Unsellable Falts/ apartments

TTMCMschine

Rachman wrote: »

Thing is, for a lot of people, they don't see beyond the carpet and furniture. They can't visualise space and rooms. Part of why developers dress their houses and why you often have to present your place right to get a good price, especially in a falling market.

Then they're missing out on the people who can see beyond a bit of paint. I think people who critisize things like the furniture looking naff are a bit daft. First of all they're not buying the furniture, they're buying the house. Secondly - there's no such thing as a good price now. All that guff about dressing a house has been dreamed up by tv programmes, it's an illusion, and people have bought into it hook, line and sinker. That's why there's so many flippers, and why prices have become stupid. All that's required is that maybe it's at least clean. If you are going to borrow a huge sum of money - then people must be pretty stupid if they base their decision on whether the vendor has provided a blank canvas and some scatter cushions. I am a buyer - i can see beyond decor. It's just like a modern day emporers new clothing with houses.

Gorgeous_George

ukmike wrote: »

that'll put people off!

Not in Eastbourne.

GG

Lavendyr

TTMCMschine wrote: »

Then they're missing out on the people who can see beyond a bit of paint.

They're missing out on them anyway, clearly. If you were looking in the area, would you buy that flat over the dozens of others similarly located and priced? Evidence is that the flat isn't selling. What's cheaper, spending a hundred quid on paint or dropping the price by £5-10k straight away? It's worth exhausting the cheaper options first.

TTMCMschine wrote: »

I think people who critisize things like the furniture looking naff are a bit daft. First of all they're not buying the furniture, they're buying the house.

If you went to a nice restaurant and were served a plate of food that looked like it'd been dragged out of the dustbin and dumped straight onto your plate, would you find it as appetising as a plate of food that had been beautifully presented and showed evidence of having been treated with care and attention? No? But wait - you're not buying the presentation, you're buying the food, surely....?

I hope that makes my point. Yes, of course people can look past dodgy appearances and badly taken photos. But in this market, should they have to? Do they have to? Evidently, they don't - there are cheaper flats that are better presented and in equally nice areas. The choice is in the buyer's hands. That being the case, the OP has nothing to lose by at least making an attempt to present the place nicely. It's more likely to stand out and attract viewings if it looks good in the advert, simple as that. Is it logical? No. Will it help? Most probably.

TTMCMschine wrote: »

All that's required is that maybe it's at least clean.

With the quality of the photos on Rightmove, you can't even see that. And clearly, evidence again demonstrates that this is not the case - otherwise the OP wouldn't be struggling to find a buyer.

TTMCMschine wrote: »

I am a buyer - i can see beyond decor

See points above.

Doozergirl

TTMCMschine wrote: »

Then they're missing out on the people who can see beyond a bit of paint. I think people who critisize things like the furniture looking naff are a bit daft. First of all they're not buying the furniture, they're buying the house. Secondly - there's no such thing as a good price now. All that guff about dressing a house has been dreamed up by tv programmes, it's an illusion, and people have bought into it hook, line and sinker. That's why there's so many flippers, and why prices have become stupid. All that's required is that maybe it's at least clean. If you are going to borrow a huge sum of money - then people must be pretty stupid if they base their decision on whether the vendor has provided a blank canvas and some scatter cushions. I am a buyer - i can see beyond decor. It's just like a modern day emporers new clothing with houses.

Are you remembering that the OP is obviously trying to get the *very* best price for this property? If they just want to sell it for it's current market value, then it's fine to leave it as it is but in order to get the very best price then it needs to be absolutely immaculate. Failing that, it needs to be presented in a way that makes someone at least want to view it.

OP aside, you can't presume that people are all like you. The is a definate proportion of people who don't have the time, inclination or often (as is the case with many FTB's) the experience to fix things.

If you aren't bothered, it's either because you're genuinely not interested in interiors (quite a few of us girls inherantly are, you'll find) or you're aiming to maximise the return yourself.

People will pay a premium for perceived quality - else the likes of Persimmon would never be able to get away with such vast mark-ups.

neverdespairgirl

neas wrote: »

Flats are like the first casualties of a HPC...theres an oversupply of cheap tatty polish-style flats

I lived in a Polish flat for a year, in a small industrial town. I shared a "large family flat", Communist-era, with another girl.

it had 2 bedrooms, 1 was 6 ft x 8 ft, the other 8ft x 8ft. There was a 10 x 10 ft living room, and the world's smallest kitchen and bathroom.

Some mates shared a "small family flat". That was the same, but minus the 6ft x 8ft 2nd bedroom....

neas

My partner is polish and I've seen the flats in poland in gdansk... they are hardly anything to live for. One flat had a living/bedroom, a small box kitchen (really small) and an opposite bathroom (same size as kitchen)

Wasnt even enough room in bathroom to have a long bath... the bath was square and deep... i.e you sit in it not lay in it.

The best are like a normal FTBer flat worst are like box rooms used for storage... like closets. Communism was about funcionality not aesthetics.. with all blocks looking the exact shade of grey.

TTMCMschine

Lavendyr wrote: »

They're missing out on them anyway, clearly. If you were looking in the area, would you buy that flat over the dozens of others similarly located and priced? Evidence is that the flat isn't selling. What's cheaper, spending a hundred quid on paint or dropping the price by £5-10k straight away? It's worth exhausting the cheaper options first.

I'm saying paint wouldn't make me buy the flat. She'll still not get that price for the effort. She'll still have to drop the price.

Lavendyr wrote: »

If you went to a nice restaurant and were served a plate of food that looked like it'd been dragged out of the dustbin and dumped straight onto your plate, would you find it as appetising as a plate of food that had been beautifully presented and showed evidence of having been treated with care and attention? No? But wait - you're not buying the presentation, you're buying the food, surely....?

I hope that makes my point. Yes, of course people can look past dodgy appearances and badly taken photos. But in this market, should they have to? Do they have to? Evidently, they don't - there are cheaper flats that are better presented and in equally nice areas. The choice is in the buyer's hands. That being the case, the OP has nothing to lose by at least making an attempt to present the place nicely. It's more likely to stand out and attract viewings if it looks good in the advert, simple as that. Is it logical? No. Will it help? Most probably.

That's a stupid analogy, you're comparing spending a tenner, to paying out thousands on a property. No i wouldn't buy food that had been dragged out a dustbin, because i'd be worried i'd get food poisoning. That's just common sense. It shows you miss the point. It's excuses as to why houses aren't selling - these are the answers. Nobody wants to buy, because they're too highly priced and they can't get mortgages. Where is your evidence it will sell quicker. Oh wait - did you get it off a property tv show?

Lavendyr wrote: »

With the quality of the photos on Rightmove, you can't even see that. And clearly, evidence again demonstrates that this is not the case - otherwise the OP wouldn't be struggling to find a buyer.

The evidence does not prove anything. If it was at the right price it would sell. Everybody is struggling to find a buyer. I can see from the details - the general detail of the flat, and number and size of the rooms. That is all you need to know. All ea photo's never give a real point of view of a house - it's impossible. Even if they were taken "professionally" (i thought it was just an ea with a camera usually), they usually use their artistic licence to try and influence/con you. Even the "nice" houses are struggling to sell. It's the market, not how they look.

olly300

TTMCMschine wrote: »

I'm saying paint wouldn't make me buy the flat. She'll still not get that price for the effort. She'll still have to drop the price.

The price drop would be less if:
1. the flat was cleanly decorated
2. the photos of the property were better
3. the description of the property was better

If a prospective buyer (which is not you btw as you don't like the flats) has a choice between the most expensive but badly decorate flat in a building or a cheaper and better decorated flat it's common sense they are going to buy the cheaper one.

TTMCMschine

Doozergirl wrote: »

Are you remembering that the OP is obviously trying to get the *very* best price for this property? If they just want to sell it for it's current market value, then it's fine to leave it as it is but in order to get the very best price then it needs to be absolutely immaculate. Failing that, it needs to be presented in a way that makes someone at least want to view it.

OP aside, you can't presume that people are all like you. The is a definate proportion of people who don't have the time, inclination or often (as is the case with many FTB's) the experience to fix things.

If you aren't bothered, it's either because you're genuinely not interested in interiors (quite a few of us girls inherantly are, you'll find) or you're aiming to maximise the return yourself.

People will pay a premium for perceived quality - else the likes of Persimmon would never be able to get away with such vast mark-ups.

They're not going to get the price they want. I am bothered about interiors, but i can pick up a paintbrush myself. I don't want someone else to expect me to pay 5-10k more just because they have arranged the furniture nicely, and given the place a lick of paint. I am giving the point of view, that it can put buyers off. Plus - if i had thought the seller had painted the flat after they had put if on the market - i would see a smack of desperation, in that it hadn't sold. In other words to me it would do more harm than good. I am well aware of the nature of new houses, which is why i will never buy one. I know other people have a different view. It just irritates me that they are always these tips given. I feel if someone really wants a property they'll buy it.

brightonman123

uf a quick sale needed, may be worth considering putting into an auction

(i wonder what postage you could add, on ebay..!)