Powerball winners in Missouri make big plans
ST. CHARLES, Mo. — Less than a week after they won a $96.5 million Powerball prize, an eastern Missouri husband and wife have made big changes in their lives and big plans for their future.
John and Susan Brands, both 49, of St. Charles were identified on Friday by the Missouri Lottery as the winners of the jackpot in the March 22 drawing.
Susan Brands is studying Web design and plans to finish the semester, according to a news release from the Missouri Lottery. The couple plans to replace their older-model cars.
Since discovering on the morning after the drawing that his ticket matched all five numbers plus the Powerball, John Brands has quit his job as a civil engineer. The native of Portageville, Mo., is thinking of buying farmland.
“Like the line from the movie ‘O Brother, Where Art Thou': ‘You ain't no kind of man, if you ain't got land,' ” he said.
Susan Brands, a native of Wichita, Kan., said she's looking forward to traveling, including a trip to New Zealand.
Why New Zealand?
“We're nerds,” she said. “That's where ‘The Lord of the Rings' and ‘The Hobbit' were filmed.”
The couple also said they plan to explore interests for which they haven't had time, such as learning languages, going to culinary school and, for John, taking guitar lessons.
John Brands let the computer select the winning combination.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Supreme Court’s health care law ruling worries 34 states
- Homeland Security panned for passing on bio-threat technology
- Huge, ancient quasar could alter theories on black holes
- Most young Republicans back legal marijuana
- Perceived slights have some New Yorkers longing for Pennsylvania
- Paul edges Walker in CPAC straw poll
- Buffet: Berkshire’s built to last
- Florida fisherman’s high court win spurs call for legal reform
- Monarch butterflies find milkweed supply dwindles
- Former K9 officer, a ‘gentle giant,’ accorded final salute
- FCC poised to limit Internet providers in auction of download speeds