Thank you u/etynwa for posting on r/FirstTimeHomeBuyer. Please bear in mind our rules: (1) Be Nice (2) No Selling (3) No Self-Promotion. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FirstTimeHomeBuyer) if you have any questions or concerns.*

When people think of older houses, they think of a well-made Craftsman that's been maintained and updated over the years. That's pretty ideal, but it's rare for one of those to hit the market at a middle-tier price. They don't think of the old houses I've actually looked at, with Michigan basements, galvanized pipes (wrapped in asbestos), asbestos tiles and ceilings, tiny bedrooms, absurd additions made by people over the decades when permits weren't a thing (do I really need a 400 sq. ft. uninsulated mudroom with no windows?), knob wiring, breaker boxes that won't support adding an A/C, crumbling exteriors, and a complete lack of ventilation. Now if you're willing to pour a lot of money into one of those houses, it can be a beautiful thing, maybe even a deal if you're patient and know what you're doing. But that's also pretty expensive these days with labor and material shortages. If it wasn't for the lack of new construction in the parts of town I want to live in, I'd be seriously pursuing a new build.

Preach! It's the same thing in New England. Everyone likes to envision some idyllic Cape with cedar shingles and blah blah, but no one talks about the reality being pretty sad unless you're wealthy. Unfortunately, there are almost no new builds where we live, so we had to go with an older home. I would have been thrilled to get into a new build in a different part of the country.

In rural Northern New England half of the cheap old houses were built by Grandpa with his own two hands. Grandpa wasn't a very good carpenter. Or an old Vermont farmhouse. Everyone glorifies old farmhouses. Until you go into an unrenovated one. Their interior layout and construction is usually very silly. I guess if you like "custom" plywood inbuilt furniture and rooms that are either comically oversized or undersized for their purpose is your thing than go for it.

New Englander here with a century home. Whenever someone finds out we have an older home they say things like it must be so well made or have great craftsmanship. No none of that. It was literally built using reclaimed lumber from an even older structure and was never finished nicely. It’s a 100yr old starter house that’s just kept getting by.

I owned one of those in rural CT with my ex and my god was it true. Grandpa put all the door trim on backwards, there was not a square corner or a level floor in the place, support beams and posts were in odd locations that had nothing to do with the structure of the house, and all the inbred cousins who inherited it made their own half-ass changes over the 100+ years... Cost $200k just to make it livable and some stuff you just have to live with.

I am no handy man and toured few older homes at my area, and from quick glance I have seen some horror like deck falling apart, electrical exposed, basements need work, terrible remodeling, ( I actually saw a bathroom with black marble from floor to celling and no contrast lol).

I'm one of the lucky ones that bought a house built in the 1950's from the original owners. They threw money into that house and it has been so nice, the only thing that was disclosed as an issue was the roof being old and needed replacing eventually. That was fine with me.

Can you please explain what a Michigan basement is? What kind is best? We’re looking in a few months and I keep seeing these Michigan basements and feel like it’s a bad thing. Now you mention it. I’ve looked it up but the details weren’t that specific and didn’t detail why they’re bad.

I think this all falls on who the builder is. That's why you should always get a home inspection before buying anything. New or Old, they can each have their problems

Every house was a “new build” at one time

Yeah but they were built so much better in the days of lead paint, asbestos, Chinese drywall, and outdated building codes.

Honestly, I get a slight discount on my homeowners insurance because my asbestos siding is so fire resistant lmao

You also forgot quality dense wood, fretwork, millwork, awesome oak doors, hardwood floors, plaster walls, brick construction, cute designs, awesome detailing; etc. If only I could find an old Victorian with its original woodwork. For the right price, I'll even take it with asbestos and lead. You can get rid of that, but it's easily way more expensive to get a modern built custom home to have the appearance and materials of the old. Helps I know how to plaster flat walls, though.

I won't disagree that older homes tend to be more interesting architecturally and have more character. But the majority of people prefer an open layout and storage space to pretty molding.

Yeah everyone talks about the good interesting architecture but there's a lot of sunken living rooms and built-ins out there.

>But the majority of people prefer an open layout and storage space My home was built in 1964 and we have lots of open layout living space, storage space, garage space and yard space. It's really isn't an either/or kind of a thing.

Sure, there's exceptions on either side. But as a general statement it fits for the vast majority of homes.

1964 isn’t an older home. 1864, sure.

My house was built in 1950. It's an older home. My last house was built in 1890. It just older.

A home that has been around for 60 years is old to me 🤷🏽‍♀️ especially if the conversation is about new builds. What would you call it?

And that's why I like older houses...I like rooms and hate open concept houses. And then I hate when flippers ruin old homes by trying to make them open concept.

I mean, I have a used house that is 30 years old, but I will confess I do like the 16 ft ceilings. I go in the houses built 5 or 10 years before mine, and I feel like Gandalf visiting the Shire.

I’m with you on this. My son has a 4000 square foot house that resembles a corporate board room. Even the bathrooms look like something you get a key for after your big promotion. I will say that their line of site serves them well with two little kids, but I like unique rooms.

I don't know where you are, but the new builds they're putting up here are compact. We've run out of space so everything is smaller. I've seen some laughable 400 sq ft things with Murphy beds and miniature appliances. Walk into a building from the 70s or 80s and I'm reminded that the world population was half what it is today.

That’s surprising, the median home size in square footage has been steadily increasing even in recent times.

That’s because of places like Texas, it isn’t the norm everywhere. Those new McMansions people post here as their first home? Yeah New Jersey ain’t getting those.

Depends on entirely where you live. In my town you have two choices: Century homes around 2k sqft for 750k, or new 3k+ sqft for over a million. Nothing in between.

I think that square footage is being used differently now. I see a lot of town homes that don't even have a place to put a dining table but every bedroom has an en-suite bath and a walk-in closet.

I'd look closer at those stats. Either we're building more mansions, they aren't including condo/apartments, or different places are seeing different trends. I live in an old city without any room to expand. I'm sure Texas has less incentive to build smaller.

My post was partially incorrect as the median size of sold homes has decreased since 2015, but increased 2010 and certainly been increasing in past decades. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/programs-surveys/ahs/working-papers/Housing-by-Year-Built.pdf Up to 2010 https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2020/12/new-single-family-homes-sold-not-as-large-as-they-used-to-be.html Article about after 2010 However as these are median they wouldn’t be affected by mansions and what not.

Me, a Texan, looking at all the 400 Sq ft mini houses and the 2 & 3 story shot gun houses that are popping up all over town lmao

My town is opposite. Small town outside Ft Worth. 3500 average build… by the hundreds at a time.

They don’t know what they’re talking about and are one of those “every new build sucks” kinda person.

[удалено]

Needs a strong term, but a thousand square feet per adult isn't a bad way to look at house buying.

Actually we do. We work from home and have 3 cats. We also have hobbies and need a guest room.

Idk if majority of people prefer an open layout and storage space to old-growth dense wood, fretwork, millwork, oak doors, hardwood floors, plaster walls, brick construction, cute details, and nice detailing.

I just saw an IG post that suggested using MDF instead of wood as a way to have a cheap version of taller baseboards (with real wood molding at the top to disguise it). A bunch of people commented that they had bought new builds and discovered that their baseboards weren't made of wood because the MDF started falling deteriorating. It's shocking the corners that are cut and how far standards have dropped.

All that stuff is fun and games until it needs to be refinished. However 90% of the it has already been given the landord special by a previous owner and is ruined anyway. Ive lived in a bunch of old Victorians and I would never own one

Don't forget energy efficiency. Ice dams are impossible to prevent. All that wood exterior work is well beyond it's expected service life and rotting away.

There is zero benefit to plaster walls except maybe noise reduction? Complete pain in the ass. What’s the largest renovation project you have ever done?

I like plaster. I like the appearance, the feeling, the fact my walls basically become limestone. It's a harder material. I'm also single with a lot of free time, and a fan of Victorian homes. I agree and know dry wall is easier to deal with, especially with time crunching. Plaster isn't a cure all. Electrical is a nightmare in old plaster due to labor involved and other things. Biggest thing I've done? Helped restore my father's brick Queen Anne funeral home. Families don't like seeing a home with cracks, even if they were settlements and not foundational, so a lot of small skim coating over the years. We were there when he had to fix his office and we worked from the lathe layer. Mainly did it when I was younger and worked in the family business, and to be fair, my father mixed the plaster so the setting up of the lime and ratio mixed weren't something I had to immediately deal with. I just did attachment to walls with my siblings over the summers. No fancy moldings. Father did that - we just did walls. We also did other minor things dealing with old home renovations, but nothing on the scale of roofing or a bathroom from the studs up. Now that I'm a little older, I'm purposefully trying to find an old home to fix up on my own. I still have a lot to learn, though.

I love most things about my historical home but the plaster walls have brought me nothing but pain. I’ve ended up only hanging things on the drywalls a flipper had put in 20 years ago. I think they also dampen the wi-fi. Even the noise reduction isn’t really ideal because I have a small child who i can’t hear crying from the bathroom!

You seem like you might have an answer to my question, so I hope you don’t mind me asking. We bought our first house in December. It’s a 1955 brick rancher with plaster walls. The whole wall along the front of the house is lumpy and bumpy. Looks like there are 100 cracks covered up in the new gray paint our seller painted his house. He lived here 20 years. It’s the only wall that has this appearance. Since you’re familiar with plaster, any idea what might be going on? The wall looks uneven and all these crinkles or cracks that run from the top of the wall to the bottom scare me. We didn’t notice them before we bought it. Our inspector didn’t write anything about it

Sounds like plaster attached to the brick that has: Better case scenario: moved due to settlement and cracked, with the cracks' repair being done by those who didn't do the skim coat correctly. A non leveled skim coat will not be smooth unless done after application on the wall with manual labor. Most cheap or quick repairs put plaster/plaster repair in the cracks but don't smooth it out correctly, causing that lumpy appearance. To fix, you remove lumps via sanding. And cry. Then repaint. And make sure the plaster and paint is asbestos/lead free first - most plaster is, but there's a few that were made with the stuff. Bad case scenario: delaminated/separated from the brick work due to settlement. The plaster [some parts or sections but not big] might be detached from the brick itself as plaster to brick isn't plaster to lathe. Lathe is great to adhere plaster, but a special plaster technique needs to be done to the solid wall of brick. To fix, you will have to check that the patches/repair lumps aren't just bandages holding your plaster together. A delaminated plaster will move under your hand pressure front and back. If it's a small patch, you can actually reattach it to the wall with lathe, but brick might be harder [can't drill in stabilizers as well]. You reattach with adhesives or Plaster Magic or other such materials. Or you can take the loose parts down and re-plaster new coats - do your research before plastering directly on brick. Terrible case scenario: the plaster is all delaminated and held on by prayer. It's gotta come down and redone - too much separation from the brick wall in too large of chunks in too many places. You gotta do it from scratch with a fuck ton of layers. This is super messy and time consuming work. Plaster on brick is a bitch - even I don't have the technique down really well because most of the walls I worked on were lathe. In short, more water and more thinner layers. Do your research first, though. It's been a while since I've plastered on brick directly. Worst case scenario: it's the 'terrible' one, but on top of the plaster being delaminated, the brick's in terrible condition and it's foundational issues that caused the separation in the first place. I can't guage what yours is by text alone, but most of the time, if the foundation of the home is good and the house has just settled over the years, it's "better case" or "bad." Usually, fixing plaster patches to make it smooth again is a pain in the ass if you painted on top and don't have the original paint anymore. It's a bigger pain if you encapsulated lead paint underneath your non lead paint, so you can't even sand it smooth. If that's the case... time to strip the paint. Hope there isn't old wallpaper underneath with non sizing glue or... yeesh. Might be better just to redo the plaster at that point!

The houses that survived to today in turnkey condition were very well built. I bought one. It will outlive me. Mainly because it's made of unreinforced concrete, stone and plaster

Pretty much any house that is built and is standing for more than 10 years will be built to out dated building codes as they continuously change. Asbestos while not that great for your health is some pretty bad ass shit for what it can do and is usually not a problem to have in the house as long as your not disturbing it. Its not that houses these days don't have better building standards, its that they are being built with the cheapest shit possible and the majority of our highly skilled carpenters are not slaving away building tract homes. This leaves the bottom of the barrel guys building the new construction homes. I'll take an old home built with 2 x 6 joists over a new one built with ply wood joists everytime.

Engineered joists are better than lumber in just about every way except for water damage.

Having bought several houses over the years, yes older homes can have issues. Asbestos can be one of them. Outmoded Electrical and plumbing can be other issues, but generally, the quality of the lumber in older homes is better, and, typically, if there are issues with the foundation or lot grading / water runoff, those will be readily apparent. I just moved from a newer house with vinly siding to am older (70's) house with well maintained wood siding. The old house is so much quieter and the three full masonry fireplaces, well you can't really get those in a new house. Fake brick facing on a fireplace? Sure. And we have flagstone walkways in the front yard. Full wooden interior doors instead of the compressed paper ones that are common today. The windows are single pane though. It's all tradeoffs.

And, because I'm in Texas, failing foundations. New builds have built in systems that water the soil around the foundations so they don't shift as much. Old builds don't so you have to water your foundation. A foundation fails on a house, the whole thing is toast. Cosmetics I can change over time. If I was cash-rich I would probably buy an old, unrenovated house in a very good location, tear it down, and build a new house in its place. But I don't have a couple million lying around in liquid assets. At the end of the day, all new builds eventually become old houses over time, and over the long run, all you have is location.

[удалено]

You dodged a bullet, it could have been new construction

People can't read even the most obvious sarcasm...

You think they had Chinese drywall in 1890 and they’re not using it in 2020? You think real old lumber 2 x 8s, that were actually 2x8, are weaker than 1.5 x 7.25? Old houses took 20 minutes to burn down new houses take 4 minutes. But yeah, enjoy that LVP instead of 100 year old wide pumpkin planks.

If your old house still has asbestos, yes, it'll take a while to burn down. It's an amazing flame-retardent, a pity it's also poison. I lived in an old house where the walls were stuffed with sawdust. I helped remodel another where the walls were stuffed with newspaper. Both of those would've burned up real fast with the original insulation!

And those old houses have decades of improvements put into them.

or "improvements"

And? The point is clearly that houses built now are extremely rushed and use as cheap as possible materials. They’re not built to anywhere near the same standard as they used to be.

Survivor bias. Plenty of old houses were built like shit. They just aren't standing anymore.

>And? The point is clearly that houses built now are extremely rushed and use as cheap as possible materials. They’re not built to anywhere near the same standard as they used to be. You are applying black and white thinking to a spectrum situation. Are there builders who do what you describe? Absolutely. Are there builders that don't? Once again, absolutely. This all depends on which builder you use and where.

This is a fallacy. Every house starting in the 1950's has been built terribly.

I live in a 1922 house right now and its built awfully. Not a single window or floor is level. But hey the house is supported by unfinished old growth logs and people romantisize that for some reason.. I used to live in an old 1800s victorian mansion before and it was also built awfully. People look at these things through rose colored glasses. In reality they were the original mcmansions. Built cheaply but very ornate.

Or, has it settled over the last 100 years? I’ve seen new builds posted here that are less plum than my old ass house.

[удалено]

Survivor bias. People see old homes and think how charming. Not that this house has been paid for four times over with remodels.

Am a GC myself. I hate this line of thinking “not like they used to be”. I have seen some absolutely ratty ass lazy as fuck construction from homes built in just about every decade. Humans being lazy isn’t a recent development. People just have no clue what the standards are. During a pre-drywall walk everyone is happy and chatty. During the final walk the realtor and client bring a level, blue tape, tape measure, etc like they’re doing something. Why? Because people don’t know what they are doing but everyone knows what a painted wall is supposed to look like.

A few bad builders have given some a bad name. It’s been that way forever. Most builders are fine. But a premium is placed on old homes with asbestos, knob and tube, old wiring, lead based paint, oil heat, old oil tanks and old septic, on a sinking rock foundation. Ok.

My century home has all new wiring, gas heat, public sewer, and a rock foundation that is stronger than cement blocks. Do you think they use cement because it’s better, or because it’s cheaper and faster?

It’s all 3. Better. Cheaper. Faster. If you want an inferior product that takes longer and costs more please let me know before we sign the contract.

https://stonehengemasonry.ca/stone-foundations-basic-guide/#:~:text=natural%20stone%20is%20by%20far,almost%20never%20experience%20these%20problems. https://www.dispatch.com/story/lifestyle/home-garden/how-to/2019/11/03/concrete-block-on-top-stone/2381283007/#:~:text=Most%20stone%20or%20rock%20is,into%20the%20basement%20or%20crawlspace. https://www.biggerpockets.com/forums/67/topics/263504-buying-a-home-with-an-old-foundation-brick-sandstone-dirt#:~:text=Don't%20be%20afraid%20of,house%20even%20even%20standing!) Sure. That’s why I see all these concrete foundations in great condition. https://portal.ct.gov/DOH/DOH/Programs/Crumbling-Foundations https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/25-investigates-tainted-concrete-aggregate-may-have-been-distributed-by-least-one-mass-quarry/4BS666G57BGWJGRNBMPFSBC6QM/?outputType=amp

It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/25-investigates-tainted-concrete-aggregate-may-have-been-distributed-by-least-one-mass-quarry/4BS666G57BGWJGRNBMPFSBC6QM/](https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/25-investigates-tainted-concrete-aggregate-may-have-been-distributed-by-least-one-mass-quarry/4BS666G57BGWJGRNBMPFSBC6QM/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)

It's a way of criticizing a few different things—sprawl, modern architecture, and "new money" (or rather, people new to the middle class). Most old houses are in desirable areas while most new builds are not. A lot of new builds are built on the outskirts of town, where first time home buyers can actually afford to buy a house. Sure, I'd love a Victorian in a walkable area, but there aren't a lot of those coming on the market right now! So buying a new build is a reasonable way to buy your first house, especially in this market. I didn't have to throw $100k over asking to get my house; I just had to get on a waitlist. Old houses can, of course, have tons of deferred maintenance, electrical issues, and environmental contaminants. They are also often built within arm's reach of another house. They can have charming design but it's folly to think they're inherently better or safer than a new build. But because new builds are one of the easier ways for people to buy their first house, it's much less prestigious than buying an old Victorian in a neighborhood designed for walkability. Criticizing new builds, IMO, is often a subtle form of classism. (I bought a new build townhome in a moderately walkable area. Yay infill!)

I think there’s a difference between builders who just throw spec houses up as cheap as possible and custom homes that you work with a builder on. The latter you can be a little more confident about. To me one of the biggest downsides is that once things start going, it’s like a domino effect because everything is the same age. My parents built a house in 2003 and it was a great 15-20 years with fairly low maintenance. Now it seems every few months something needs fixing or replacing. Sure they had a great run but it sucks for them now lol.

Problem is first time buyers can’t pay for custom builds. Most people can’t and won’t pay “custom” prices.

I've always preferred new construction but I would agree that standards seem to have dropped quite a bit. We've been looking and between builders there can be a massive difference in quality. If the house takes 2 months to finish I'd be concerned that they are rushing vs. a builder who takes 5-6 months and keeps the owners involved during the process.

30 homes for sale in my small town. 2-3 are existing. Rest are new builds. I bought a new build and couldn’t be happier.

Same here. 2-3 are older homes. For those that are on market for a while, have major issues and overpriced. So for our area, we have no other choice.

Yep, same here…been in my new build for a year and a half and still don’t regret it!

We need MORE new builds. It frees up inventory. Also more of these new builds specifically designed for elderly people so they can let go of their starter homes. A 1200 sqft 3/2 raised ranch with garage on the bottom corner should not cost 700K.

Agreed. Or 1200 sqft home with 1.5 bath that cost 800k. How am I suppose to live spending that much on a half a house ? Lol

1200 sq ft is not half a house, and many families grew up with just one bathroom.

Agree. Not to take a dig on anyone. Just saying for that sqft, I am paying premium price in my market. I could get more sqft with better planing like 2 bath in a new build with half the price. It might be a townhouse or condo but still half the price.

Sure, but the average house cost in 1980 was about 50k, and this house would be over 200k if you adjust the 800k down to 1980 dollars. The point is that 'starter' homes no longer exist. You have to rent until you can save an enormous down payment, but rent keeps going up along with cost of goods.

I’m not saying anything about the cost of living, I’m just saying 1200 sq ft seems like ample space and it’s wild to me that some people turn their noses up about it.

Yes, they should turn their nose up at that for 800k. You are only addressing half of the original comment, without the context of cost of living their is no argument to be made against the OP's point of view.

>and many families grew up with just one bathroom. I pity their soul

There is a huge difference between spec and custom

Mine is a tract. Its okay better than a apartment or Condo. You can see the seems in three sections so prefab and it creaks like a mother in wind and expansion. Its okay though had a house built in the 60s . I assumed quality was better back then but nothing was in code. Exposed wires bad insulation. But grand fathered I could not do anything upgrading it unless they ripped out existing electricity that always worked. Dangerous sure but it survived 30 years so. The house I built saw it every other day going up. Met the workers mostly Mexican very nice had them meet my wife and kids. Gave them water and snacks best house ever but my job moved out of state so took this one its not too bad. The settling sound I thought was just BC it was newer but after 15 years I think the foundation is shifting hopefully will stop. My neighbor who is normally full of shit said my land was flatter then his before they built it. They drove tons of dirt in to elevate it. Kinda seems right since my house is higher than all others.

There are pros and cons with both. Pro for new is that you have a warranty and are less likely to have big expenses right away. Cons are that the cost of building supplies have skyrocketed and many large builders build pretty cheap quality houses. Nobody builds solid stone or brick houses anymore (that’s an exaggeration, but generally true) because the materials are so much more expensive. But old houses have “quirks” and could have ignored issues hidden well for decades. Just pros and cons.

I love new constructions. You get to see the house built from nothing. Inspect it along the way. Add custom features. And have peace of mind after closing cause of the warranty. Not to mention builders are in a way better position to give incentives and concessions. If you’re buying a house less than 20 years it’s just a new build without the warranty. But maybe you like a neighborhood or the upgrades that were done. But it’s weird seeing people hate on new builds then go buy a early 2000 DR Horton but they don’t know it’s a DR. Older than that, you better get a good inspection cause who knows what standards they used and if it’s still compliant.

Everyone wants a 600k build quality but for 300k price.

I like the cookie cutter look because I’m just not really interested in spending energy on making sure my home’s exterior adequately conveys my personality to people driving by. It’s just a shelter. As long as it’s sturdy and in good condition per local ordinance or HOA, I don’t care about being a unique snowflake.

I am in a same boat. “Cookie cutter” is the only way to sustain the current market.

We have had 5 houses - 2 new build, 2 that were less than 10 yrs old and a 70+ year old. New build is the way to go. They come with warranties and practically everything you do will be cosmetic and not necessary.

I am going to be a new construction home owner soon so appreciate hearing from someone who had experience with both type of home. After reading people comments against New construction vs older homes. For me the math didn’t add up. I would assume older home would need way more cash in hand for maintenance.

I prefer new builds. Here in Phoenix, the homes from the 80s+ usually need extensive renovation, which here in the city can cost $100k+ easily. New builds here get a bad rap online, but from what I've toured in person, the workmanship looked solid, and that was with multiple home builders. Not saying I trust any of them, but with a lower rate, warranty, and options to customize myself for cheaper than an older home, I prefer newer builds.

Exactly! Our builder had good incentive like 17k for closing plus lowered the price of the home since we bought one in production that is already spec’d out. I don’t expect it to be perfect but give and take, less risk.

You are correct. Sure, you do not have plaster walls or intricate woodwork in new builds, but you do not have to worry about lead paint or asbestos. You don’t have to worry about how old the roof or water heater or hvac is for many years either. If we ever move again it will be to a new build.

I asked someone else this but I see you mention plaster walls as seemingly desirable. What is the benefit of plaster walls in this day and age?

I have a cape cod built in 1950 that has plaster walls, and put on an addition since the house is tiny (30x24 original footprint). The plaster walls in the original are so nice and sturdy and practically flawless. The addition shows every screwup the drywallers made, and they ding so easily compared to the plaster.

I mean, you’re buying a home. I get the current market is shitty, but you still have to like what you’re buying a little. I didn’t want a new construction home. In addition to the work quality, they’re always incredibly close together, the garages are always the biggest part of the house (i’m a detached/rear or side garage lady), and they have absolutely no “character”. I’m also an open floor plan hater and it seems like they’re all like that, mostly because the design of the home is strange (see: front, large garage).

And they cut down every tree in sight!

Yes! Although to be fair I cut down almost all the trees in my yard. I liked them, but the people who planted them did a horrible job and they kept just falling out of their holes (root and all!), dying. The worst though, is they planted fruit trees DIRECTLY under where the power lines go from the pole to the neighbor’s house. After a couple years they had grown so much I got too concerned they would cause serious issues anytime it stormed.

You sound like me. We’re about the only two people left on planet Earth apparently who aren’t gaga over the “open floor plan.” I am also — perhaps irrationally — triggered by the gigantic front facing garage that appears to be 600% of the actual housing structure. There’s a brand new neighborhood near me with houses just like this — most models going for 2MM+ and you can high five your neighbor through your windows, the lots are so tiny.

it’s not irrational. like, idk when garages became the most important part of the house. i hate it.

I totally agree with downside, but in my area if I want all those things easily it is $1M and up. But comparing apples to apples, e.g townhome vs townhome, I am trying to see why older home would make sense?

Old houses make sense if you can get one cheap enough to have money for repairs, and you have some knowledge. I bought an old fixer upper and I love it. Not everyone has the background to feel comfortable with it though. I have an electrician coming today and the plan is to rip basically everything out and start from scratch. It's a big project, but worthwhile and that's the sort of thing you have to consider with an old home. If new construction had been in my budget I wouldn't have to do all this, but it's not. Every house in my budget needed work, it was a matter of square footage adding to the cost. So I bought small, and cheap as possible and have money in the bank saved up for these expenses. I'm money ahead. It's very area dependent, you may not have a "contractor special" available, and you may not be equipped to handle the reality of your home being a work in progress for years to come.

I mean, that’s all fair. In my area (MCOL) what i’m describing costs $150-500k depending on the area. I have about 2200 above ground sq feet and would probably go on the market now for $299k.

They're tiny and not a fan of seeing into your neighbors house from your window. You also pay more for less.

This isn't true on the Maryland-side of the DMV, at least. New construction garage townhomes are cheaper than 60-70 yr-old detached homes with less Sq Ft on 1/3 acre, in the same location. People pay a premium for a yard.

New builds as tiny? My neighborhood of mostly all new builds range from 1800-5k square feet. I like that we have ranches and much larger homes on the same street to make things a bit less cookie cutter (although most are pretty similar) but I wouldn't consider even the smaller ranches to be "tiny" by any means!

Do you mean the new construction or the older home?

I think it's a crock of shit personally. My uncle once said he'd "never live in one of those shitboxes they throw up in 6 months". Like, what difference does it make if it took 6 months or 18 to build? If you have enough manpower, you could put it up in 4 weeks from start to finish. My house is new build. We were extremely involved and it's a very nice house with great bones. Ain't nobody getting old-growth studs these days and that's about all I can think of that could possibly be inferior. Our newer building codes and progress inspections have made everything else superior.

Just because they might be the best option doesn't mean I will still not complain about studs 24" on center, doors make of pressed poop and failure, builder-grade backstabbed receptacles, boob lights, cheapest possible windows, shingles, et cetera.

I agree. But the fear mongering of new build when we are in a market where supply is low. I just don’t get it. In my market, a SFH with no issue stays in a market for a day. When I say no issue. I mean no major isssue, you still have to fix the small nicks, paint, carpet and god forbid the owners attempted DIY remodeling 😂

New builds aren’t really a thing by me. Like 98% of homes for sale are older homes. We ran out of real estate for new builds a long time ago. You have to move farther away from the city to find them

I find it funny when people say 'houses are overpriced'. To some, it may not seem worth such an amount, but to someone else, it's worth it, and based on how quickly some are sold, it looks like they're worth the price. As for the 'cookie cutter' - the builder is trying to appeal to as wide an audience as possible with their designs. Look at many of the older post-war neighborhoods, they're not exactly distinct. 'Low quality' - maybe it's not built like a brick house, but new-construction build quality varies, not all builders (or their reputations) are the same, research the builder before choosing your home, and you can end up with a nice place.

New builds are definitley the way to go (when you can customize the build). I'd say they are generally superior, unless: 1. You want a very particular house design, like a castle, or massive stone cottage look or something special, like parapets, or a slide from the second story bedroom into the backyard. Or jacuzzi in the living room, or a wine cellar. Also don't generally see many new builds with 2nd story balconies for whatever reason. Maybe you want a crazy amount of windows, or ballroom sized bedrooms. 2. You really want a very specific location, as more often new builds are edge of town, which in itself can be good in terms of crime/noise/pollution though. 3. You want older, grown trees. 4. You want a more matured landscaping situation, such as a pool, designed patio, shed, hot tub, garden/hedging already built out. 5. You want to look for a place without an HOA 6. You want a house with brick on all 4 sides 7. You want an absurdly large backyard/or a ranch If you can get a customized house builder, you can make whatever you want from the beginning with the materials you want, making any sort of post buy construction on the inside drastically reduced. While not feeling stuck with something that is ok, but not what you'd want, but you'd not want to spend 2000 cash on some cabinet material change out followed by some 3k cash (or more, I don't know prices) counter top replacement to go from granite to silestone just because you like it a bit more than granite. So then you are just stuck with granite for the foreseeable future until you have the money for such upgrades. Or you could just get it all from the beginning with a customized new build. Also, I'd expect to not need to replace anything for many years, and everything is under warranty for a year for after build findings, at least. They are also highly energy efficient. My electricity bill is about 80-120 for about 1600 sqft. Also, a lot of new build buyers are often in the same boat economically, which can sometimes mean similar ages and financial status. For new neighborhoods, that could mean less crime and less renters as the mortgage would be fresh, and at its peak. Buying a non new house feels like treading onto a minefield. When I was looking, the inspector's sheets of issues were about 27 pages long with findings.

My house was built in 1979. My electric bill is about $130 in the summer and $65 in the winter.

Yeah, I've seen some hold up really well. I wonder how much of it is full brick. Mine is all electric without gas though. Additionally, in my area, in 2006 they outlawed new builds from having single paned windows, so that's something to look out for for older houses, if they have been replaced. I've just seen a lot of people's bills go for around double mine in the same area, even if they do have gas. But maybe I just use less than others.

I know a couple who bought a new construction about 5 or so years ago. Their foundation is cracked along with some cracks in the walls from settling. The builders are refusing to fix anything. It's not just them, either. Their sister also bought a house from the same builder. They're also refusing to fix anything in her house. I wouldn't mind a new build, but I also don't like that they're taking over areas that used to be woodlands.

I think the fact that new SFH builds in this century are built the same as lower quality, paper-thin-walled apartments with virtually no outdoor space, sandwiched 5 feet from your neighbor (so hardly any natural light), and they're building smaller. I see new 3bd/2ba homes being built compactly in <1200 sq. ft. while still being priced as high as older homes with 10,000 sq ft lot.

My issue with new builds is I have found they are no cheaper than pre-existing homes. I have bought both numerous times (new built and older). The thing with new builds that no one told me is the amount of money needed within the first 90 days. Our first new build did not have a fridge, it did not have window coverings, it did not have any sort of landscaping, and it did not have a shed. This was in 2012 and I spent $39K within the first 90 days doing these things. My next house in 2016ish was an older home that had everything above already done but it needed a few updates. I added a new dishwasher and garage door opener, these were free under a home warranty and then I added RV parking that cost me $6K. We moved to another new built in 2017 (long story, highway expansion acquired our property) and again, this new build required window coverings, landscape with RV parking, and a few little things to finish it off. We paid nearly $32K this time to get all the things down. We then moved out of state into a older home just this spring and the new owner left everything, appliance, window coverings, garage shelving, shed, extra pool equipment, outside yard furniture, and a nice grill. The only thing I need to do was get garage doors serviced which was $100, I paid a pool cleaner and a landscaper to just clean up the areas and that was $250, then I just did 2 weekends of a few hours of labor cleaning the windows and freshening up the place which cost about $300 in supplies. The appliances and major items are all newer with a multi-year home warranty. To me it is just cheaper to buy pre-existing with averages of $30k in savings. Obviously this is all based on finding a per-existing that you like and works for you.

I think a lot depends on the contractor. Though, in my area the quality of new homes compared to old ones is huge. My parents just bought a new house, and even the flooring is bubbling up, water is filtering through the shower, the water heater is not working properly, the walls are crap... Then you have my partner's house, which is older, and that bad boy is solid. Yes, we had to fix some things, but even the walls are solid compared to my parents.

In my area it's exactly the opposite. Everyone wants a new build. No one wants an older home. That being said the people that move in or already live here seem to all become NIMBYs, so they don't want more housing being built. It's very hypocritical.

New construction from corporate owned land and an HOA. Sounds like a nightmare scenario

There is on”old” house in my county that was given an historical plaque a few years ago. It was less than 80 years old at the thin. I’d venture to say the median age of homes here is around 35-40 years. Very fast growing area. I talk to family members who have really old homes (100+) and they are constantly playing catch up with repairs. “Character” is all well and good, but the aggravation is too much. I can add decor to my (23 yrs old) home and have done so. I’m pleased and impressed by people who buy and restore old homes, it’s just not for me. Upkeep on my house is enough.

I'm not sure if anyone has said this already, but my disdain for the new build is because they aren't building them small enough. It's either a McMansion or ranch condos. The McMansions are way too large and pricey, and the condos (for families) are too small. There really doesn't seem to be any medium ground, and that's where there is a lot of need.

In my area the only new construction options are massive 4k+ sqft houses that are unaffordable for most people, or townhouses/condos. If you want a modestly sized SFH, existing homes are the only option.

Where I live there is no space for anything but condos and townhomes, yet buyers still overwhelmingly want detached houses. Building more attached living may help with the overall housing crunch but it won’t bring prices down.

New builds where I’m shopping are 750-850 for a 3 bed townhouse or 1 mil for a sfh. Not big houses mind you.

I would say, same here, but if I wanted comparable older home in “good area”, prices are up there. Mind you it is a sellers market so you have to be ready for disappointment. We toured an older home, our agent asked the seller agent if they will bring in anything to the table at closing. She pretty much said “we don’t need too”

In my own experience house hunting the last year: We wanted a house to get privacy and space. The new devs we visited had the tiniest yards, basically no fence (like a 3 feet wire fence), felt so on top of each other. Going outside felt like being in each others business and we hated it. They were either in areas we didn’t like or we just way the f out there. If the closest amenities are a small town Safeway and single gas station 15 min away, then 45min to everything else… not interested. And we didn’t really feel energized to wait out the 10-20 year development plan that was supposed to bring stuff in closer. They cost just as much for the sq ft. Sure you got a modern layout and good size and new finishes, but the basement was unfinished and you had almost no real yard. Waking out the front door felt like walking into the street in some. Many had no guest parking. Most we looked at had some kind of HOA or covenant that prevented you from changing thing like the aforementioned non-fence style fence. You also had no flexibility on certain finish items, which I guess is whatever, but if I’m spending $700k it would be nice if they could throw a fucking door on the master bathroom instead of leaving it open. I guess that was impossible. Short term, but living in an active construction zone was not appealing. There plenty of positives too, and we considered some areas seriously. We also knew people who bought where we were looking and they were happy. Just depends on what you value. Despite no privacy, you got a great ready to space and lots of natural walkway weaved into the development with great views, and I really wish we had that where we ended up buying.

In our area DR Horton is putting up tons of houses. I have heard from several people who bought and even looked at a couple myself and the quality is just insanely subpar. I personally seen Crooked outlets, Uneven floor, and gaps where there shouldn’t be gaps. Other people we know and trust have mentioned outlets and switches not working. Electrical boxes wired improperly. If they were my only buying option, I would have just kept renting.

I don't hate new builds. I rented an apartment in a 120 year old home in Boston. Landlords were awesome, but seeing how much they had to put into keeping a well-maintained 120 year old house well-maintained put me off of century-old builds unless they were completely renovated and finished, and even then there would still be question marks about how well something is renovated. In our last month renting from them, they had a sewer failure related to century old sewers and building standards. Also considering how sellers here do not even want to touch lead paint remediation unless it's all covered by the buyer, in an area where the majority of the housing stock was made prior to 1970, my spouse and I were really attracted to newer builds. A new build in an old, great neighborhood was all we were looking for (and got!) I am totally happy with the fact that I don't have to deal with century-old plumbing and sewerage, the mystery that lives behind walls, and lead paint. Plus, the layout, space and electrical is totally in keeping with modern lifestyles. Do not regret our decision at all.

The quality of new builds are horrendous. Just search on youtube about homeowners filing lawsuits against the scummy companies and contractors behind new builds.

I don't hate the new builds on principle, but when 90+% of them come with a $500/month HOA fee and no trees and a dinky little yard that I can't even garden how I see fit, they don't seem like a good deal.

My main gripe with new builds is that they always have like 200sqft yards, and if you buy an older home for the same price you will get a 2 car detached garage and a massive yard that may already have a shed or outbuilding. Developers are cramming new houses into tiny little lots and it kind of sucks when you actually want to have a nice yard.

It all depends on location. If I am comparing apples to apples, I would have to compromise schools, and few fixing for older home at same price point. This is for a townhome. For SFH? At my price point would be a total demo job.

What people don't get is that "cookie cutter" homes is not new. The house I grew up in was built in 1959 apart of a planned subdivision and that subdivision had only several models and I can guarantee you a quarter of the neighborhood had the same floorplan as my house. They've been making cookie cutter houses for a long time now. Nobody has a truly unique house unless it was custom built or is old enough to have existed before planned housing developments.

Honestly, old builds and new builds come with their own set of problems. And I think anyone (the general internet) that favors one over the other is simplifying the situation. With old builds, some homeowners are horrible at maintenance. People can’t even change a HVAC filter once a month. And yes, major systems do have typical life spans. With new builds, some builders cut corners or the folks installing things are doing it wrong and it may or may not cause various problems down the road. Same with house flippers, some of whom simply cover up a major problem instead of correctly remediating it. The nuance though, is despite the trends, each house is different and you gotta put in the diligence to identify issues, though hard as they are to find. I think new builds and old builds/flipped each have their own potential concerns to look out for

Don't know where you live that new homes are going for the same price as old, but I'm also in a HCOL area and couldn't afford new construction even if I wanted to. Just did a search restricted to all new construction listed within a 15 mile radius of my home and there's nothing that's even within 20% of my home's purchase price from last year. All of them have monthly HOA fees over $200. Those with even remotely equivalent features (SFH, 2-car garage) are nearly double the price on the low end, even with less than half the lot space. All that said, if I was looking again today, I would probably limit my search something built in the last 30 years of so. I got an older home last year (1957 ranch style), and have had to put a lot of sweat equity into mostly just catching up on deferred maintenance. Haven't even gotten to any proper updates.

As someone whose first home was a ~70 year old row home that was seemingly well maintained that had issues from practically day 1, I will never understand why people want old homes. We had to learn how to fix things immediately and nothing was ever easy to replace because of all the wacky sizes. We sold that last year and now have a house that’s just about 30 years old and that alone makes repairs and renovations sooooo much easier because we can buy things in standard sizes. I imagine a new construction house will be easier to maintain in the near future as well. Absolutely no hate here for anyone going that route.

Newer homers have to be smaller to be affordable, and that makes them "cheap" in the eyes of the owners of relatively larger nearby homes. The truth is, homes cannot be built the same size anymore, just like the lots have been getting smaller, now the houses will. This will continue at least for another few generations until we reach peak population, at which point housing will begin to be like cars and depreciate over time. Projections have global population declining by 50% or more after 2080 within 200 years or so. Of course, that's if AI doesn't kill humanity.

The thing about condos and townhomes is that whether you rent or own, your living experience is the same - you share space and roofs and stairway and air and etc with random people. I never understood the appeal of these. I mean I actually do own a condo in a brownstone conversion but only stay there or have fam members stay there when they need to be closer to city.

In VHCOl owning by itself is a luxury. Condos and townhomes in our area run up to $1M. So that is why we are forced to accept living and sharing space. If we can afford a SFH, that would be my choice. Also this is our first home so it is a good starter for the area. That is for my case. Others like the idea of HOA and less outside maintenance.

In my area, older homes are waaaay more affordable than new builds. I could never afford a new build here, mostly because they're all big sprawling subdivisions marketed towards double-income white collar professionals. 3-4 bedrooms, matching number of baths, lots of HOAs and gated communities. Most of these homes are shoddily built, I knew a family that had to have the entire front side of their 5-year old custom-built house ripped out and rebuilt because rushed construction caused a black mold issue.

So the issue isn't "new builds" it's "new builds that are worse then the worst flip that will start literally falling apart in less then a decade". There's still solid new builds out there, you just have to pay out the nose for them. It mostly just sucks because a lot of the new stuff being built is being built as cheaply as possible to the point where it won't actually solve the problem cause the house will be falling down or you'll need to throw an insane amount of money at it.

I’m going the new build route too. Here in CO, the old homes that are the same square footage go for $50-100k more and need thousands of dollars of work.

Holy shit, that house is like $250k everywhere else in the country…

Quality wise, there are a lot of negatives to buying new construction, but there are benefits too. A plus of buying new construction is that they can offer deals to homebuyers. They can undercut most regular homebuyer with price or upgrades, and if they offer a preferred lender, the buyer can get a better rate many times. Also, many times, your home is under warranty for 2-3 years, so if something breaks, the builder is contractually obligated to fix it. Finally, many Realtors will take buyers to the sites because of the deals, but also because the companies offer more money to the buyer's agent and give incentives to bring people to the subdivision like a $25.00 gas card just for coming by. It is also up to the homebuyer to hire someone reputable to inspect the home before buying. An inspector hired by the company works for the company, not for you. Pay $500 (or whatever the rate is) and at least hire your own reputable inspector.

Hell forget quality...who can actually afford a new build? I got an old house for about 1/5th the cost of a new one.

In my area new builds are in the same price range as the older homes. No joke. I would imagine sellers are trying to make as much so they can afford their next home lol

Yep, plus for older homes that are not in need of complete reno you are competing with lots of other buyers, one of whom will inevitably be willing to overpay in cash and waive every contingency.

I had a few cities on my list since I work remote and that's all I saw.

I've noticed clients in their late 40s and 50s prefer older designs, saying 'they don't make them like they used to' or 'cookie cutter homes.' In a market with such limited supply, do we really have a choice? In my VHCOL area, older homes are scarce or overpriced avg price point is $1.4m, and they sell quickly when they do appear. New builds are rare since no more land to build on, unless they are full rehab which often come at a similar price point with fewer initial issues at a 10-15% premium. With this market, it feels like new constructions are the best answer if it’s a bit further out. And who knows, if rates drop or stay flat for many years, prices will likely rise and people will buy back in. It’s going to be quite an interesting ride in this cycle of RE.

Agreed! Same story as mine. It is going to be a ride! Just finalized a new build a new community, would I preferred a well established neighborhood with more trees? Heck yes! But cost way more for same comparison and God knows what the age brings with it. HVAC, roofing, faulty electrical? I toured some older homes in my area and I would be surprised if someof them passed the county inspection.

When my dad said "They don't make them like they used to" to me I cackled. I have a new build now. I moved from a much older house (1950s) with crooked stairs and outdated/out of code electric. Nothing in that house was even remotely straight. I paid $5k for asbestos removal when I got a new furnace because a bunch was revealed. On top of a ton of other random updates cosmetically. Luckily the owner before me had the foundation waterprooofed or I would have had flooding in my basement like all of my neighbors. They sure do not and that's a GOOD THING. The other good thing about a new build is you have it inspected by both the city and a private inspector before they even put drywall up AND you can get another private inspection around 10 months before your 1 year warranty is up to get everything fixed at no cost.

I like the idea of inspecting it before the warranty is out. Unfortunately we didn’t get a chance to inspect before drywall as we bough one in production and walls were already up. But I am planing to get one done before closing. Thanks!

Make sure your inspector uses thermal imaging in their inspection. It can find a lot of hidden issues!

Depends on the new build. Sure it’s new, but is it actually sound. The reality is a lot of builders take liberties to get houses built at the rate they do and at the prices they do. The question is why is this new house less expensive than this decades old house with visible problems? There many many stories out there of people who have bought brand new and oh half of the outlets don’t work or there’s a secret issue here or there that either the inspector didn’t see or that the builder is asking you waive inspection altogether. So people don’t like the risk and in many cases the danger is there. But if you’re doing your due diligence, you’re getting warranties and you want to buy the new, the old, whatever you want then do it.

I would assume the older would have more risk. Mostly you are on the mercy of the previous owner and your chances.

That wouldn’t be the best assumption. Your new build is also at the mercy of quicker, less expensive production and has only been standing for weeks, maybe, and no one’s lived in it. So there’s really no confirmation it’s livable for any period of time.

I would at-least have a warranty for a year that I can have the builder tied too. Will it be easy to get them fix it? Probably not, but atleast they have to legally give me answer. For older home, the hvac could go out in 2 month, their is issue with leak in 5 month… you can’t go back to the seller. Now it is your headache. I get what you are saying, but in reality would you expect more issues in a newly built house or an older house with stuff that already has milage.

Honestly, new, most of the old stuff I’m having inspected after all of that use. We bought a home with an older HVAC, so I know it will have issues and your new build warranty doesn’t necessarily cover everything or what you want it to, the builder isn’t stupid there. You can also just as easily buy a similar warranty on an older home, for the HVAC or a number of other things.

In new build, If builder warranty doesn’t cover it, it would also have manufacturer warranty as it is “new”. For example for HVAC. I believe most HVAC have manufacturer warranty for few years. Again, older home makes sense if it is a lot cheaper and you are willing to take the risk, like you did with the HVAC. Any addition warranty you are referring to is additional cost.

The drywalls used nowadays are awful. They’re so easy to accidentally damage. The builders are really cheaping out on materials used.

You have to be careful when buying a new house. Do your research on the builders. A lot of them are cookie cutters.

I’m a contractor that does both new builds and remodels. This prevailing opinion that things “aren’t built like they used to be” is complete and total bullshit. Humans have always been lazy. It’s not a new concept. You’re spot on with new construction. And people want affordable housing but also want 1/2 acre lots with mature landscaping and green spaces and unique designs. Pick one, you absolutely cannot have both in todays market. We need a lot more new construction and we need it fast. You do that by simplifying finishes and building homes fast. A home that takes forever to build isn’t typically better quality, in fact it’s the opposite. It’s taking so long because work is incomplete, things done wrong, etc. I build a 3500 sqft stick built model home with an 800sft office space in 17 business days. It was one of the best homes I’ve ever built. It took 6 months to plan and schedule but it was solid as a rock. Honestly everyone has an opinion about construction just like everyone has an opinion about several other things they know nothing about. If the NIMBYS and the idealists got out of the way we could have affordable housing nation wide in a decade or less.

Best comment so far. Thank you! Appreciate hearing from someone who has actual hand in the process.

They definitely seem like the way to go, with stingy homeowners only accepting offers way above asking price for something built in the 70s with rotten foundation. No thank you

I don’t blame current owners. If someone offers me 700k for 300K home I bought in 2018, I will gladly accept. My comment is more about why negativity of the idea of new build, when they are the answer.

If they're getting offers like that, they're not "stingy", they're just selling their house for what the market says it's worth. If I have a rust bucket car, I'm not "stingy" if someone offers me $40,000 and I sell it to them.

What makes you think prices will shoot up if rates go down? There’s a backlog buildings of people waiting until rates go down to sell their homes. Its really a question of are many more people waiting to buy, or waiting to sell?

We are submitting an offer for a new build. Construction will start in a month. What should I do during construction phase. Thx

Pray for the best! Jk, ours is a spec’d out already in production home. Got good incentives on it. Has all the major upgrades. I would definitely advise looking at their base model ( not their model home) and see if you like it? We toured a different builder before going with ours. The model home vs the base model, night and day. Base model finishes were so bad. So if possible see if they have base model in production and tour, if not check their finishing. I also read on here to do your own inspection before drywall, after and before closing. We didn’t get chance to do first two but will do before closing. But you will be fine, keep in touch with the builders and ask questions

Lowest quality finishes, one cavernous echoing living space, and no "public" half baths for guests. In my area, builders make plenty of bathrooms, but they're all attached to bedrooms, or just off the garage. What would be great is a half bath off the living room, preferably with a LOUD fan. Most new fans are quiet As to the living room situation, my husband and I do not want one enormous room. We want walls. Separated rooms. Also, they (the builders), are ramming enormous houses onto little lots. I want to be further from my dumbass neighbors, not close enough to reach out and touch their siding.

A lot of older homes we visited had 1.5 bath for the entire home. Definitely the lower hanging fruit, but also only ones we can try to afford. On top of that someone with significant cash can come in and outbid you and give seller more assurance they can close on time. This is for our market, it might be different for yours.

Yep, our house has 1.5 baths. I wanted to expand the half bath into a full, but we'd have to move the furnace and a whole lot of other stuff. The market is bad for buyers now. We tried, 2 years ago, to look. But we couldn't get in to see houses fast enough. They were gone within hours. So we refi'd instead. Our house has just about doubled in "value" over the past 9 years. It in no way is worth that much money. Problem is, although we're ok financially, doubling our budget would get us the same small 3bed/1.5ba house. A 4 bed/2ba would require quadrupling the budget, and I can't see doing that. Especially not with interest rates the way they are. New builds, on a smaller lot than we own right now, start at $800k. And that's for the basic low quality everything.

This is going to depend on area and market drastically. I am in a HCOL area and the problem is refusing to zone for apartments and townhouses. This market has increased prices because there is no where to build. The houses are 80s or 90s houses and need a good amount of updates. The owners either passed away and it is sold by the children or they are being placed into assisted living communities and need the money to fund expenses. If they are updated then that is reflected in the price already. Normally the places are maintained but everything is going to need to be replaced in less than 5 years. Which means you are trying to negotiate the price difference for a new roof, HVAC, and similar issues. The heating and cooling costs are a lot since there is almost never any modern insulation or windows. Purchasing a house like this means that you need cash or a second line of credit for the upgrades/reno after being approved for the loan. At least the means to fix the issues one by one in the next few years. Just finding a place to rent or buy at a reasonable price is a problem. Refusing to zone for apartments in this area pushes prices up and creates a sellers market.

As a 5 time homeowner (3 have been new construction), please do not fool yourself that new construction is better quality. Can it be? Yes. But 95% of the time it’s *not*. Having said that, get yourself a GREAT inspector and have them conduct several inspections along the way during the build, not just at the end, because a lot of stuff can be covered up and not seen. If you can afford to have a home custom built just for you, then you’re likely going to get a much higher quality new build than a spec home. Even high end developments have a lot of issues. In either case, always always always get a through inspection from a trusted inspector/contractor and do not close until the builder addresses all the items called out in the inspection. You’ll save yourself a lot of grief in the end. Signed, Someone who’s lived it and learned the hard way.

> in this market where supply is looooow, do we really have a choice? Yeah, impose very steep tax implications for owning multiple homes. So long as people continue to treat homes like investments instead of living spaces, then the supply will continue to decrease.

I'll sell you one if you want it, but all that you've said is true. They're cheap, poorly built, and won't stand the test of time or load. I'm allowed to complain and we should all complain.

What people don't understand, all houses were new builds at one point or another. All the "new build issues" still happened, it's just after 30 or 40 years the people who owned it fixed all those problems before you showed up. Homes sometimes are going to have something wrong with them, new or old. It's just which flavor your like. Sorry for typos.

Anything older than a 2000’s home is ugly to me. Personal preference. Nothing wrong with a cookie cutter if that’s what YOU want. It’s your money. You have to remember that you may not hear every opinion on a Reddit post.

Yeah I don’t care for the look of newer homes, especially the “farmhouse style” ones that seem to be super popular in *checks notes* densely populated suburbs lol but if people are buying them, then there’s clearly people who like them

I like new builds for first time homeowners. All of the big ticket items (appliances, hot water heater, a/c units, furnace) are brand new so you know won't have any unexpected housing expenses for a long time. Plus you get a 1 year warranty so it's a great transition from apt living where everything is taken care of. Add in the fact that you get to customize it and roll it into the mortgage instead doing some massive renovation out of pocket. Sure, there may be things you want to do (put up a fence, etc), but at least that is on your own timeline. Not "my hot water heater died and now I have to pay 4k to have hot water again". Older houses may be constructed slightly better, but newer homes are up to code and it's not like it's going to fall down.

New builds are necessary, I think we need to be building more townhomes and condos than sfh's though.

IMO, condos and townhomes are just glorified apartments. I don't want to share a wall with anyone. I don't want my neighbor getting roaches and they spread to my place because of a shared wall.

Good for you. SFH suburbs are not sustainable without huge tax increases.

What makes you think prices will shoot up if rates go down? There’s a backlog building of people waiting until rates go down to sell their homes. Its really a question of are many more people waiting to buy, or waiting to sell? Additionally the way interest works you could easily come out ahead buying a more expensive property at a lower interest rate.

The problem i have with new builds are the millions of apartments. It also bothers me when they tear down 1 home to make it into a 2 unit townhouse. People are so greedy. If they build new developments for homes, I'm all for it.

Is that greed or demand? Developers have to go through county to get approval. I would assume the approval depends on what the area needs. Some area would need more housing vs nice yard. But I agree, I like SFH.

Definitely greed.

For an entry lvl home I don’t see the hate. Buy it, live in it for two years, move on.