Posted on

Elon Musk Plays a Familiar Song: Robot Cars Are Coming

Elon Musk , dressed in a leather jacket in front of adoring fans, looked like an ageing rock star on stage playing one of his greatest hits.

Robot cars are coming. 

Those fans at Thursday’s event swooned as they always have as he pushed out timelines for delivering robot cars and showed what those vehicles could look like. But outside the Hollywood-area venue, it wasn’t exactly clear that everyone believed his vision for the future is as near as he says.

Tesla stock fell almost 9% Friday amid investors frustrated with the continued lack of details for how the company is going to make the very complicated transition from maker of cars to maker of robots.

In essence, Thursday night’s much-hyped product reveal became something of a Rorschach test: Supporters, who point to everything Musk has accomplished with electric cars and other industries, heard a glorious future with driverless cars and humanoid robots. Critics—mindful of previous missed goals and maybe peeved by his contentious politics —saw more smoke and mirrors.

“Let’s not get nuanced here,” the chief executive told the crowd as they peppered Musk with questions, a reminder that even among the faithful, time is ticking for him to play some new notes. And to deliver a big hit.

What he did show was cool. A two-seat car with doors that swung upward to open, inspired, in part, by the sci-fi movie “Demolition Man.”

Though as Musk talked about the vehicle, it wasn’t clear he had settled on a formal name. On stage, he called it the “Cybercab,” while the company released details on its website calling it the “Robotaxi.”

Whatever the name, the straight lines of the small car resembled what might be the offspring of the Cybertruck , the pickup the company brought out last year after some delays, and the new Roadster that was first revealed in 2017 and has yet to come to market. Those delays are examples of “ Elon Standard Time ,” or his practice of setting a target only to miss it.

Robot cars are coming. 

The Cybercab/Robotaxi reveal also included what Musk says will be Tesla’s autonomous van, an art deco-inspired vehicle that resembled a giant toaster with an interior meant to feel like a spaceship and enough room for 20 passengers.

Like the small car, the van lacked a steering wheel—the sort of doodads currently required under regulations, though exceptions can be granted. The car could begin production “probably” in 2026, Musk said. He didn’t even suggest when the van might come.

The nearest timeline was deploying fully self-driving cars, through the company’s current offerings, next year in Texas and California.

Musk has been predicting driverless cars being just around the corner for several years, including in 2016 when he said Tesla would demonstrate a car driving itself from Los Angeles to New York City in 2017. That didn’t happen.

In 2019, he said he expected his robot taxis would arrive in 2020 . That didn’t happen.

But Tesla has pushed the envelope with its driver-assist system that is essentially a glorified cruise control—adjusting speed, keeping within a lane and other manoeuvres—but can’t technically drive the car itself. Tesla says the person behind the wheel is responsible for everything, though some drivers grow overconfident in its true abilities and act like the car is autonomous.

Musk likes to talk about how Tesla vehicles are collecting valuable real-world data that is used to train its AI systems.

After building Tesla into the world’s leading electric-car company, Musk in recent years has tried to position its future on robotics, saying it is focused on solving self-driving technology. “That’s really the difference between Tesla being worth a lot of money and being worth basically zero,” Musk said in 2022.

Despite that rhetoric, Tesla is behind in deploying cars on roadways without drivers. Alphabet ’s Waymo has deployed fully autonomous vehicles in places such as San Francisco, where paying customers can take its vehicles around the city without anyone sitting behind the wheel.

On Thursday night, Tesla demonstrated 50 vehicles, including the new two-seater, driving autonomously on private property of the Warner Bros. studios where Musk held his party for investors and supporters.

Detractors were quick to pounce.

“After over 10 years of Full Self-Driving development, Tesla is limited to a 20-30 acre geofenced 5mph 1950s Disneyland ride on a preprogrammed, premapped and heavily rehearsed route with no traffic and no pedestrians,” Dan O’Dowd , a critic of Tesla and founder of a rival software company, said in a statement. “Tesla robotaxi is nothing more than the latest work of fiction to come out of the Warner Bros. Studio.”

But Thursday night wasn’t about impressing the O’Dowds of the world. And maybe not even those watching on the livestreams through Musk’s social-media platform X—which counted more than 9 million views by Friday evening.

The real target were the hundreds of attendees at the event who spent the evening riding around in the cars and posting fawning videos of their experiences on social media, in turn, helping the event go even more viral and generating even more attention for the idea that Tesla is paving the way for a robot future.

Robot cars are coming. 

Not only did party attendees enjoy rides, but they were entertained by the latest versions of Tesla’s humanoid robots Optimus, which Musk has said could one day add $25 trillion to the company’s market value.

Former Tesla board member Steve Jurvetson posted a video of himself playing rock, paper, scissors with one of the robots. “Optimus just beat me in rock paper scissors!” he tweeted .

Others shared videos of robots pouring drinks and dancing.

“The markets won’t get what happened last night at @tesla ,” Robert Scoble, a blogger and former Microsoft tech evangelist, posted on X. “I couldn’t be more impressed. @elonmusk laid out a bunch for next decade. I have been to a lot of product launches and never have been to one like this.”

Some even compared the evening to when the late Steve Jobs unveiled Apple ’s first iPhone, marking the beginning of a new technology era. It was an idea that Musk was quick to endorse.

“Yes, this marks a fork in the road,” he tweeted afterward.

Robot cars are coming.

Posted on

‘Breathtakingly Fast’ McLaren W1, a $2.1 Million Hybrid, Sets a High Bar for Supercars

Every street McLaren since the F1 in the 1990s has been, of course, a supercar. But now the British company is hitting a new and higher mark with its W1, which has a 1,258-horsepower hybrid drivetrain—producing the most powerful McLaren to date. It’s a successor to both the F1 and the P1, and was revealed on Sunday.

Auto makers worried about the ups and downs of the battery electric car market are hedging their bets with hybrids and their plug-in variant. McLaren is no different. It has electric range, but only 1.6 miles.— he W1 will be priced at US$2.1 million, and only 399 will be sold globally. Unsurprisingly, all of them have already been allocated to customers.

Many familiar McLaren build traditions are in place, including rear-wheel drive, lightweight carbon-fibre unit construction and uplifting gullwing-type doors hinged only at the roof. The company says the W1 doors are of “anhedral” design and optimised for aerodynamics. The doors also “allow optimisation of airflow from the front wheel arches into the high-temperature radiators, providing extra cooling space that allows the size of the radiators required to cool the powertrain to be reduced, optimising packaging and saving weight.”

The interior carries over the two-tone colour scheme.
McLaren

This is a breathtakingly fast car. The all-new twin-turbo, four-litre aluminium V8 engine produces 916 horsepower, and the company’s electric motor module (coupled to a 1.38-kilowatt-hour battery) adds another 342, yielding the aforementioned 1,258 horsepower and 988 pound-feet of torque. The car revs to 9,200 rpm before hitting redline, and power flows through an eight-speed transmission with electronic reverse and a technically innovative hydraulic electronic differential. In a car weighing only 3,084 pounds, this produces zero to 60 miles per hour in 2.7 seconds, zero to 124 in 5.8 seconds, and attainment of 186 mph in less than 12.7. The top speed is electronically limited to 217 mph.

The W1 is slower off the line than a US$89,990 Tesla Model S Plaid edition (1.99 seconds to 60, the company claims), but off-the-line acceleration is a big advantage of electric cars. The McLaren’s power plant is, without doubt, impressive. About that engine, Richard Jackson, chief powertrain engineer, said in a news release, “We’ve designed it to be much more power-dense than our previous V8—generating 230 horsepower per litre and capable of revving higher…with supreme driver engagement.”

The driver will have the option of choosing Race mode, which stiffens the suspension (via Race or the more bone-jarring Race+ setting) and extends downforce wings at the front and rear. The motorised wings aren’t there because they look cool—they’re capable of putting 772 pounds of downforce on the road at the front and 1,433 pounds at the back. Racing cars have to stop, so the car gets six-piston brakes up front and four-piston units in the rear. From that 124 mph, the W1 can be at a standstill in 95 feet.

The side view-in road, not race, mode-reveals the slippery shape.
McLaren

The W1 will spend a lot of its time among civilians on the road, and there’s the choice of a Comfort setting that smooths out the ride for unstressed cruising around town. Comfort uses the hybrid system only for occasional torque applications. Sport is the interim choice, with full hybrid availability and faster throttle response.

Photographs of the W1 show an exceptionally aerodynamic two-door supercar, shaped by the preferences of the wind, in a gold-and-black two-tone color scheme, with that pattern carried over into the seating. The bottom cushions are gold but the black gradually intrudes in what might be called a Jackson Pollock thrown-paint effect. The mid-mounted engine, just behind the driver, is part of the design.

The side view-in road, not race, mode-reveals the slippery shape.
McLaren

In keeping with the trend toward owner customisation, McLaren says there are “virtually unlimited bespoke options” for the W1, including a new lightweight knitted-to-fit interior material called InnoKnit. The company claims that visibility is “best in class,” which is good if it means the driver can actually see what’s happening behind the supercar—a notorious issue. The driving position is said to be fairly reclined, with plenty of thigh support—useful when these cars corner at high speeds. The aluminium pedals are adjustable.

Start/stop buttons, the gear selector, window controls, and Race-mode switch are all mounted overhead the driver, with the Boost button on the steering wheel. The 8-inch centre screen offers USB-A and -C, as well as Apple CarPlay. Supercars aren’t known for storage space, but the W1 has small stowage and a sliding cup holder between driver and passenger. Weekend bags (or crash helmets) can be stashed behind the seats if the headrests are moved aside.

The W1’s fuel economy will undoubtedly be helped by its hybrid drive, but an actual figure has yet to be announced. It wasn’t a make-or-break figure for customers in this league.

Even aficionados of the marque who already own a McLaren Senna will want a W1, because it has 102 horsepower more. Keep in mind that 102 horsepower was considered perfectly adequate for British sports cars of the 1950s. In that same era, racers would drive to the track, compete, and then drive home again. The W1 appears ready to bring back that era.

Posted on

Formidable Scottish Castle With Turrets, a Pub and a Helipad Asks £8 Million

An imposing Scottish castle that has only had four owners in its more than 200-year existence has hit the market asking for offers above £8 million (US$10.45 million).

Seton Hall, as it’s known, was built in 1789 by architect Robert Adam using stone from Seton Palace, the since-demolished property that was considered to be Mary Queen of Scots’s preferred retreat, according to Savills, which brought the home to the market last month.

“Seton is an absolutely magical castle—from the moment you approach, to the inner courtyard, to the quality of interior design,” said listing agent Jessica Gwyn.

The castle—roughly 10 miles from Edinburgh—remained in the same family from the late 18th century until 2003, which “served to freeze Seton in a protective time warp,” according to the listing.

Castellated features such as slit windows and turrets can be seen from the outside, and inside “secret staircases, curved doors, curved walls, arched windows and hidden doors add to the charming sophistication of the architecture and design,” the listing said.

But the castle has since been refurbished to meet modern standards, and now also boasts a helipad, a full security system, a gym, a playroom, a silk-lined dining room and a billiards room.

The restoration project saw a team of expert stonemasons rebuild the castle’s many chimneys, turrets and rooftop parapets. Plus, ironwork was restored, the dumbwaiter reinstated and the 10,000-bottle wine cellar was brought back to life, Savills said.

Alongside the seven-bedroom home that forms the core of the castle, there are additional residences across the property, including Darnley Cottage and Bothwell Cottage—named after Mary Queen of Scots’s husbands.

The castle’s stables have been refurbished, too, and are adjacent to the “Stable Bar,” the castle’s private pub.

The owner—who Mansion Global couldn’t identify—“feels their time as custodian of this outstanding building has come to a natural conclusion and it is time for this historic home to be loved and cared for by someone else,” Gwyn said.

This article first appeared on Mansion Global

Posted on

The Anti-Status Watch: Why Men in Finance Love Cheap, Cheesy Watches

How do you tell the time? Neal W. McDonough, the COO of a finance and policy startup in Ho-Ho-Kus, N.J., looks to Charlie Brown, the loveable, miserable “Peanuts” protagonist. An illustration of the character occupies the exec’s watch dial, Brown’s stout arms acting as the minute and hour hands.

McDonough, 55, bought the kooky Timex for a Valentine’s Day trip about five years ago, along with a matching model depicting Lucy van Pelt (Brown’s frenemy) for his then-girlfriend. To his surprise, he kept wearing the $150-ish ticker after the trip. “It’s now my business watch,” he said, adding that such a non luxury model can telegraph that he’s under no obligation to be flashy. “I have nothing to prove to anyone,” he said. “And the fun thing is, a lot of people notice [my watch].”

Though finance guys famously flaunt Rolexes or Patek Philippes on their wrists, an established subspecies of money men goes the other way entirely. In place of a sleek steel case and elegant ceramic dial? Mickey Mouse. SpongeBob SquarePants. Fanta-orange rubber straps.

Over the years, highfliers have made headlines for sporting Swatches. (See: Blackstone Group CEO Stephen A. Schwarzman or former Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein .) That “wealthy guy, cheap watch” ethos continues to resonate in boardrooms and on trading floors, with men of all seniority levels embracing plasticky, offbeat designs, from superhero models to calculator Casios. Many resemble something you might win in a claw machine. Priced from $30 to a few hundred bucks, they’re a bit of fun and a different sort of flex, conveying an “I don’t need a Rolex” bravado that comes from having made it. Call them anti-status watches.

Patrick Lyons, the managing partner of a family office in New York, rotates two contrasting watches: a 1988 Santos de Cartier and a Nickelodeon “SpongeBob SquarePants” model with a tangerine strap.

The Cartier, a family heirloom, is a slice of French sophistication; the Nickelodeon dial features a giant image of a pink starfish named Patrick Star who lives under a rock. Lyons, 35, likes that the second watch is idiosyncratic—and that its starfish shares his name. “I wear that more often than my Cartier,” he said, adding that he hopes to pass down both models to future offspring.

Leroy Dikito, 42, an executive director at JPMorgan Chase in New York, chose his $450 “Avengers” watch from Citizen because it reminds him of his father, who loved comic books. Though its stainless-steel strap reads urbane enough, its cheerfully garish dial slices together images of the Hulk, Iron Man, Captain America and other superheroes. Working in finance, you need to be “serious all the time,” so a fun watch brings welcome levity, said Dikito. “People need to know there is more than the big job and the title.”

Since a suit can only inject so much colour, a watch offers that rare opportunity to “show off your personality,” said Eli Tenenbaum, 36, the director of corporate development for a New York private-equity firm. Plus, he noted, “If you wear a fancy watch, chances are someone else may be wearing the same one.” Tenenbaum runs little risk of twinning with a colleague when he straps on his Mickey Mouse or Snoopy Swatches, worn with premium Brioni or Zegna suits.

Evan Vladem, 37, considers his Casio calculator watch a neat “ice breaker” when schmoozing, a professional obligation for the partner at a financial advisory in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. “It came in handy to break up awkward moments,” he said of the black, $30-ish design, a Casio classic. At a dinner with an insurance partner a few years ago, he recalls, the conversation petered out after an exchange about a client’s situation, which involved some financial arithmetic. “I pulled out my wrist and said, with a smile, ‘Well, I’m happy I have my trusty calculator watch to help me here,’” said Vladem. “We both laughed. [It] kicked off another conversation.”

Even men who have invested heavily in high-end horology seem to be falling for cheap, kitschy designs. Scott Jay Kaplan, 44, a film producer and financier for Brooklyn company CoverStory, owns pricey models from Rolex and Audemars Piguet. But for daily wear he’s currently favouring a super-chunky $25 watch he bought in Argentina this past winter, a model similar to a G-Shock but by an unfamiliar brand. He says he has received a lot of compliments on it, and it has held up surprisingly well. “I bought it because it looked silly,” he said. “Not for clout.”

McDonough, the Charlie Brown fan, urges anyone considering a novelty ticker to follow just one rule: Don’t splurge. “I think the whole idea of luxury watch brands coming out with ‘kitsch’ watches is…a little bit absurd,” he said. “So anything over, say, $500 would be out.”

Prop styling by Marina Bevilacqua

The Wall Street Journal is not compensated by retailers listed in its articles as outlets for products. Listed retailers frequently are not the sole retail outlets.

Posted on

China Will Lift Ban on Australian Rock Lobsters, Australia PM Says

SYDNEY—China will lift a ban on Australian rock lobster imports by the end of the year, Australia’s prime minister said Thursday, as ties between the two major trading partners continue to stabilise.

The announcement, following months of speculation, comes after China previously lifted trade barriers on various other Australian goods including barley, wine and beef. Beijing imposed the restrictions in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic, during a diplomatic spat with Australia’s previous government.

Many of Australia’s live lobsters were sent to China prior to the ban, which sent prices spiralling downward.

“With our patient, calibrated and deliberate approach, we’ve restored Australian trade with our largest export market,” Australian Prime Minster Anthony Albanese said Thursday after meeting with Chinese Premier Li Qiang alongside an Asean summit in Laos. “We’ve worked for the removal of trade impediments one by one.”

Albanese said the lifting of the ban would support Australian jobs, and noted the ban will be lifted in time for Lunar New Year in early 2025.

China is Australia’s largest trading partner, but Australia’s growing security ties with the U.S. has added complexity to its relationship with Beijing. Ahead of the meeting with Li, Albanese said his message would be that “we’ll cooperate where we can, we’ll disagree where we must.”

Posted on

A Godfather of AI Just Won a Nobel. He Has Been Warning the Machines Could Take Over the World.

The newly minted Nobel laureate Geoffrey Hinton has a message about the artificial-intelligence systems he helped create: get more serious about safety or they could endanger humanity.

“I think we’re at a kind of bifurcation point in history where, in the next few years, we need to figure out if there’s a way to deal with that threat,” Hinton said in an interview Tuesday with a Nobel Prize official that mixed pride in his life’s work with warnings about the growing danger it poses.

The 76-year-old Hinton resigned from Google last year in part so he could talk more about the possibility that AI systems could escape human control and influence elections or power dangerous robots. Along with other experienced AI researchers, he has called on such companies as OpenAI, Meta Platforms and Alphabet -owned Google to devote more resources to the safety of the advanced systems that they are competing against each other to develop as quickly as possible.

Hinton’s Nobel win has provided a new platform for his doomsday warnings at the same time it celebrates his critical role in advancing the technologies fuelling them. Hinton has argued that advanced AI systems are capable of understanding their outputs, a controversial view in research circles.

“Hopefully, it will make me more credible when I say these things really do understand what they’re saying,” he said of the prize.

Hinton’s views have pitted him against factions of the AI community that believe dwelling on doomsday scenarios needlessly slows technological progress or distracts from more immediate harms, such as discrimination against minority groups .

“I think that he’s a smart guy, but I think a lot of people have way overhyped the risk of these things, and that’s really convinced a lot of the general public that this is what we should be focusing on, not the more immediate harms of AI,” said Melanie Mitchell, a professor at the Santa Fe Institute, during a panel last year.

Hinton visited Google’s Silicon Valley headquarters Tuesday for an informal celebration, and some of the company’s top AI executives congratulated him on social media.

On Wednesday, other prominent Googlers specialising in AI were also awarded a Nobel Prize . Demis Hassabis, chief executive of Google DeepMind, and John M. Jumper, director at the AI lab, were part of a group of three scientists who won the chemistry prize for their work on predicting the shape of proteins.

Thinking like people

Hinton is sharing the Nobel Prize in physics with John Hopfield of Princeton University for their work since the 1980s on neural networks that process information in ways inspired by the human brain. That work is the basis for many of the AI technologies in use today, from ChatGPT’s humanlike conversations to Google Photos’ ability to recognize who is in every picture you take.

“Their contributions to connect fundamental concepts in physics with concepts in biology, not just AI—these concepts are still with us today,” said Yoshua Bengio , an AI researcher at the University of Montreal.

In 2012, Hinton worked with two of his University of Toronto graduate students, Alex Krizhevsky and Ilya Sutskever, on a neural network called AlexNet programmed to recognise images in photos. Until that point, computer algorithms had often been unable to tell that a picture of a dog was really a dog and not a cat or a car.

AlexNet’s blowout victory at a 2012 contest for image-recognition technology was a pivotal moment in the development of the modern AI boom, as it proved the power of neural nets over other approaches.

That same year, Hinton started a company with Krizhevsky and Sutskever that turned out to be short-lived. Google acquired it in 2013 in an auction against competitors including Baidu and Microsoft, paying $44 million essentially to hire the three men, according to the book “Genius Makers.” Hinton began splitting time between the University of Toronto and Google, where he continued research on neural networks.

Hinton is widely revered as a mentor for the current generation of top AI researchers including Sutskever, who co-founded OpenAI before leaving this spring to start a company called Safe Superintelligence.

Hinton received the 2018 Turing Award, a computer-science prize, for his work on neural networks alongside Bengio and a fellow AI researcher, Yann LeCun . The three are often referred to as the modern “godfathers of AI.”

Warnings of disaster

By 2023, Hinton had become alarmed about the consequences of building more powerful artificial intelligence. He began talking about the possibility that AI systems could escape the control of their creators and cause catastrophic harm to humanity. In doing so, he aligned himself with a vocal movement of people concerned about the existential risks of the technology.

“We’re in a situation that most people can’t even conceive of, which is that these digital intelligences are going to be a lot smarter than us, and if they want to get stuff done, they’re going to want to take control,” Hinton said in an interview last year.

Hinton announced he was leaving Google in spring 2023, saying he wanted to be able to freely discuss the dangers of AI without worrying about consequences for the company. Google had acted “very responsibly,” he said in an X post.

In the subsequent months, Hinton has spent much of his time speaking to policymakers and tech executives, including Elon Musk , about AI risks.

Hinton cosigned a paper last year saying companies doing AI work should allocate at least one-third of their research and development resources to ensuring the safety and ethical use of their systems.

“One thing governments can do is force the big companies to spend a lot more of their resources on safety research, so that for example companies like OpenAI can’t just put safety research on the back burner,” Hinton said in the Nobel interview.

An OpenAI spokeswoman said the company is proud of its safety work.

With Bengio and other researchers, Hinton supported an artificial-intelligence safety bill passed by the California Legislature this summer that would have required developers of large AI systems to take a number of steps to ensure they can’t cause catastrophic damage. Gov. Gavin Newsom recently vetoed the bill , which was opposed by most big tech companies including Google.

Hinton’s increased activism has put him in opposition to other respected researchers who believe his warnings are fantastical because AI is far from having the capability to cause serious harm.

“Their complete lack of understanding of the physical world and lack of planning abilities put them way below cat-level intelligence, never mind human-level,” LeCun wrote in a response to Hinton on X last year.

Posted on

One of America’s Biggest Homes Hits the Market for $195 Million

The Pritzker estate in Los Angeles, one of the largest homes in the country, is hitting the market for $195 million. If it sells for that price, it would set a record for the city, where the priciest home sale on record was Jeff Bezos’ $165 million purchase of the Warner Estate in 2020.

The Pritzker listing comes in the wake of a bitter divorce battle between billionaire Tony Pritzker and philanthropist Jeanne Pritzker. The former couple built the house, completing it in 2011.

The roughly 6-acre parcel is in the Beverly Hills Post Office area, just over a mile from Bezos’ home. Situated on a promontory overlooking the city, the home has 180-degree views of downtown L.A. and the ocean, according to Stephen Shapiro of Westside Estate Agency, who has the listing with colleague Kurt Rappaport .

Clad in imported white Italian limestone, the gated estate is about 50,000 square feet with 16 bedrooms, 27 bathrooms and 18 fireplaces. The primary suite has his and hers bathrooms and closets, as well as an indoor and outdoor fireplaces, a hairdressing area, a custom pop-up TV and a balcony.

The lower level of the house has a flower-prep room and a soundproofed bowling alley with custom cabinetry for the bowling balls and shoes. A large theatre has velvet curtains, stage lighting, stadium seating and a projector room. The kitchen has three Gaggenau ovens, two stainless-steel sinks and a dumbwaiter.

On the grounds, a detached two-bedroom guesthouse has a balcony, elevator and its own patio. The estate also has a lighted tennis court with a viewing pavilion. The 75-foot green marble infinity pool overlooks the city, and there is a nearby outdoor kitchen with two barbecues, a large pizza oven, and a custom swimsuit spinner.

In Los Angeles, these types of features are unusual for properties in the hills, Rappaport said. “It’s very rare to have this type of acreage with a view,” he said.

The property also has a detached two-bedroom staff apartment, multiple staff lounges and a staff kitchen.

The Pritzkers are major philanthropists and the home was designed to host large fundraisers, with a large walk-in refrigerator and an extensive underground parking structure.

Because of new restrictions on building, the estate couldn’t be recreated, Shapiro said. “You couldn’t build it today,” he said, adding: “This is the finest house I’ve ever seen.”

Tony and Jeanne Pritzker, who were married for more than 30 years and have six children, declined to comment. The son of Hyatt hotel chain co-founder Donald Pritzker, Tony is a member of one of the country’s wealthiest and more powerful families. He and his brother, J.B. Pritzker , co-founded the investment firm the Pritzker Group, with J.B. ceasing his involvement around the time he became governor of Illinois in 2019.

In 2001, Tony and Jeanne paid $9.5 million for a circa-1938 house in the Beverly Hills Post Office area, according to property records. Then, through LLCs, they purchased several parcels on a ridge adjacent to their previous home. It is unclear how much they paid for the land, but one batch of parcels was purchased in 2005 for $14.7 million, records show.

Once the land was assembled, the Pritzkers started building a new home designed by the late Ed Tuttle of Paris-based architecture firm Designrealization. The Pritzkers moved into the estate in 2011, selling their previous home to celebrity chef Wolfgang Puck for $14 million, property records show.

Jeanne and Tony separated in 2022. The Pritzkers reached a preliminary settlement in April 2024, and Jeanne moved out of the estate that month. The divorce was finalised in May 2024, according to court records. Tony has since paid $19.5 million for a penthouse at Westwood’s Beverly West condominium.

Posted on

China’s Ghost Cities Are a Problem for Europe’s Luxury Brands, Too

How closely is demand for $3,000 handbags tied to home prices in China? Quite closely, it turns out, which is unfortunate for luxury brands.

Europe’s luxury stocks fell in early trading Tuesday after China’s economic planning agency failed to announce additional measures to kickstart growth that some investors had hoped for. The sector is still up 10% on average since Beijing launched its initial stimulus plans late last month.

Beijing hopes a cut to mortgage rates, and lower down-payment requirements for buyers of second homes, will jump-start the country’s troubled housing market. A package of loans to brokers and insurers to buy Chinese shares has had initial success at lifting the stock market.

Luxury spending in China has traditionally been more correlated with its home prices than with the financial markets or overall economic growth. Around 60% of net household wealth was tied up in property before prices peaked in 2021. Barclays estimates that falling home prices have destroyed about $18 trillion in household wealth since then, which is equivalent to roughly $60,000 per family.

This, along with worries about the wider economy, is hurting consumer confidence. Retail sales rose just 2.1% in August compared with the same month last year, according to data from China’s National Bureau of Statistics. When global luxury brands start to report their third-quarter results next week, Chinese demand is expected to have slowed since they last updated investors.

Flagging sales come at an unhelpful time for Europe’s luxury companies, which rely on Chinese consumers for a third of global luxury spending. After several bumpy years during the pandemic, luxury brands and their investors hoped that a comeback in Chinese spending would compensate for a slowdown among Europeans and Americans.

This looks increasingly unlikely. Luxury sales to Chinese shoppers are expected to shrink 7% in 2024 and by 3% next year, according to UBS estimates. As luxury brands have high fixed costs, including the most expensive retail rents in the world, a slowdown with such key customers could have an outsize impact on profit margins.

The last time the luxury industry went through such a rocky patch in China, barring the pandemic, was between 2014 and 2016 when Beijing was cracking down on corruption, including officials who were gifting Louis Vuitton handbags and Rolex watches in exchange for political favours. The global luxury industry barely grew for two years during China’s anticorruption drive, which also coincided with a property-market correction in the country. It didn’t help that shoppers in other markets were also tiring of logos back then.

Europe’s luxury stocks look expensive today compared with that time. As a multiple of expected earnings, listed brands’ shares now trade at a roughly 40% premium to their 2014 to 2016 average.

To justify the higher price tag, Beijing’s housing and wider economic stimulus would need to indirectly lift luxury demand. Measures rolled out so far may not be enough to slow the slide in home prices. China’s housing market is oversupplied by around 60 million units, according to Bloomberg Economics estimates.

New incentives to kick-start consumption are expected soon but will probably target mass-market products like white goods. China already rolled out trade-in subsidies for home appliances earlier this year and a range of consumption coupons.

None of this is very helpful for sellers of expensive luxury goods. For brands to see a recovery, Chinese consumers that spend anywhere from $7,000 to $43,000 a year on luxury products would need to feel much better about their finances than they currently do. Spending by this group has fallen 17% so far this year compared with the same period of 2023, according to a report by Boston Consulting Group.

Half-finished, abandoned housing estates are a big headache for China’s government, and are also on the mind of executives in Paris and Milan. Though the fortunes of luxury bosses likely isn’t high on Chinese officials’ priority list, their fates may be intertwined.

Posted on

People Without Kids Are Leaving Money to Surprised Heirs

Charities, distant relatives and even pets are benefiting from surprise inheritances. They can thank people without children.

Not having children is becoming more common, both among millennials and older people. A July Pew Research Center analysis found that 20% of U.S. adults age 50 and older hadn’t had children.

And many of these people don’t have wills. An AARP survey found half of childless people age 50-plus who live alone have a will, compared with 57% of others that age. Those without wills have less control over what happens to their money, which often ends up in the hands of people who don’t expect it.

This phenomenon of a surprise inheritance is common enough that it has a name: the laughing heir .

“All they do is get the money and go, ‘Ah ha ha, look at that,’ ” said Michael Ettinger , an estate lawyer in New York.

Kelley Gilpin McKeig, a 64-year-old healthcare-industry consultant in Ridgefield, Wash., received a phone call several years ago saying her cousin Nick Caldwell left behind money in a savings account. They hadn’t been in touch for 20 years.

“I thought it was a scam,” she said. “Nobody else in our family had heard that he had passed.”

She hunted down his death certificate and a news article and learned he had died about a year and a half before in a workplace accident.

Caldwell, who was in his 50s, had died without a will. His estate was split among cousins and an uncle. It took about two years for the money to be distributed because of the paperwork and court approval involved. Gilpin McKeig’s share was $2,300.

Afterward, she updated her will to make sure what she has doesn’t go to “just anybody down the line, or cousins I don’t care about.”

Who inherits

There are trillions of dollars at stake as baby boomers age.

Most people leave their money to spouses and children when they die. A 2021 analysis of Federal Reserve survey data found that 82% of heirs’ inheritances came from parents.

People with no children say they want to leave a greater share of their estates to charity, friends and extended family , according to research by two Yale law professors that surveyed 9,000 U.S. adults.

Rebecca Fornwalt, a 33-year-old writer, created a trust after landing a book deal. While her heirs are her parents, her backup heirs include her sister and about a half-dozen close friends. She set aside $15,000 for the care of each of her two dogs.

Susan Lassiter-Lyons , a financial coach in Florence, Ariz., said one childless client is leaving equal interests in her home to her two nephews. Another is leaving her home to a man she has been friends with for a long time.

“She broke his heart years ago and she feels guilted into leaving him property,” Lassiter-Lyons said.

A client who is a former escort estranged from her family is leaving her estate to two friends and to charity.

Lassiter-Lyons, who doesn’t have children, set up a trust for her two dogs should she and her wife die. The pet guardian, her wife’s sister, would live in their house while taking care of the dogs. When the dogs die, she inherits the house.

In the Yale study, people without descendants—children or grandchildren—intended to give 10% of their estates to charity, on average, more than triple the intended amount of those with descendants.

The Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles, which manages $1.3 billion of assets, a few years ago added an “heirless donors” section to its website that profiles donors and talks about building a legacy.

“Fifteen years ago, we never talked about child-free donors at all,” said Lew Groner , the foundation’s vice president for marketing.

In the absence of a will, heirs are determined by state law . Assets can wind up in the state’s hands. In New York, for example, $240 million in unclaimed funds over the past 10 years has arrived from estates of the deceased, not including real estate, according to the state comptroller’s office. In California, it is $54.3 million.

Hard questions

Financial advisers say a far bigger concern than who gets what is making sure there is enough money and support for a comfortable old age, because clients without children can’t call on them for help.

“I hope there is something left to leave,” said Stephanie Maxfield, a 43-year-old therapist in southern Colorado. “But if there isn’t, I think that’s OK, too.”

She said she would like to leave something to her partner’s nieces and nephews, as well as animal shelters and domestic-violence shelters. Her best friend is a beneficiary.

Choosing an estate executor and who would handle money and health decisions on your behalf can be difficult when you don’t have children, financial advisers say. Using a promised inheritance as a reward for taking care of you when you are older isn’t a good solution, said Jay Zigmont , an investment adviser focused on childless people.

“Unfortunately, it is relatively common to see family members who are in the will decide to opt for cheaper medical care (or similar decisions) in order to protect what they will be inheriting,” he said in an email.

Kirsten Tompkins, who is from Birmingham, U.K., and works in consulting, along with her husband divided their estate among their dozen nieces and nephews.

Choosing heirs was the easy part. What is hard is figuring out whom to ask for help as she and her husband get older, she said.

“A lot of us are at an age where we are playing that role for our parents,” the 50-year-old said, referring to tasks such as providing tech support and taking parents to medical appointments. “Who is going to do that for us?”

Posted on

Why Do Grand Hotels Fail? These 5 Examples Offer Some Answers—and Much Mystery

Many luxury hotels only build on their gilded reputations with each passing decade. But others are less fortunate. Here are five long-gone grandes dames that fell from grace—and one that persists, but in a significantly diminished form.

The Proto-Marmont |

The Garden of Allah, Los Angeles

A magnet for celebrities, the Garden of Allah was once the scene-making equivalent of today’s Chateau Marmont. Frank Sinatra and Ava Gardner’s affair allegedly started there and Humphrey Bogart lived in one of its bungalows for a time.

Crimean expat Alla Nazimova leased a grand home in Hollywood after World War I, but soon turned it into a hotel, where she prioritised glamorous clientele. Others risked being ejected by guards and a fearsome dog dubbed the Hound of the Baskervilles. Demolished in the 1950s, the site’s now a parking lot.

The Failed Follow-Up |

Hotel Astor, New York City

The Astor family hoped to repeat their success when they opened this sequel to their megahit Waldorf Astoria hotel in 1904. It became an anchor of the nascent Theater District, buzzy (and naughty) enough to inspire Cole Porter to write in “High Society”: “Have you heard that Mimsie Starr…got pinched in the Astor Bar?”

That bar soon gained another reputation. “Gentlemen who preferred the company of other gentlemen would meet in a certain section of the bar,” said travel expert Henry Harteveldt of consulting firm Atmosphere Research. By the 1960s, the hotel had lost its lustre and was demolished; the 54-storey One Astor Plaza skyscraper was built in its place.

The Island Playground |

Santa Carolina Hotel, Bazaruto Archipelago, Mozambique

In the 1950s, colonial officers around Africa treated Mozambique as an off-duty playground. They flocked, in particular, to the Santa Carolina, a five-star hotel on a gorgeous archipelago off the country’s southern coast.

Run by a Portuguese businessman and his wife, the resort included an airstrip that ferried visitors in and out. Ask locals why the place was eventually reduced to rubble, and some whisper that the couple were cursed—and that’s why no one wanted to take over when the business collapsed in the ’70s. Today, seeing the abandoned, crumbled ruins and murals bleached by the sun, it’s hard to dismiss their superstitions entirely.

The Tourism Gimmick |

Bali Hai Raiatea, French Polynesia 

The overwater bungalow, a shorthand for barefoot luxury around the world, began in French Polynesia—but not with the locals. Instead, it was a marketing gimmick cooked up by a trio of rascally Americans. They moved to French Polynesia in the late 1950s, and soon tried to capitalise on the newly built international airport and a looming tourism boom.

That proved difficult because their five-room hotel on the island of Raiatea lacked a beach. They devised a fix: building rooms on pontoons above the water. They were an instant phenomenon, spreading around the islands and the world—per fan site OverwaterBungalows.net , there are now more than 9,000 worldwide, from the Maldives to Mexico. That first property, though, is no more.

The New England Holdout |

Poland Springs Resort, Poland, Maine

The Ricker family started out as innkeepers, running a stagecoach stop in Maine in the 1790s. When Hiram Ricker took over the operation, the family expanded into the business by which it would make its fortune: water. Thanks to savvy marketing, by the 1870s, doctors were prescribing Poland Spring mineral water and die-hards were making pilgrimages to the source.

The Rickers opened the Poland Spring House in 1876, and eventually expanded it to include one of the earliest resort-based golf courses in the country, a barber shop, dance studio and music hall. By the turn of the century, it was among the most glamorous resort complexes in New England.

Mismanagement eventually forced its sale in 1962, and both the water operation and hospitality holdings went through several owners and operators. While the water venture retains its prominence, the hotel has weathered less well, becoming a pleasant—but far from luxurious—mid-market resort. Former NYU hospitality professor Bjorn Hanson says attempts at upgrading over the decades have been futile. “I was a consultant to a developer in the 1970s to return the resort to its ‘former glory,’ but it never happened.”