Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We are about to place our home on the market, the home shows well but the carpet needs to be replaced. Is it advisable to do so, or offer a flooring allowance so buyers can choose for themselves, and perhaps even install hardwoods.
Allowances are saying you're not really listed at such and such number, but you're at this other number. $300k with $5k flooring allowance means you're listed at $295k. Allowances aren't allowed in contracts anymore. You could call it closing costs as long as it doesn't exceed the % amount the buyer is allowed from their lender.
How bad is the carpet? Is it just old and worn, or are there stains/smells?
I've mentioned this in a couple of other threads, but a few years back, my husband and I looked at a home that had a great floorplan, but several cosmetic issues, and among them was very worn and stained flooring throughout the house. The owners offered only a $500 allowance toward new floors and new counters to replace the Barbie pink kitchen counters. Admittedly, the countertops were a bigger problem for me than the floors, but $500 wouldn't have gotten us anywhere with fixing the issues.
Another house we looked at clearly had kids and animals -- there were a variety of colorful stains everywhere and the house smelled of urine. That was a quick turn-off.
If the carpet is simply old and has seen better days, but is absent of (large) stains and any smells, you're probably fine to offer an allowance of some kind, however you have to do it. If, however, there are stains and smells (and be honest with yourself about this, or find a very honest friend to tell you the truth), it would be well worth your time to rip the carpet out and replace with a cheaper neutral.
The carpet is old, stretched, and probably has retained some dog odor, although has never been peed on as far as I know.
Our plan was to replace it with a cheap neutral, but at our price point, I think cheap carpet would be a bit of a turn off. I suppose if the carpet is in good condition it does come down to personal preference which can't be factored into the price. We may install hardwoods in the living room, as that is an important first impression, and leave the bedroom carpets as-is.
Even if you offer the allowance, you'll have some potential buyers that will not even make an offer because they'll think "if the carpet is THIS dingy, what else that's gross??" So my opinion is to replace the carpet as it may likely lead you to a quicker sale. Just don't go overboard when you choose a carpet--choose something cheap.
The carpet is old, stretched, and probably has retained some dog odor, although has never been peed on as far as I know.
Our plan was to replace it with a cheap neutral, but at our price point, I think cheap carpet would be a bit of a turn off. I suppose if the carpet is in good condition it does come down to personal preference which can't be factored into the price. We may install hardwoods in the living room, as that is an important first impression, and leave the bedroom carpets as-is.
I would get a very honest friend to give you an assessment of this -- preferably one with a great sense of smell. I have a friend with a nose like a bloodhound and a commitment to brutal honesty -- too bad I can't lend him to you for an afternoon.
Depending on the condition of the carpet, I think I would rather see a clean neutral carpet of a lower quality than a high quality old carpet way past its prime. If your price point is high enough, potential buyers would probably just rip it out as they would your old carpet, but it would be a lot more visually appealing during the buying process, not to mention, it'd smell better.
My brother and SIL just sold their 20-year-old home and did replace the original carpets with a medium-grade, mid-neutral color. Although paint and carpet colors can turn off buyers, they felt the original carpeting would be even more of a turn off. So if the carpet is dingy and worn, I would replace it.
Yeah, it's a tough question to answer, because it depends on the buyer.
Personally, each house I purchase in my life, the first thing I will do is replace any carpeting and repaint, before I even move in. So to replace carpet for me as a buyer is a waste of your money. I'd love to have the allowance. But for other buyers, they either don't intend to replace, or can't look past it if it is visibly dirty.
If there is an odor, which you've indicated there might be, I would replace it for sure, even if you put something cheap in. If there isn't an odor, it is a judgment call on your part, and depends on just how bad it looks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
