then a comfortable, middle-class lifestyle would reliably await you. Having a large house with two cars outside, private school for the children and going on at least two foreign holidays a year were once the hallmarks of a middle-aged professional who had achieved a high level of success in their career. But times have changed, and a lifestyle involving all of the above is now a pipe dream for all but the very highest earners. There is not much 'middling' about it, when even those whose salaries are in the top 1pc can no longer afford to live this way, that is, unless there is a sizeable inheritance subsidising it. The lifestyle that the current generation of professionally successful 30- and 40-somethings can now afford on their higher-than-average wages looks very different to the environment they grew up in as children. In many ways it is richer, with a vast array of entertainment, fashion and technology at their fingertips, and at relatively cheap prices. Superficially at least, affluent people's lifestyles may never have been better. Whereas the boomer generation would have been content with a Friday night in, watching only what was on the terrestrial TV guide and a home-cooked meal, my generation would consider anything less than Netflix and a Deliveroo takeaway to be thoroughly depressing. But let's be honest. This constant stream of little treats, new 'stuff' and short attention span-inducing distractions to which people with any amount of disposable income have become accustomed, bears no relation to traditionally 'middle-class' lifestyles. Instead, the 'cushiness' of it all it provides a welcome distraction from thinking for too long about how prohibitively expensive the big, important pillars of a comfortable, middle-class existence have become over the past decade or longer – and how the tax burden on high earners has soared, too. By far the biggest differentiator between the old and new middle class has been the stonking rise of house prices which have soared far beyond wages, therefore placing the sorts of homes bought by previous generations of high earners firmly out of reach for today's equivalents. The street I live on provides a good example of this in action. It's a quiet but ordinary residential road in a not very trendy area of London. On it are the sorts of terraced houses which two or three decades ago might have been considered as relatively small, narrow and certainly not the preserve of high earners. But according to the Telegraph's new calculator, it is now considered to be 'upper middle' class. House prices have now climbed to such a degree that anyone who has bought there recently is more than likely a professional couple both earning well, and with a vast mortgage they'll be paying off until into their silver years. When someone decides to leave the road, their house – and its asking price –is publicly listed on Rightmove. Messages often follow on the street WhatsApp group from older residents, who bought theirs for approximately five shillings goodness knows how long ago, and are therefore feel bemused at how much the younger folk are now shelling out. 'Who would pay that much for a rabbit hutch?', said one recently. Awkwardly, a middle-aged man replied, saying, 'Me, actually, and it's not a rabbit hutch, it's actually very spacious.' The man in question works in finance and probably earns far more than the commenter ever has. Yet, he is likely mortgaged up to his eyeballs while the commenter may well sit mortgage-free in a similar house across the road. Burdened by these giant mortgages, as well as the stealth raid on higher-rate taxpayers by successive governments, there simply isn't enough left over for the middle-class staples of the past, even for those lucky enough to be on six-figure salaries. Thanks to Labour adding VAT to private school fees, day fees for schools in many areas now top £30,000, and £45,000 for boarders. For two children, this is the equivalent of £60,000 of post-tax income, which assuming the parents pay higher rate-tax, is equivalent to £100,000 of pre-tax income, or more if they pay at the additional rate. To afford this on top of the mortgage, bills and everything else, you'd need to be earning within the top percentage point compared to the rest of the country – as a bare minimum. Then come the cars and the holidays, which for many feel as though they're slipping out of reach, too. A flash poll by Telegraph Ski found that 70pc of readers think ski holidays are becoming unaffordable, and as I reported in March, the most sought-after luxury summer resorts targeting 'middle-class' families are now charging £10,000 for a family during school holidays. My generation is left wondering whether the phrase 'middle class' is an outdated relic which no longer applies, because nowadays, there's nothing remotely middling about the cost of the things the phrase alludes to. Whereas once attainable for those who worked hard and did well, the truth is that the traditional middle-class lifestyle has become so extortionate that it is now the preserve of the elite. But while the true middle are busy enjoying their relatively low-cost luxuries like Netflix subscriptions, fancy brunches and Zara clothes hauls, daily life feels good enough for them not to fully notice how far the financial goal posts are shifting before their eyes.
