Images

Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch sold to billionaire for $22 million

Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch sold to billionaire for $22 million

The asking price of the property was $100 million in 2016 then dropped to $67 million a year later.
Updated 25 Dec, 2020

Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch in California has found a new owner in billionaire businessman Ron Burkle.

Burkle views the 2,700-acre property in Los Olivos, near Santa Barbara, as a land banking opportunity, his spokesperson said on Thursday in an email.

The Wall Street Journal reports the property was sold for $22 million to Burkle, an associate of the late pop star and co-founder of the investment firm Yucaipa Companies.

The asking price of the property was $100 million in 2016 then dropped to $67 million a year later.

In addition to a 12,500 square-foot main residence and a 3,700 square-foot pool house, the property boasts a separate building with a 50-seat movie theatre and a dance studio.

Other features on the ranch are a “Disney-style” train station, a fire house and barn.

Burkle’s spokesperson said the billionaire had been eyeing Zaca Lake — which adjoins the property — for a new Soho House, a members-only club with locations in Los Angeles, Miami, New York and Toronto. Burkle ultimately decided the location was too remote and expensive for a club.

Burkle is the controlling shareholder of Soho House.

After Burkle saw the property from the air, he put in an offer to purchase.

Comments

Dr. Salaria, Aamir Ahmad Dec 25, 2020 01:31pm
No doubt, in today's capitalistic world, money walks, money talks, money rocks, money mocks and often stalks.
Recommend (0)
Vijay B. Dec 25, 2020 01:46pm
2700 acres plus appurtenances near Santa Barbara California for just $22.0 million? that is a steal if I've ever seen one. The 12500 sq. ft. house alone is worth that much. Ron Burkle has literally stolen that property.
Recommend (0)
Chrís Dăn Dec 25, 2020 01:55pm
M. Jackson was unique.
Recommend (0)
Omar Dec 25, 2020 03:54pm
That’s throw away price for that property. Someone did not do their fiduciary duty.
Recommend (0)
Steve lomas Dec 25, 2020 04:45pm
@Vijay B. Metaphorically "stolen" perhaps, but "literally stolen" is actually libelous.
Recommend (0)
Chrís Dăn Dec 26, 2020 11:21am
@Dr. Salaria, Aamir Ahmad in this very case,it is the respect of the art of this artist which is acknowledged.
Recommend (0)