Which is better and more economical? Buy a fixer-upper of an old house or buy a lot and build a house on a fair budget?
2006-08-06 08:45:43 · 11 answers · asked by avenus 5 in Business & Finance ➔ Renting & Real Estate
It is better to buy a fixer-upper. However you have to spend a lot of time to fix it.
Tips for a fixer-upper:
* The worse it looks the better price you get.
* Negociate a lot. It is likely that you will be satisfied by the seller.
* Be creative in the solution you find to fix it. Sometimes you can just remove unnecessary things instead of fixing those.
* Try to fix a maximum by yourself. It is much cheaper.
* If you cannot fix it by yourself, you can always shop and find somebody who can help you to fix it with you.
* Buy second hands elements instead of new
* Never save on appearance. A poor quality paint will give the impression that the house is fragile. A broken window is a no go.
When the house is fixed, rent it or sell it.
2006-08-08 05:16:05 · answer #1 · answered by roy_s_jones 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have done both 7 times.
Bought a 50yr old fixer upper in 1975 for $25000, remodeled bath, kitchen, added dormer room on 2nd floor and deck and sold for $70K in 1982. Made about $20k
Bought a 30yr old $100K house old house, fixed leaky basement and sold for $132K
Bought a $132K newer ranch, no fixing needed. Bank bought it for $150K to tear down for a parking lot.
Bought another $132K newer split level, added basement rec room, swimming pool and remodeled kitchen and baths. Sold for $190K
Bought a new colonial on 5 acres for $199, put $30K into deck, water treatment system, garage door openers, landscaping and all that the builder didn;t do, or didn;t do well. Sold for $230K and made no money on it.
I did more, but you get the idea
I think older is better money maker, but newer is usually less work and more comfortable rooms and features.
2006-08-06 08:57:00 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is cheaper to buy a house that isn't a fixer-upper.
It could cost more to fix up than to build new, but building new generally does cost more than buying a non-fixer-upper.
2006-08-06 08:51:43 · answer #3 · answered by sonyack 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
There are advantages and disadvantages to both. It is vitally important to get an inspection before buying an old house. Old houses are usually well built but they often have dated kitchens, baths, plumbing, electricity, etc. A new house will have the latest bells and whistles but it may be poorly constructed. Know the builder's rep and again get an inspection. Personally, I prefer a new house.
2006-08-06 08:53:13 · answer #4 · answered by notyou311 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Depends upon the purpose of the purchase. If its to rent, then might as well buy an old house. If you are buying to live in, then might as well build a new house because you can totally customise the look of your house. The only down-side is that it might be a little more expensive than buying an old one, but its worth it.
2006-08-06 08:51:24 · answer #5 · answered by Billy Talent 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If the house was never updated, chances are, there is no insulation anywhere. Attic insulation will help a lot, and it's something most people can do themselves. Unless you are really advanced, you'll need to hire a contractor for other upgrades such as replacement windows or wall insulation.
2016-03-27 01:18:13 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
build me a new one
2006-08-06 08:49:57 · answer #7 · answered by jyd9999 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
build your own
2006-08-06 08:49:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
BUILT ONE AND HIRE ME AS YOUR ARCHITECT
2006-08-06 08:49:51 · answer #9 · answered by dr.who 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
what ever you want
2006-08-06 08:49:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋