Disgusted Seller (Orlando: short sale, sex offenders, crime)

[zmgriffith]

Originally Posted by gettinoutofjersey

how can anyone make the ridiculous statement that many people do not want a new house?

I think there's a lot more to it than the way in which you're interpreting that comment.

New houses, by and large, are built poorly when compared with houses built 20, 30, 40 years ago.

For instance, in my old neighborhood in Kansas City, my house was built in 1926. The hole for the foundation was dug in 1924, filled with water, and was left to sit and settle for 18 months before construction began. There were separate crews for plumbing, tinsmithing, framing, plastering, carpentry, etc. I even found "W. E. Morgan, Paper Hanger 1926" written in lead on the plaster following the removal of 7 layers.

Now, you see the same 6 guys doing everything from pouring concrete todrywall to landscaping. They're fine - but they have nowhere near the level of specialized skill as yesteryear.

Nevermind the same cheap 3" pine baseboard, the same 69-cent-per-square-foot frizze carpet (taupe), the same crummy MDF cabinetry, the same Home Depot bulk-pack light fixtures, the same undersized $69 toilets, the same ugly faux-travertine tile, the same flimsy plastic shower stalls, the same lucite knobs and pulls, the same 4' x 12' fiberboard paneling on the outside, Chinese Drywall... and on and on and on.

"Building a House" means picking from a menu of 4 floorplans and 4 trim options.

I know you know some developer who only uses Kohler and Silestone and Reclaimed Timber and Sustainable Bamboo Flooring. BUT, the vast, vast majority of these new developments were barfed out in 7 months with no care given whatsoever for whether or not the house will even be standing in 20 years.

I think blueherons probably meant something along those lines, though she certainly does not need me to defend her.

[gypsychic]

Originally Posted by zmgriffith

I think there's a lot more to it than the way in which you're interpreting that comment.

New houses, by and large, are built poorly when compared with houses built 20, 30, 40 years ago.

For instance, in my old neighborhood in Kansas City, my house was built in 1926. The hole for the foundation was dug in 1924, filled with water, and was left to sit and settle for 18 months before construction began. There were separate crews for plumbing, tinsmithing, framing, plastering, carpentry, etc. I even found "W. E. Morgan, Paper Hanger 1926" written in lead on the plaster following the removal of 7 layers.

Now, you see the same 6 guys doing everything from pouring concrete todrywall to landscaping. They're fine - but they have nowhere near the level of specialized skill as yesteryear.

Nevermind the same cheap 3" pine baseboard, the same 69-cent-per-square-foot frizze carpet (taupe), the same crummy MDF cabinetry, the same Home Depot bulk-pack light fixtures, the same undersized $69 toilets, the same ugly faux-travertine tile, the same flimsy plastic shower stalls, the same lucite knobs and pulls, the same 4' x 12' fiberboard paneling on the outside, Chinese Drywall... and on and on and on.

"Building a House" means picking from a menu of 4 floorplans and 4 trim options.

I know you know some developer who only uses Kohler and Silestone and Reclaimed Timber and Sustainable Bamboo Flooring. BUT, the vast, vast majority of these new developments were barfed out in 7 months with no care given whatsoever for whether or not the house will even be standing in 20 years.

I think blueherons probably meant something along those lines, though she certainly does not need me to defend her.

I completely agree, we live in a vintage home and always have. Our current rancher was built in the 1950s of top quality materials and construction even though it is a small and modest home. For instance, the slab was poured 8" thick rather than the customary 4" - TWICE what it needed to be. It has gorgeous terrazzo floors over that which will last a lifetime and need almost no care. We have a huge "great room" with a very high cathedral ceiling with exposed roof beams - NO prefab trusses here! Built from poured reinforced concrete and stucco - a little fort. Lots of people prefer this to the cheap construction of today. That is not to say you can't buy something new with a better build, but it will definitely cost you.

[gettinoutofjersey]

Most older homes were built below flood which means you are limited on improvements and additions. This also impacts the cost of insurance. Most of your older homes have a lot of wood in them that was never treated which is a risk with wood destroying insects. Most older homes are not engineered to any where near the current wind codes which also means high insurance.

As far as old vs new, with old you pretty .much live with what you got. With new or a major renovation. You get exactly what you want. If you are looking at new and its junk you have the wrong builder.

[joeyddog]

What came to my mind on the original post was maybe the homes in the area aren't exactly comparable. You can have a beautiful $700,000 home but if it's been upgraded beyond the neighboring homes, it just won't sell. I know for me, when I was looking: odors (mold, potpourrismelly pets), odd colors, lots of mirrors, columns or statuettes were instant turn-offs.

[gettinoutofjersey]

i think many times the statement, i wouldnt want a new home is made by those that are in no position to buy one. kind of like saying i love my old car, i would never get rid of this piece of junk mercedes for a new ford. until they someone drops dead and leaves them some cash, then its on to the real estate office and the car dealer.

[staywarm2]

I would like a new home, IF it wasn't in the middle of nowhere, as so many are. OR if the new home was well built--not a cheaply built one with a high price.

[Trigger-f]

Originally Posted by gettinoutofjersey

Most older homes were built below flood which means you are limited on improvements and additions. This also impacts the cost of insurance. Most of your older homes have a lot of wood in them that was never treated which is a risk with wood destroying insects. Most older homes are not engineered to any where near the current wind codes which also means high insurance.

As far as old vs new, with old you pretty .much live with what you got. With new or a major renovation. You get exactly what you want. If you are looking at new and its junk you have the wrong builder.

There's nothing that can save a home from a swarming pack of termites, especially subies. Treating or not treating the wood, it's still wood, they find a way to get to the core (unless you keep up with spraying). At least older homes' exterior walls are built with concrete blocks, less wood to chew and theoretically can hold better in case of hurricanes.

I've seen quite a few older homes that had a 2nd floor added, not sure what you mean by major renovation(the interior walls are all drywall/wood). Been to Thailand/Phuket after the tsunami and seen new homes with reinforced concrete walls, ceilings etc.. now those you cannot renovate. Most everything in the US, you can.

[Californianz]

Not one response from the OP.

Showing the mob here the actual listing would help garner honest opinions, but bottom line - ANY HOUSE WILL SELL FAST - if the price is right.

By the sounds of all the work you had to do to get the house presentable - it's 90% for sure older and dated in other possible ways as well. A house doesn't have to be brand new - but over $700K it had better be immaculate because that range of buyers is probably only the top 3% of the market. That's only 30 lookers out of 1000 active buyers. If your house is a smelly 1960s tract nightmare - it's not going to sell. If it has low ceilings or a creepy layout - it will take forever to sell.

Location is a big deal - MANY areas in Sarasota are way past their prime. If you have blight encroaching into the neighborhood you aren't going to sell for what you think. If your street is close to the freeway or main road - forget about selling quickly and you'll have to be WAY under the rest of the neighborhood price. If your "lake" is a swamp - people will run away.

Assuming it's really really nice, in the most elite neighborhood in town, and you don't decorate like it's a garage sale in the 1960s - then you might be overpriced by a lot. Just guesstimating, but $700K should be over 5,0000 square feet (inside under A/C) too. If your house is 2,800 square feet - that's likely not the right price.

[loves2read]

in FL I would say one of the serious factors preventing someone from buying an older home is layout--
desireable home design/floor plans/flow ideas have changed significantly in the past 30-50 yrs...

Now people (young and older) are geared to an open living plan-- with large kitchen that offer wider aisles, more storage, a communal aspect and most homes built before the 1990s or 2000s just didn't offer that style...
some very forward thinking architects did design MCM homes with flow in mind and those homes usually find buyers quickly because even if the fixtures/colors are dated the house has "good bones" as they say...
you don't have to remove walls, raise ceilings, and make other very expensive modifications to get the floor plan you want...

One reason that certainly made the purchase we made last year more palatable was that the kitchen had been opened up and there was a spacious feel to the main living areas...
and the price of that work (expensive) hadn't increased the cost per sq ft over other homes w/o that modification...

(has the OP come back to this thread???)

[loves2read]

PS--being adamant about buying a new home and ignoring the realities of any specific house is just being stubborn for the sake of being stubborn IMO
In my home area (DFW TX) there are some areas with NO new construction--they are built out and the economics don't support tearing down an older/original home to built new...
yet those areas offer great amenities including top quality schools, good parks, safe location, and those homes are often priced less than new homes w/o those amenities--especially location...
If YOU bought a new home and you are happy with that--then fine
but to denigrate people's choices to buy older homes as ALWAYS a bad decision smacks of self-aggrandizement and rudeness...
They made their choice--it wasn't yours--but it is not your money doing the buying...