Size of Avg. US home over time

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]
There seems to be a HUGE misconception out there as many of these areas now seem to be so “undesirable” to a lot of young families that they never even bothered to explore them when they were house-hunting. In my day, these areas were HIGHLY DESIRABLE (yes, even 92113 and 92114 to dtn. workers). Hence, the current “urban defectors” now have 20-40 year bonds (and in the majority of cases, HOA dues) to pay for the entire length of their homeownership because of their choices to buy properties towards, into or beyond the “urban sprawl.” And have no lot with which to park their vehicles and “stuff” on for all the extra fees and taxes they are paying.
[/quote]

Because those families want new, crisp and clean.

[quote=bearishgurl]
Perhaps young families today feel some of the communities heretofore mentioned are too “cost prohibitive” to buy into for the living space they think they need. Piggs, you gotta ask yourselves, “Why is this so?”

As I’ve stated before, a “square-footage” problem can always be fixed but a (tiny) lot (purchased out in BFE) cannot :={[/quote]

bearishgurl, I feel that the older houses are cost prohibitive for what you get — old, functionally obsolete houses. That’s why people take the path of least resistance and buy new.

If we could provide housing in crisp, clean and “new” condition near the urban core, then people would stay.

[CA renter]

BG,

If we lived/worked downtown, we would absolutely be looking in the closer-in communities. For us, we live/work in North County, so we are looking to buy here.

I do agree with you about the older house/larger lot issue. We’ll never understand why people live in those PUD developments, and we only want to buy in older, more established neighborhoods with smaller, single-story houses and larger lots. Unfortunately, lots of other people seem to be looking for the same thing (see, people ARE looking for them!), so these homes/lots are VERY expensive, at least around here.

[CA renter]

BG,

If we lived/worked downtown, we would absolutely be looking in the closer-in communities. For us, we live/work in North County, so we are looking to buy here.

I do agree with you about the older house/larger lot issue. We’ll never understand why people live in those PUD developments, and we only want to buy in older, more established neighborhoods with smaller, single-story houses and larger lots. Unfortunately, lots of other people seem to be looking for the same thing (see, people ARE looking for them!), so these homes/lots are VERY expensive, at least around here.

[CA renter]

BG,

If we lived/worked downtown, we would absolutely be looking in the closer-in communities. For us, we live/work in North County, so we are looking to buy here.

I do agree with you about the older house/larger lot issue. We’ll never understand why people live in those PUD developments, and we only want to buy in older, more established neighborhoods with smaller, single-story houses and larger lots. Unfortunately, lots of other people seem to be looking for the same thing (see, people ARE looking for them!), so these homes/lots are VERY expensive, at least around here.

[CA renter]

BG,

If we lived/worked downtown, we would absolutely be looking in the closer-in communities. For us, we live/work in North County, so we are looking to buy here.

I do agree with you about the older house/larger lot issue. We’ll never understand why people live in those PUD developments, and we only want to buy in older, more established neighborhoods with smaller, single-story houses and larger lots. Unfortunately, lots of other people seem to be looking for the same thing (see, people ARE looking for them!), so these homes/lots are VERY expensive, at least around here.

[CA renter]

BG,

If we lived/worked downtown, we would absolutely be looking in the closer-in communities. For us, we live/work in North County, so we are looking to buy here.

I do agree with you about the older house/larger lot issue. We’ll never understand why people live in those PUD developments, and we only want to buy in older, more established neighborhoods with smaller, single-story houses and larger lots. Unfortunately, lots of other people seem to be looking for the same thing (see, people ARE looking for them!), so these homes/lots are VERY expensive, at least around here.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=briansd1]Because those families want new, crisp and clean.[/quote]

brian, why couldn’t an older home be clean? Why couldn’t you clean it yourself if you picked up a good deal? Have you ever heard of installing new bathroom fixtures or kitchen appls? As a buyer, would you rather do this in a well-located older home on a 9000 sf lot or buy a *newer* far-flung home on a 4000 sf lot (no guarantee of “cleanliness” there, esp. with an REO – lol).

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]Perhaps young families today feel some of the communities heretofore mentioned are too “cost prohibitive” to buy into for the living space they think they need. Piggs, you gotta ask yourselves, “Why is this so?”[/quote]bearishgurl, I feel that the older houses are cost prohibitive for what you get — old, functionally obsolete houses. That’s why people take the path of least resistance and buy new.

If we could provide housing in crisp, clean and “new” condition near the urban core, then people would stay.[/quote]

I don’t think this is true, brian. There are several hundred new or near new condos in dtn SD currently for sale and many are >2000 sf with underground parking. They don’t seem to be selling that fast. I know there ARE substantial HOA dues involved but no MR. At least in most of THOSE complexes, the buyer will actually be getting SERVICES for the monthly dues, i.e. trash drops and pickup, elevator, gym, jacuzzi, pool, doorman, garage maintenance, grounds and/or rooftop maintenance, etc., aside from the usual water, sewer and fire insurance.

The reason I stated young families might think the older SFR’s were “cost prohibitive” is not because they are “functionally obsolete” (because many aren’t anymore). I stated it because a certain purchase-price level, say $500K, will only buy say, 1000-1600 sf in 92103 (example). They can buy an SFR in this size range, well located near Scripps Mercy Hospital or go out to an exurb and get 2500 sf or even go out to another county (Riv) and get 4000 sf!

These buyers appear to be fixated on the SF and don’t realize (or care) that the one near Mercy they rejected was situated on an 8800 sf corner lot with alley access and has no MR and HOA dues. Of course, they could also remodel in the future. They also don’t take into account that MANY homes near the “Mercy Hosp. fixer” are WORTH $750K and up. Out in the exurb, the properties are all homogenous for miles around and all worth a few dollars of one another, depending on the building plan. These buyers end up paying in some cases what amounts to a 2.7% property tax (+HOA dues) and inconveniencing their lifestyles with road time for a property for which they may not even be able to recover their closing costs on for a very long time.

Commuting from SD’s urban core to and from an employer situated to the north would be a breeze on I-5 or SR-163 as the “rush hour” would be on the opposite side of the freeway.

When I was visiting my usual 7-8 “haunts” yesterday, I parked across the street from a gorgeous and charming professionally-landscaped all-brick tudor (partial 2 story) circa 1920’s or early ’30’s (92103, 2.5 mi. from dtn) situated on a corner lot with a large 2-car cedar garage door on the side and decent sized driveway. It was NOT a business. House size approx. 2400 sf and lot size approx. 12,000 sf. What young family wouldn’t want that home? The street was “upscale,” with well-kept “vintage” SFRs (some housing small businesses) and lined with mature trees. IMHO if it was priced right and purchased today, it would hold its value for many years to come and most likely appreciate as it is also zoned light commercial.

IMO, the reason well-located urban SFR’s, even when priced correctly, are “cost prohibitive” is because they are worth every penny and are a good investment. THAT is “why it is so.” Hence the mantra, location, location, location (which CAN NEVER BE FIXED after purchase).

[bearishgurl]

[quote=briansd1]Because those families want new, crisp and clean.[/quote]

brian, why couldn’t an older home be clean? Why couldn’t you clean it yourself if you picked up a good deal? Have you ever heard of installing new bathroom fixtures or kitchen appls? As a buyer, would you rather do this in a well-located older home on a 9000 sf lot or buy a *newer* far-flung home on a 4000 sf lot (no guarantee of “cleanliness” there, esp. with an REO – lol).

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]Perhaps young families today feel some of the communities heretofore mentioned are too “cost prohibitive” to buy into for the living space they think they need. Piggs, you gotta ask yourselves, “Why is this so?”[/quote]bearishgurl, I feel that the older houses are cost prohibitive for what you get — old, functionally obsolete houses. That’s why people take the path of least resistance and buy new.

If we could provide housing in crisp, clean and “new” condition near the urban core, then people would stay.[/quote]

I don’t think this is true, brian. There are several hundred new or near new condos in dtn SD currently for sale and many are >2000 sf with underground parking. They don’t seem to be selling that fast. I know there ARE substantial HOA dues involved but no MR. At least in most of THOSE complexes, the buyer will actually be getting SERVICES for the monthly dues, i.e. trash drops and pickup, elevator, gym, jacuzzi, pool, doorman, garage maintenance, grounds and/or rooftop maintenance, etc., aside from the usual water, sewer and fire insurance.

The reason I stated young families might think the older SFR’s were “cost prohibitive” is not because they are “functionally obsolete” (because many aren’t anymore). I stated it because a certain purchase-price level, say $500K, will only buy say, 1000-1600 sf in 92103 (example). They can buy an SFR in this size range, well located near Scripps Mercy Hospital or go out to an exurb and get 2500 sf or even go out to another county (Riv) and get 4000 sf!

These buyers appear to be fixated on the SF and don’t realize (or care) that the one near Mercy they rejected was situated on an 8800 sf corner lot with alley access and has no MR and HOA dues. Of course, they could also remodel in the future. They also don’t take into account that MANY homes near the “Mercy Hosp. fixer” are WORTH $750K and up. Out in the exurb, the properties are all homogenous for miles around and all worth a few dollars of one another, depending on the building plan. These buyers end up paying in some cases what amounts to a 2.7% property tax (+HOA dues) and inconveniencing their lifestyles with road time for a property for which they may not even be able to recover their closing costs on for a very long time.

Commuting from SD’s urban core to and from an employer situated to the north would be a breeze on I-5 or SR-163 as the “rush hour” would be on the opposite side of the freeway.

When I was visiting my usual 7-8 “haunts” yesterday, I parked across the street from a gorgeous and charming professionally-landscaped all-brick tudor (partial 2 story) circa 1920’s or early ’30’s (92103, 2.5 mi. from dtn) situated on a corner lot with a large 2-car cedar garage door on the side and decent sized driveway. It was NOT a business. House size approx. 2400 sf and lot size approx. 12,000 sf. What young family wouldn’t want that home? The street was “upscale,” with well-kept “vintage” SFRs (some housing small businesses) and lined with mature trees. IMHO if it was priced right and purchased today, it would hold its value for many years to come and most likely appreciate as it is also zoned light commercial.

IMO, the reason well-located urban SFR’s, even when priced correctly, are “cost prohibitive” is because they are worth every penny and are a good investment. THAT is “why it is so.” Hence the mantra, location, location, location (which CAN NEVER BE FIXED after purchase).

[bearishgurl]

[quote=briansd1]Because those families want new, crisp and clean.[/quote]

brian, why couldn’t an older home be clean? Why couldn’t you clean it yourself if you picked up a good deal? Have you ever heard of installing new bathroom fixtures or kitchen appls? As a buyer, would you rather do this in a well-located older home on a 9000 sf lot or buy a *newer* far-flung home on a 4000 sf lot (no guarantee of “cleanliness” there, esp. with an REO – lol).

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]Perhaps young families today feel some of the communities heretofore mentioned are too “cost prohibitive” to buy into for the living space they think they need. Piggs, you gotta ask yourselves, “Why is this so?”[/quote]bearishgurl, I feel that the older houses are cost prohibitive for what you get — old, functionally obsolete houses. That’s why people take the path of least resistance and buy new.

If we could provide housing in crisp, clean and “new” condition near the urban core, then people would stay.[/quote]

I don’t think this is true, brian. There are several hundred new or near new condos in dtn SD currently for sale and many are >2000 sf with underground parking. They don’t seem to be selling that fast. I know there ARE substantial HOA dues involved but no MR. At least in most of THOSE complexes, the buyer will actually be getting SERVICES for the monthly dues, i.e. trash drops and pickup, elevator, gym, jacuzzi, pool, doorman, garage maintenance, grounds and/or rooftop maintenance, etc., aside from the usual water, sewer and fire insurance.

The reason I stated young families might think the older SFR’s were “cost prohibitive” is not because they are “functionally obsolete” (because many aren’t anymore). I stated it because a certain purchase-price level, say $500K, will only buy say, 1000-1600 sf in 92103 (example). They can buy an SFR in this size range, well located near Scripps Mercy Hospital or go out to an exurb and get 2500 sf or even go out to another county (Riv) and get 4000 sf!

These buyers appear to be fixated on the SF and don’t realize (or care) that the one near Mercy they rejected was situated on an 8800 sf corner lot with alley access and has no MR and HOA dues. Of course, they could also remodel in the future. They also don’t take into account that MANY homes near the “Mercy Hosp. fixer” are WORTH $750K and up. Out in the exurb, the properties are all homogenous for miles around and all worth a few dollars of one another, depending on the building plan. These buyers end up paying in some cases what amounts to a 2.7% property tax (+HOA dues) and inconveniencing their lifestyles with road time for a property for which they may not even be able to recover their closing costs on for a very long time.

Commuting from SD’s urban core to and from an employer situated to the north would be a breeze on I-5 or SR-163 as the “rush hour” would be on the opposite side of the freeway.

When I was visiting my usual 7-8 “haunts” yesterday, I parked across the street from a gorgeous and charming professionally-landscaped all-brick tudor (partial 2 story) circa 1920’s or early ’30’s (92103, 2.5 mi. from dtn) situated on a corner lot with a large 2-car cedar garage door on the side and decent sized driveway. It was NOT a business. House size approx. 2400 sf and lot size approx. 12,000 sf. What young family wouldn’t want that home? The street was “upscale,” with well-kept “vintage” SFRs (some housing small businesses) and lined with mature trees. IMHO if it was priced right and purchased today, it would hold its value for many years to come and most likely appreciate as it is also zoned light commercial.

IMO, the reason well-located urban SFR’s, even when priced correctly, are “cost prohibitive” is because they are worth every penny and are a good investment. THAT is “why it is so.” Hence the mantra, location, location, location (which CAN NEVER BE FIXED after purchase).

[bearishgurl]

[quote=briansd1]Because those families want new, crisp and clean.[/quote]

brian, why couldn’t an older home be clean? Why couldn’t you clean it yourself if you picked up a good deal? Have you ever heard of installing new bathroom fixtures or kitchen appls? As a buyer, would you rather do this in a well-located older home on a 9000 sf lot or buy a *newer* far-flung home on a 4000 sf lot (no guarantee of “cleanliness” there, esp. with an REO – lol).

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]Perhaps young families today feel some of the communities heretofore mentioned are too “cost prohibitive” to buy into for the living space they think they need. Piggs, you gotta ask yourselves, “Why is this so?”[/quote]bearishgurl, I feel that the older houses are cost prohibitive for what you get — old, functionally obsolete houses. That’s why people take the path of least resistance and buy new.

If we could provide housing in crisp, clean and “new” condition near the urban core, then people would stay.[/quote]

I don’t think this is true, brian. There are several hundred new or near new condos in dtn SD currently for sale and many are >2000 sf with underground parking. They don’t seem to be selling that fast. I know there ARE substantial HOA dues involved but no MR. At least in most of THOSE complexes, the buyer will actually be getting SERVICES for the monthly dues, i.e. trash drops and pickup, elevator, gym, jacuzzi, pool, doorman, garage maintenance, grounds and/or rooftop maintenance, etc., aside from the usual water, sewer and fire insurance.

The reason I stated young families might think the older SFR’s were “cost prohibitive” is not because they are “functionally obsolete” (because many aren’t anymore). I stated it because a certain purchase-price level, say $500K, will only buy say, 1000-1600 sf in 92103 (example). They can buy an SFR in this size range, well located near Scripps Mercy Hospital or go out to an exurb and get 2500 sf or even go out to another county (Riv) and get 4000 sf!

These buyers appear to be fixated on the SF and don’t realize (or care) that the one near Mercy they rejected was situated on an 8800 sf corner lot with alley access and has no MR and HOA dues. Of course, they could also remodel in the future. They also don’t take into account that MANY homes near the “Mercy Hosp. fixer” are WORTH $750K and up. Out in the exurb, the properties are all homogenous for miles around and all worth a few dollars of one another, depending on the building plan. These buyers end up paying in some cases what amounts to a 2.7% property tax (+HOA dues) and inconveniencing their lifestyles with road time for a property for which they may not even be able to recover their closing costs on for a very long time.

Commuting from SD’s urban core to and from an employer situated to the north would be a breeze on I-5 or SR-163 as the “rush hour” would be on the opposite side of the freeway.

When I was visiting my usual 7-8 “haunts” yesterday, I parked across the street from a gorgeous and charming professionally-landscaped all-brick tudor (partial 2 story) circa 1920’s or early ’30’s (92103, 2.5 mi. from dtn) situated on a corner lot with a large 2-car cedar garage door on the side and decent sized driveway. It was NOT a business. House size approx. 2400 sf and lot size approx. 12,000 sf. What young family wouldn’t want that home? The street was “upscale,” with well-kept “vintage” SFRs (some housing small businesses) and lined with mature trees. IMHO if it was priced right and purchased today, it would hold its value for many years to come and most likely appreciate as it is also zoned light commercial.

IMO, the reason well-located urban SFR’s, even when priced correctly, are “cost prohibitive” is because they are worth every penny and are a good investment. THAT is “why it is so.” Hence the mantra, location, location, location (which CAN NEVER BE FIXED after purchase).

[bearishgurl]

[quote=briansd1]Because those families want new, crisp and clean.[/quote]

brian, why couldn’t an older home be clean? Why couldn’t you clean it yourself if you picked up a good deal? Have you ever heard of installing new bathroom fixtures or kitchen appls? As a buyer, would you rather do this in a well-located older home on a 9000 sf lot or buy a *newer* far-flung home on a 4000 sf lot (no guarantee of “cleanliness” there, esp. with an REO – lol).

[quote=briansd1][quote=bearishgurl]Perhaps young families today feel some of the communities heretofore mentioned are too “cost prohibitive” to buy into for the living space they think they need. Piggs, you gotta ask yourselves, “Why is this so?”[/quote]bearishgurl, I feel that the older houses are cost prohibitive for what you get — old, functionally obsolete houses. That’s why people take the path of least resistance and buy new.

If we could provide housing in crisp, clean and “new” condition near the urban core, then people would stay.[/quote]

I don’t think this is true, brian. There are several hundred new or near new condos in dtn SD currently for sale and many are >2000 sf with underground parking. They don’t seem to be selling that fast. I know there ARE substantial HOA dues involved but no MR. At least in most of THOSE complexes, the buyer will actually be getting SERVICES for the monthly dues, i.e. trash drops and pickup, elevator, gym, jacuzzi, pool, doorman, garage maintenance, grounds and/or rooftop maintenance, etc., aside from the usual water, sewer and fire insurance.

The reason I stated young families might think the older SFR’s were “cost prohibitive” is not because they are “functionally obsolete” (because many aren’t anymore). I stated it because a certain purchase-price level, say $500K, will only buy say, 1000-1600 sf in 92103 (example). They can buy an SFR in this size range, well located near Scripps Mercy Hospital or go out to an exurb and get 2500 sf or even go out to another county (Riv) and get 4000 sf!

These buyers appear to be fixated on the SF and don’t realize (or care) that the one near Mercy they rejected was situated on an 8800 sf corner lot with alley access and has no MR and HOA dues. Of course, they could also remodel in the future. They also don’t take into account that MANY homes near the “Mercy Hosp. fixer” are WORTH $750K and up. Out in the exurb, the properties are all homogenous for miles around and all worth a few dollars of one another, depending on the building plan. These buyers end up paying in some cases what amounts to a 2.7% property tax (+HOA dues) and inconveniencing their lifestyles with road time for a property for which they may not even be able to recover their closing costs on for a very long time.

Commuting from SD’s urban core to and from an employer situated to the north would be a breeze on I-5 or SR-163 as the “rush hour” would be on the opposite side of the freeway.

When I was visiting my usual 7-8 “haunts” yesterday, I parked across the street from a gorgeous and charming professionally-landscaped all-brick tudor (partial 2 story) circa 1920’s or early ’30’s (92103, 2.5 mi. from dtn) situated on a corner lot with a large 2-car cedar garage door on the side and decent sized driveway. It was NOT a business. House size approx. 2400 sf and lot size approx. 12,000 sf. What young family wouldn’t want that home? The street was “upscale,” with well-kept “vintage” SFRs (some housing small businesses) and lined with mature trees. IMHO if it was priced right and purchased today, it would hold its value for many years to come and most likely appreciate as it is also zoned light commercial.

IMO, the reason well-located urban SFR’s, even when priced correctly, are “cost prohibitive” is because they are worth every penny and are a good investment. THAT is “why it is so.” Hence the mantra, location, location, location (which CAN NEVER BE FIXED after purchase).

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]
These buyers appear to be fixated on the SF and don’t realize (or care) that the one near Mercy they rejected was situated on an 8800 sf corner lot with alley access and has no MR and HOA dues. Of course, they could also remodel in the future. They also don’t take into account that MANY homes near the “Mercy Hosp. fixer” are WORTH $750K and up. Out in the exurb, the properties are all homogenous for miles around and all worth a few dollars of one another, depending on the building plan. These buyers end up paying in some cases what amounts to a 2.7% property tax (+HOA dues) and inconveniencing their lifestyles with road time for a property for which they may not even be able to recover their closing costs on for a very long time.[/quote]

I agree with you…

But most buyers buy to move in right away and get their kids into school. They think that they’ll sell in 5 years and move on.

Of course, not everybody is like that but it’s that “average” buyer that counts. It’s the same with everything, Walmart, Holiday Inn, McDonald’s etc…

It’s expecting too much for people to look for quality, past the wow and impulse factor. Why do you think that staged houses sell better? Me, I’d rather see the plain space and imagine myself rather than seeing the staged junk. Marketing and psychology, bearishgurl… marketing.

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]
These buyers appear to be fixated on the SF and don’t realize (or care) that the one near Mercy they rejected was situated on an 8800 sf corner lot with alley access and has no MR and HOA dues. Of course, they could also remodel in the future. They also don’t take into account that MANY homes near the “Mercy Hosp. fixer” are WORTH $750K and up. Out in the exurb, the properties are all homogenous for miles around and all worth a few dollars of one another, depending on the building plan. These buyers end up paying in some cases what amounts to a 2.7% property tax (+HOA dues) and inconveniencing their lifestyles with road time for a property for which they may not even be able to recover their closing costs on for a very long time.[/quote]

I agree with you…

But most buyers buy to move in right away and get their kids into school. They think that they’ll sell in 5 years and move on.

Of course, not everybody is like that but it’s that “average” buyer that counts. It’s the same with everything, Walmart, Holiday Inn, McDonald’s etc…

It’s expecting too much for people to look for quality, past the wow and impulse factor. Why do you think that staged houses sell better? Me, I’d rather see the plain space and imagine myself rather than seeing the staged junk. Marketing and psychology, bearishgurl… marketing.

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]
These buyers appear to be fixated on the SF and don’t realize (or care) that the one near Mercy they rejected was situated on an 8800 sf corner lot with alley access and has no MR and HOA dues. Of course, they could also remodel in the future. They also don’t take into account that MANY homes near the “Mercy Hosp. fixer” are WORTH $750K and up. Out in the exurb, the properties are all homogenous for miles around and all worth a few dollars of one another, depending on the building plan. These buyers end up paying in some cases what amounts to a 2.7% property tax (+HOA dues) and inconveniencing their lifestyles with road time for a property for which they may not even be able to recover their closing costs on for a very long time.[/quote]

I agree with you…

But most buyers buy to move in right away and get their kids into school. They think that they’ll sell in 5 years and move on.

Of course, not everybody is like that but it’s that “average” buyer that counts. It’s the same with everything, Walmart, Holiday Inn, McDonald’s etc…

It’s expecting too much for people to look for quality, past the wow and impulse factor. Why do you think that staged houses sell better? Me, I’d rather see the plain space and imagine myself rather than seeing the staged junk. Marketing and psychology, bearishgurl… marketing.

[briansd1]

[quote=bearishgurl]
These buyers appear to be fixated on the SF and don’t realize (or care) that the one near Mercy they rejected was situated on an 8800 sf corner lot with alley access and has no MR and HOA dues. Of course, they could also remodel in the future. They also don’t take into account that MANY homes near the “Mercy Hosp. fixer” are WORTH $750K and up. Out in the exurb, the properties are all homogenous for miles around and all worth a few dollars of one another, depending on the building plan. These buyers end up paying in some cases what amounts to a 2.7% property tax (+HOA dues) and inconveniencing their lifestyles with road time for a property for which they may not even be able to recover their closing costs on for a very long time.[/quote]

I agree with you…

But most buyers buy to move in right away and get their kids into school. They think that they’ll sell in 5 years and move on.

Of course, not everybody is like that but it’s that “average” buyer that counts. It’s the same with everything, Walmart, Holiday Inn, McDonald’s etc…

It’s expecting too much for people to look for quality, past the wow and impulse factor. Why do you think that staged houses sell better? Me, I’d rather see the plain space and imagine myself rather than seeing the staged junk. Marketing and psychology, bearishgurl… marketing.

[Author]

Posts