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.
I looked at the nearby homes for sale and they seem to be more updated, especially the kitchens. There's two near your price range that are your competitors. At this point you need to think about the carrying costs and price your home where it will pay off your mortgage so you don't incur any more costs.
Have you gotten any feedback from showings or had the realtor made any suggestions?
It is alone at its price point. The cheapest in town.
Just speaking honestly, your pictures are terrible and present the property as if it's in a dilapidated state. Combined with the price, they make it seem like your property is a run-down house that will need a ton of work to get into a livable state.
Now, that probably isn't the reality, but when the vast majority of people start their search online, the pictures on your listing are hurting you; I'm certain it presents much better in person but you need to get people's feet in the door first, and photos that look like they were taken off of a cell phone aren't helping you at all: they make the outside look small and dingy, the bedrooms look tiny, and the inside not very well-lit.
Look at your competition nearby, especially the listings at 2128 Birchwood Ln, 425 Wightman St, 2343 Abbott Ave and, most especially, 1249 Iowa St. When you compare the photos of those properties to yours, answer honestly which one, as a buyer, you would choose to look at. Spending a couple of hundred dollars for professional photos to be taken would be a worthwhile investment that should drive more traffic to your home.
None of the above comments are meant to bash your house. It's merely pointing out that the presentation of your home is not up to par with your competition, and is likely a strong factor in why it's lingering on the market.
The pictures that have furniture in them are too dark or blurry or the room is cluttered. Most of the pics that show empty "rooms" are really just showing off a wall. The kitchen pictures are better, but, honestly, the way those pulls are angled drives me nuts and might be enough to make me not see your house.
I would redo the front flower bed; right now it looks unkempt.
About 1/3 when I moved in, and 2/3rds this spring before listing. I wish I had done some of the improvements earlier, for us to enjoy!
You just "upgraded" to vinyl flooring in the kitchen and bathroom? That isn't an upgrade to anyone and probably not worth the money you put into it. Most likely any buyer will plan on changing it.
I also agree with the other posters, your pictures do no justice to the house.
I]Just speaking honestly, your pictures are terrible and present the property as if it's in a dilapidated state.[/i]
I'd probably have to agree with the above in general. What follows is an extremely frank discussion from my POV as a potential buyer in your type of market.
If we hadn't moved further south and inland for family concerns we had targeted south and central Oregon as a retirement place, had done considerable reconnaissance and I would be potentially a buyer in that market. In our search we had pretty much ruled out Ashland. In our price range 2-300K everything was dowdy, dumpy and plain overpriced as compared to the price range in Port Orford, Medford, Roseburg or even Willits CA at the time that we were looking.
If we just had to live in Ashland, we would probably pass on your home not due to size or BR/BA number but due to the lack of "charm' and the investment that would be involved to create it on the exterior. The off-center porch and general asymmetry of the exterior with no attempt to mitigate through plantings or other fool the eye methods, the tiny stuck on porch cover, the modern treated wood deck porch are non-starters for me, the overgrown exterior while manageable, is just a PITA for a new buyer who normally wants to paint and decorate. This is before I go inside the house to look. Working on the curb appeal issues is cosmetic rather than functional (except that porch) and represents an investment of time and cash into almost purely aesthetic issues, not on everyone's radar to do but critical to get someone to fall in love with the house. Frankly we saw lots of the same in Ashland in the lower price ranges so we passed on the city.
I looked at some online ads just now. If we needed to live in Ashland we would have looked at the older houses with more curb appeal and charm and possibly functionality in the 265K range. We would have used our cash position to help with an offer, ultimately paying but also getting much more which would be important on resale and not having to fork over a lot of cash for some exterior charm that is important to us. The other option would be to pick up a house in the lower price ranges that needed some serious updating inside which also scares buyers off.
The house could be adorable with attention paid to the details. I'm not trying to be mean but the term "dumping" cash into the house to sell it tells me about your priorities as a homeowner over the years that you lived there and that shows somewhat in the photos.
I'd take the lower offer if you can afford to. It's better than dumping more cash perhaps in a manner that will do more harm than good to your overall cause. Frankly a pet peeve of mine is the "new" paint, carpets, vinyl etc to sell a house. Usually I won't agree with what was done and often enough the ''improvements" are slapped up/on poorly.
I'm speaking within my area of expertise (which apparently is not discovering spider infestations, another thread) but in creating homes that people fall in love with. In 30 years and 4 home sales, our homes for sale never sat on the market for more than 3 weeks even in terrible or down markets. One sold in less than 24 hours after listing with multiple offers while others in the same neighborhood had languished for almost a year.
Cut your losses. You are paying for not doing the labors of homeowner love while you were there. Best of luck to you.
The reason this house is still on the market because it's way overpriced. I truly don't think different pictures would sell this house for asking price.
Those photos are awful! Way too dark. Those middle of the window drape things block both the view and the light. Take them down and patch the rod holes. Spend some time cleaning up the yard. Get the hose out of the picture and also the ladder. Trim that overgrown jungle. If you don’t know how to do it, hire someone or ask a neighbor for advice.
Get a professional photographer. The pics don't feature what they should, lots of close-ups of furniture, none of scope of rooms. Lots of pretty floors, none of rooms from a go angle.
Well, I just checked out the google street view and the problems are more than just the listing photos. It doesn't just look messy in the listing, it looks like the shabby house on the block.
Bare minimum:
- trim the bushes, mow the lawn, cut down the weeds and rake everything up
- stage the house at least a little bit (I've seen homes specifically listed as tear downs that presented better)
- use a better camera
- use better lighting - your house faces west, so late afternoon/early evening muted light is probably the best choice. The current photos look like they were taken late morning and give the place a dark cave like appearance, just not dark enough to hide the fact that the owner obviously doesn't own a rake or a broom.
- don't take photos from angles that accentuate flaws. The first picture people see now is the crooked uneven front porch behind lawn that obviously hasn't been mowed recently, and an empty garden hose hanger - while the hose lays in the un-mowed lawn! This stuff just screams 'lazy do nothing homeowner'
...and 2/3rds this spring before listing.
I wish I had done some of the improvements earlier, for us to enjoy!
Indeed. Too many suffer with X until they suspect that a buyer won't.
Even then though... it's rare that more than clean & fixed is required.
ftr... you'll not likely to ever see this money at sale.
I'll agree with the others. The house doesn't photograph well. When I looked through it, I thought it was a project home - something to buy only if it was for a fantastic price and if I had money to sink into it immediately. In my opinion, the entire kitchen needs to be re-done (the cabinets look older and a floating oven is a pet peeve of mine). The exterior needs a lot of help - the chain link fence (makes it look like the neighborhood isn't that good), the porch, the entrance - all of it needs to be fixed up, along with the landscaping (the playhouse in the back even looks dilapidated).
Unless I wanted to go through a big project right away, I'd prefer to buy a house that was more "done" and cost $30,000-$50,000 more. Not only would I not have to do much except maybe paint, but I could possibly get another bedroom or bath out of it. The house on Birchwood Lane, for instance - it's more expensive, but it's move-in ready, looks much nicer from the outside, has another bath, and a few hundred more square feet. The one on Wightman is comparable in size, but completely done - it looks really good on the inside and outside. Again, unless I wanted a project and had a lot of cash to be used for remodeling, I'd prefer to go for a higher mortgage and get the one on Birchwood or Wightman (or something similar to those) over your house.
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.
