Square Feet

sirhan_sirhan

Am I the only person that works out the square footage of all properties that I am considering buying, in order to calculate the price per square foot for comparison?

It amazes me that people will compare the cost per 100g of cornflakes, but then not do similar for something that will cost them half a million pounds.

Of course, just because a particular property works out to be the cheapest per square foot doesn't necessarily mean it is the best. I find it useful though to put it in this order, before making adjustments for good and bad features, in order to justify prices/values.

Could someone please reassure me that I am not just odd!


Thanks.

sonastin

I guess it depends how much size matters.

For me, provided the bedroom, living room, kitchen and garage are all individually big enough, and there is some other space for housing guests and storing clutter, I don't really care what size property I buy. A small 2 bedroom cottage with a double garage could be worth much more to me than a 5-bed mansion if the location, character, features, etc aren't right. So price per square foot doesn't really tell me anything I want to know.

Hammyman

Its not that simple though really - you need to look at the whole picture. We looked at two houses for example - one a couple of streets up for £125k which we've bouhht, one in a village for £115k. Bedroom wise the same and similar sized rooms and gardens.

However with the one in the village:
I'd need to build a work shop
It needed decorating.
Every time our son wanted to come into town to see his mates it would be £1 bus fare
Every time we wanted to go to the bank, the post office, do weekly shopping it was a 10 mile round trip.

There were a few other things but all in all even though the house in the village was £10k cheaper, by the time you'd factored in all the extra mileage, travel costs etc etc then over the 10 years minimum we'd be looking at it worked out way dearer.

Doozergirl

No you're not the only one.

I helped busy friends buy a coupld of years ago. I went through everything for sale and had them sent the details of 28 properties that met the criteria. We then organised 14 viewings based on what they liked the look of. I did a spreadsheet calculating the price per square foot and the variation was actually amazing and not entirely predictable. I think it was really useful for my friends as well to decide whether something was worth it. It makes it very easy to see who has an inflated view of their own house and easier for you to decide whether you agree. We looked at properties that varied by £100k in price so it was particularly helpful.

When I'm looking for myself I'm just looking for 'dirt cheap' so price comparisons don't really work for me especially as there are never that many properties on the market at any time for me. I can work on my initial gut instinct because I'm used to it as well I guess.

I don't think a lot of people do the actual sums but really when you decide to buy you are weighing up the price against size and location, condition etc. Hardly any agents give you the square footage to start off with (depending on where you are) so it's impossible to calculate.

It would be a really useful task for those who think that an asking price is more of a price tag than a finger waved in the air. And also those who have no spatial awareness. They could better compare what they're looking at.

amr_scotland

I have to admit that I have worked out the Sq.ft / cost on a number of properties I have looked at. I find it soooo hard to compare properties, each has their own features and specs so working on the cost helps bring order to it all (well in my mind anyway!). I think I might be tight because I do like to compare prices and muse over the pros and cons, I think this habbit maybe getting on my wife's nerves....

Mum_of_3_3

I think that having sq ft/mtr on the description is a good idea. They do it on the continent and it's always puzzled me why we don't do it here. In fact I would also include a garden size in as well.

We are looking at a specific area and if we had a measurement it would be easier than comparing room sizes etc. Of course things like structural issues, exact location etc would still come into it, but it would be handy to have a quick guide to how big the property is overall.

M_o_3

Catatonia

Of course it's not the only consideration, but it is useful to look at, especially when trying to compare properties with very different layouts. Some of the EAs round here put it on the floor plans, and it's annoying when they don't!

I think it would make more sense for properties to be sold by square meterage, rather than by bedrooms, as for me a house with two big bedrooms would be preferable to one with three tiny bedrooms.

Richard_Webster

It is an interesting though but as many have said, valuations don't go by floor area - although insurance rebuild cost does.

Where it would be interesting would be to compare quickly e.g two 3 bed semis with similar room arrangements and similar design but one just a little bigger than the other. They can look very similar and the person with the smaller one may try to sell for the same price as the larger one!

Imelda

We looked at average price per sq ft/m as one of the factors we considered when deciding upon an area of London to buy in. We could immediately see that Hampstead prices were double those of Blackheath, for example.

When looking at individual houses, no, we didn't overly concern ourselves with price per sq ft/m as by that point other factors were more important to us, eg location and period.

It's a good way of comparing like with like though, for example flats in London.

A lot of floorplans on rightmove will give an indication of floor area.

dboswell

sirhan_sirhan wrote: »

Am I the only person that works out the square footage of all properties that I am considering buying, in order to calculate the price per square foot for comparison?

It amazes me that people will compare the cost per 100g of cornflakes, but then not do similar for something that will cost them half a million pounds.

Of course, just because a particular property works out to be the cheapest per square foot doesn't necessarily mean it is the best. I find it useful though to put it in this order, before making adjustments for good and bad features, in order to justify prices/values.

Could someone please reassure me that I am not just odd!


Thanks.

no you are not, but a pat on the back for doing so

olias

I'm sorry, but I'm going to be the first to disagree. It may work in principal, with similar age/type of houses in similar areas, but in practice it bares no relation.

In my area for example you might have a 5 bed detached with a large garden (new build, estate) for exactly the same price as a tiny 2 up 2 down period cottage with a tiny courtyard. There are also extreme variations where immediate surroundings come into play. For example identical houses, one next to busy and noisy building suppliers on the edge of an industrial estate and one in a quiet culde sac backing onto open fields may have vast differences in price yet be the same suare footage.

These are just two examplesof different parameters, there are infinately more. You might just as well say why does a plate from Ikea cost 50p when one the same size from sothebys can cost £10000, or why does a Ferrari cost £150000 and a Fiesta £10000 when they are both the same size? It would never work.

Having said that, I do think as a minimum, an EA should include a plan with room dimensions on in their particulars, just to aid in visualisation, if nothing else.

Olias