EXCLUSIVE Billionaires Jay-Z and Beyoncé raise eyebrows as they make a curious move on their $88M Bel Air mansion
Given their wealth and their extensive property portfolio of at least four luxury homes, the superstar couple's new 30-year loan from Morgan Stanley Private Bank has raised eyebrows.
They bought the Bel Air mansion for $88million in 2017 and opted to keep it when they purchased what was billed as California 's most expensive home in Malibu for $200million cash in 2023.
The two kept the Bel Air property, viewing the estate as 'home', partially due to its proximity to the school attended by their children - Blue Ivy, 13, and twins Rumi and Sir, 8.
But the Houston-born 43-year-old and the Brooklyn-born 55-year-old's decision to hold on to the house has now saddled them with another 30-year loan with an interest rate of five percent for the first ten years - totaling $310,000 a month.
This is coupled with their second 30-year mortgage they took out four years ago for $52.8million with Goldman Sachs at a 3.15 percent rate, with repayments working out at a $226,901-a-month.
It's possible they're using the recent mortgage cash for investments that could offset the five percent interest they're paying, but it still means they've borrowed an eye-watering $110.55million
But that's not all the expenses on the Bel Air homestead.
Adding to the mortgage payments is the not-so-small matter of property tax - $1,204,120 from 2024 to 2025, or roughly $100,343 a month for the Bel Air estate.
Before factoring in staff and maintenance, the couple is already shelling out $637,244 a month in mortgages and property taxes alone.
The lavish estate features eight bedrooms, 11 bathrooms, four outdoor swimming pools, a spa, wellness center, media room, multiple outdoor entertaining areas, 15-car garage, full-sized basketball court and staff quarters.
Designed by developer Dean McKillen, the striking Bel Air compound is composed of six interconnected structures and sits on two acres of land high up in the hills.
The mansions glass-walled common areas offer expansive panoramic views of Los Angeles, and its pocketing glass doors and windows are bulletproof.
They borrowed $52.8million to buy the place and refinanced again in 2021 with Goldman Sachs for the same amount, before adding a further $57.75million borrowing in April this year.
This revelation is more eye-catching as the pair paid nearly $200million for another property in Malibu - in cash.
In March 2023, they stumped up the mammoth amount to buy their Malibu home, which at the time smashed all real estate records in California and was the highest amount paid for a home in the US that year.
The seaside estate is located on an eight-acre bluff that overlooks the Pacific Ocean in the Paradise Cove area nicknamed Billionaires' Row.
The 40,000-square-foot home was created by renowned Japanese architect Tadao Ando, who designed Kanye West's former Malibu place, and took 15 years to build.
Ando is also a Pritzker Prize winner known for his unique concrete structures in Asia, Europe and North America.
The seven-bed, 11-bath mansion, originally listed for $245milllion, has an infinity and private pool and an expansive backyard that boasts a pool and ends with a cliff that overlooks the beach.
The minimalist modern house was originally commissioned and owned by William Bell, a famed art collector, who bought the property for $14.5million in 2003, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Bell spent almost 15 years building the concrete structure of the house but never listed it on the market - only showing it to a select group of buyers until the superstar couple purchased it, according to the publication.
Jay-Z and Beyoncé also own a $26million estate in East Hampton. Known as the Pond House, the seven-bedroom mansion sits on two acres with over 200ft of pristine water frontage.
Designed to capture both sunrise and sunset over the water, the home features classic parquet de Versailles floors, hand-carved heated marble bathtubs and 18th-century fireplaces - blending timeless elegance with modern luxury.
Jay-Z personally purchased his 8,300-square-foot $6.85million penthouse in the Manhattan neighborhood of Tribeca in 2004 - three years after he got into a relationship with the former Destiny's Child singer.
It was the same location where the two were married in a small ceremony in 2008. That building has also housed superstar residents such as Hailey and Justin Bieber.
Beyoncé and Jay-Z originally met back in 1998 and have amassed a c ombined 56 Grammy Awards and $3billion net worth between them.
Beyoncé is currently on her 32-date Cowboy Carter World Tour, which has grossed $269.5million and is set to wrap in Las Vegas on July 25 and 26 - with daughter Blue Ivy joining her as a backup dancer.
Her four-day show in Atlanta, Georgia, just wrapped up on Monday and ran into a road bump when news emerged that unreleased music was reportedly stolen from her choreographer's SUV on July 8.
The incident is said to have happened around 8pm inside a parking deck at Krog Street Market, three days before her sold-out run at Mercedes-Benz Stadium.
At this time, the suspect, whose identity has not yet been released, has not been found.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
15 minutes ago
- The Independent
Britain has no business laughing at Trump's EU trade deal
In a world where Donald Trump's tariffs and trade wars make everyone a loser, are there any winners from his latest deal, sealed by a handshake with the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, in a ballroom at one of the president's Scottish golf courses, of all places? One very clear loser is von der Leyen herself. If body language is anything to go by, she looked like she'd been badly bullied by the Big Orange Man – and, truthfully, so she had. In her own clipped remarks, she admits that a reduction in tariffs to 15 per cent, while 'not to be underestimated', was 'the best we could get'. President Macron has declared the US-EU trade deal a 'dark day' for Europe – and you can understand why. A general tariff level of 15 per cent – better than the 20 per cent proposed by Trump on his infamous 'Liberation Day' in April, and even better than the 30 per cent he was threatening a couple of weeks ago – is still prohibitive. It is certainly way above the 2 to 3 per cent levels that most EU exporters used to face. A trade war has been avoided, but this looks like the kind of deal the Americans have forced on the likes of Vietnam or Indonesia. So it is something of a humiliation for the mighty European Union, a global trade superpower. The feeling in some parts of Europe must be that if von der Leyen had played hard ball like the Chinese, a more evenly balanced and more advantageous relationship could have been reached in the long run. We will never know the truth about that. For European pride and for many of its great industrial concerns, the deal is disappointing, and will be expensive – the Volkswagen group is just one to speak out. But for European consumers, it is surely good news. They will be able to enjoy cheaper imports from the United States; it is American customers who will have to pay more for their French wines and Italian sports cars. Could it be that the EU's trade deal – which Trump has, well, trumpeted as the 'biggest ever', and whose biggest 'win' is the removal of a threat to raise tariffs to 30 per cent later this week – is marginally worse than the one Starmer did with Trump in May? Britain's trade deal lowered tariffs of UK goods imported into the US to 10 per cent, and imposed a lesser, 25 per cent tariff on the UK steel industry, with room for further concessions, while the 50 per cent 'worldwide rate' will remain for the EU. For those now cheering this as a rare Brexit benefit, it is a hollow victory. For the concessions to Britain are so minor, they cannot hope to make up for the ground lost since Brexit – essentially, a GDP loss in excess of 5 per cent. And we're not out of the rough, by any stretch. As Keir Starmer meets the US president for further trade discussions at the Trump Turnberry golf course, he will be acutely conscious of his counterpart's unpredictability. Starmer has milked the modest concessions he managed to wangle, particularly on cars and food standards, but much remains vague and far from nailed-down. The greatest danger is the fuzzy UK commitment to improve the trading environment for the US pharma groups will eventually mean an enormous increase in the drugs bill for the National Health Service, which it can ill-afford. Trump also omitted virtually the whole of the service sector from his UK deal, where the British actually enjoy a surplus, which is great until he decides otherwise. There are no legally binding rules here. The world economy remains highly inter-dependent, and globalisation, while receding, cannot sensibly be ended, as even Elon Musk tries to argue. All barriers to trade harm the country that erects them both directly and, in their depressing effects on world growth, indirectly. Consumers are charged more, on a highly regressive basis, companies are forced to pay more for inputs, and be less cost-effective, and competition and dynamic structural change are deliberately impeded. Whatever the details of the individual deals counties are trying to strike with one another, tariffs make us all poorer in the long run.
Reuters
16 minutes ago
- Reuters
Is U.S. stock rally near 'Mag 7' turning point?
ORLANDO, Florida, July 28 (Reuters) - As investors brace for the busiest week of the U.S. earnings season, with four of the 'Magnificent Seven' tech giants reporting, debate is picking up again about these megacap firms' influence over U.S. equity indexes and whether we could be seeing the beginnings of true market broadening. By some measures, this small clutch of tech titans' profits, market cap, and valuations as a share of the wider market has never been bigger. Broader indices are at record highs, but strip out these firms and the picture is much less rosy. Indeed, since the beginning of 2023, the S&P 500 composite - the benchmark 'market cap' index increasingly dominated by the 'Mag 7' - has gained 67%, more than double the 'equal-weight' index's 32%. Only two years ago, the S&P 500 composite/equal-weight ratio was 0.66, meaning the composite index was worth around two-thirds of the equal weight index. That ratio is now 0.84, the highest since 2003. There's good reason for that. According to Larry Adam, chief investment officer at Raymond James, 12-month forward earnings estimates for the S&P 500 have outpaced estimates for the equal-weight index by 14%. And Tajinder Dhillon, senior research analyst at LSEG, notes that the 'Mag 7' last year accounted for 52% of overall earnings growth. Many investors and analysts consider it unhealthy to have the fate of the entire market dependent on so few companies. It may be fine when they're flying high, but not so much if one or two of them take a dive. Plus, it makes stock picking more difficult. If the market basically goes where the 'Mag 7' or Nvidia go, why should an investor bother buying anything else? That's a recipe for market inefficiencies. There have recently been nascent signs that the market may be broadening out beyond tech and AI-related names, largely thanks to positive news on the trade front. Last week, the equal-weight index eclipsed November's high to set a fresh record. Raymond James's CIO Adam notes that the equal-weight index outperformed the S&P 500 last week for the fourth week in the last 13. More of the same this week would mark its first monthly outperformance since March. Can it hit this mark? Around 160 of the S&P 500-listed firms report this week, including Meta and Microsoft on Wednesday and Amazon and Apple on Wednesday. It's not a stretch to say these four reports will move the market more than the rest combined. LSEG's Dhillon says the Mag 7's share of total earnings growth is expected to fall to 37% this year and 27% next year. The expected earnings growth spread between Mag 7 and the wider index in the second quarter - 16.4% vs. 7.7% - is the smallest since 2023, and will shrink more in Q3, he adds. [Why does he believe this will be the case?] Larry Adam at Raymond James, however, thinks the recent market broadening is a "short-term normalization" rather than a "material shift". He thinks the earnings strength of the tech-related sectors justifies the valuation premium on these stocks. Regardless, what we know for sure is that fears about the market's concentration and narrowness have been swirling for years and there has yet to be a reckoning. The equal-weight index's rise to new highs last week suggests the rising tide is lifting all boats, not just the billionaire's yachts. Essentially, the Mag 7 and large caps are outperforming, but if you peel back the onion, other sectors like financials and industrials are also doing well. And look around the world. Many indices outside the U.S. that aren't tech-heavy are approaching or printing new highs also, like Britain's FTSE 100 and Germany's DAX. "To see the largest names leading isn't a worrisome sign, especially as they are backing it up with very strong earnings," says Ryan Detrick, chief market strategist at Carson Group. "This isn't a weak breadth market, it is broad based and a very healthy rally." This week's earnings might go some way to determining whether this continues for a while yet. (The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters)
Reuters
16 minutes ago
- Reuters
Carlyle picks insiders for newly minted role of co-presidents after reshuffle
July 28 (Reuters) - Alternative asset manager Carlyle (CG.O), opens new tab said on Monday it has rejigged its senior leadership ranks and named three of its veterans for its newly created role of co-presidents. Chief Financial Officer John Redett, credit head Mark Jenkins and client business head Jeff Nedelman will become the company's co-presidents, effective January 1, 2026. "These individuals, all Carlyle veterans, are proven leaders whose deep expertise and extensive experience will drive our next phase of growth," CEO Harvey Schwartz said in a statement. Since Schwartz took the helm in 2023, Carlyle has undergone a multi-year transformation to boost growth by rejigging leadership and realigning its compensation model, while expanding beyond its private equity roots. The company said the leadership appointments would bolster its ability to operate at scale in a competitive environment. In the newly created roles, the trio will closely work with Schwartz to further Carlyle's growth ambitions, the firm said. In addition to their new roles, Jenkins will lead the credit and insurance business, while Nedelman will continue to head the client business. Redett will lead Carlyle's private equity business as well as oversee the corporate private equity and real assets businesses. Justin Plouffe, who is the current deputy chief investment officer for Carlyle's credit business, will succeed Redett as the finance boss of Carlyle next year, the company said. Michael Wand, who oversees the firm's private equity business in Europe, will become the head of EMEA investments and work in tandem with the company's co-presidents. Admiral James Stavridis, the former Supreme Allied Commander at NATO and Carlyle's vice chair of global affairs, will become the company's vice chairman. With $453 billion of assets under management, Carlyle deploys private capital across private equity, credit and its AlpInvest business. Carlyle is set to report its quarterly results next week. Its stock has jumped nearly 26% this year.
