At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

Mark S.

Mark S. wrote:
At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

I'm watching it at the moment and the more I see, the more I want them to
fail. They just don't seem to have any clue at all.

--
James...
http://www.jameshart.co.uk/

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:05:03 +0000, Mark S.
assembled some random characters on their keyboard which said:

At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

Mark S.

Another fix of SB ;-)

Colin M

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:31:45 +0000 (UTC), Colin M
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:05:03 +0000, Mark S.
assembled some random characters on their keyboard which said:

At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

Mark S.

Another fix of SB ;-)

Colin M


The woman featured seemed to be trying to out front her. ;-)

Mark S.

"James Hart" wrote in message ...
Mark S. wrote:
At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

I'm watching it at the moment and the more I see, the more I want them to
fail. They just don't seem to have any clue at all.

Apart from the extremely un-realistic budget of £5K, i feel sorry for
thier friends.

He (the idiot IMO) stated at the end of the program, with a smug grin,
that considering the amount of effort he had put in, then the profit
wasn't bad.

Considering his best friend was doing the vast majority of the work,
then the best friend should have told him to *uck off and put in a
proper invoice!

I know they get these people in because it makes good television but
it would be nice if someone took some advice!

What about a celebrity property ladder and SB being the guest as well
as the presenter.
Give her a run down house with limited budget and sit back and watch.

May make people listen to her in the future.

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

I thought that idea of having the downstairs bathroom was pure inspiration,
allowing a separate bathroom and still having a dining area and a larger
kitchen. Until she said it, I couldn't think of a solution to the house's
odd layout. It's such a shame the couple were too thick to listen to her.

Christian.

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 10:00:49 -0000, David Kent
wrote:


Mark S. wrote in message
...
At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

Mark S.


I did not see the second half of the programme

Did they replace the roof?

Yes, begrudgingly. They also added a skylight to the bathroom at the same
time.

How much did it sell for?

92,000 IIRC. That gave them a profit of just 500 based on the 75,000
valuation before they decided to renovate. Of course, they disputed that
it would have sold for 75 at the time and so they estimated their
development profit as a higher proportion of the total profit (they bought
for 50,000 I think.) Their total budget tripled from their original 5,000
to 15,000.

Colin
--

On 19 Nov 2003 00:39:40 -0800, Rich wrote:

"James Hart" wrote in message
...
Mark S. wrote:
At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

I'm watching it at the moment and the more I see, the more I want them
to
fail. They just don't seem to have any clue at all.

Apart from the extremely un-realistic budget of £5K, i feel sorry for
thier friends.

Me too. I would have no qualms about helping in a decorating party, or
redoing the garden party, of friends who were doing up their own *home*
but I would not help if the reason was pure speculation, not unless I was
paid!

Colin
--

Mark S. wrote in message
...
At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

Mark S.


I did not see the second half of the programme

Did they replace the roof?

How much did it sell for?

YorkieDave

Two points about "Property Ladder":
1) Is anyone else getting stick from their partner as they yell "idiot" (or
worse) at
the telly when some naiive, greedy and diy-thick plonker comes out with some
drivel
about cost/timescales/what-the-buyer-will-like ?

2) I wonder what the buyers of these properties experience as they watch the
program
some weeks or months later... do they feel "done" or what? Is the fact that
the property
has been on the telly a plus or a minus for future resale?

I guess overall it irks me that I have the skills but not the courage to
delve into this
work area... well, maybe someday.

Mungo ;-)

1) Is anyone else getting stick from their partner as they yell "idiot"
(or worse) at the telly when some naiive, greedy and diy-thick plonker
comes out with some drivel about cost/timescales/what-the-buyer-will-like
?

No. Both me and my partner yell "idiot" (or "you stupid thick b*stard who's
going to lose lots of money and all their friends") in unison.

Christian.

"Mungo Henning" wrote in message
...
Two points about "Property Ladder":
1) Is anyone else getting stick from their partner as they yell "idiot"
(or
worse) at
the telly when some naiive, greedy and diy-thick plonker comes out with
some
drivel
about cost/timescales/what-the-buyer-will-like ?

You're not alone. I have developed a reputation amongst SWMBO's family as a
complete and utter pessimist and cynic and nit-picked.....

a) because I shout at the screen and generally give up on a film every time
computer screen output is accompanied by chirping noises from said computer;

b) because I do not believe ANY estimates of cost or effort or timescales
given on home make-over programs (they get all their labour for free and
therefore conveniently forget to factor it into their estimates)

c) because I point out the myriad planning and building regs
restrictions/expense/delays for a lot of what is shown on the screen

d) because of all the nasties that I see them doing with plumbing and
electrics.


2) I wonder what the buyers of these properties experience as they watch
the
program
some weeks or months later... do they feel "done" or what? Is the fact
that
the property
has been on the telly a plus or a minus for future resale?

I guess overall it irks me that I have the skills but not the courage to
delve into this
work area... well, maybe someday.

Mungo ;-)



Well, I might be most upset, but then I'm not the kind of person to buy a
newly done-up house! At least I'd have evidence if they'd done anything
really naughty....

:-)

Richard



--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

"Mark S." wrote in message
...
At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)



Is anyone (other than me) watching the £1 million property experiment on the
Beeb? Every weeek you get two arrogent blokes ignoring well meant advice.
They are going to have to get their comeuppance soon!

Rich wrote:

"James Hart" wrote in message ...

Mark S. wrote:

At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

I'm watching it at the moment and the more I see, the more I want them to
fail. They just don't seem to have any clue at all.


Apart from the extremely un-realistic budget of £5K, i feel sorry for
thier friends.

He (the idiot IMO) stated at the end of the program, with a smug grin,
that considering the amount of effort he had put in, then the profit
wasn't bad.

Considering his best friend was doing the vast majority of the work,
then the best friend should have told him to *uck off and put in a
proper invoice!



Hear hear. I had a friend once, who got ******s cramp in a kneee,
decided he couldn't use a clutch, and biought an auotomatic Maxi, which
promptly dumped all its gearbox oil on teh pavement.

In a panic he appealed to me to help, and after a fairly hard weekends
work, involving sebveral trips to motor factors and scrapyards I managed
to replace part of teh gearbox casing, the nut on teh mainshaft, its
bearing and the lock washer that had never been fotted at teh factory...

He sold it for 350 more than he bought it for. I got a free spaghetti
bolognese and a glass of wine.

Later on he stiffed me for over several million. Arguably. But thats
another story.


I know they get these people in because it makes good television but
it would be nice if someone took some advice!

What about a celebrity property ladder and SB being the guest as well
as the presenter.
Give her a run down house with limited budget and sit back and watch.

May make people listen to her in the future.



She's a complete cow. Arrogant little tart. Another Anne Robinson clone.

Not only do we now have 'its frightfully clever to be stupid' (celebrity
XXXXX) we now have its frightfully clever to pretend to be clever and
put people down.

I preferred teh old BBC, format where it was frightfully clever to be
clever, and not put people down at all.

Mungo Henning wrote:

Two points about "Property Ladder":
1) Is anyone else getting stick from their partner as they yell "idiot" (or
worse) at
the telly when some naiive, greedy and diy-thick plonker comes out with some
drivel
about cost/timescales/what-the-buyer-will-like ?


Not at all, since we did all of those things, but when looking back, the
cost-to-sell, when taken away from the current value is about equal to
money spent, and most importantly, we have a house that simply could not
have been got any other way.



2) I wonder what the buyers of these properties experience as they watch the
program
some weeks or months later... do they feel "done" or what? Is the fact that
the property
has been on the telly a plus or a minus for future resale?

I guess overall it irks me that I have the skills but not the courage to
delve into this
work area... well, maybe someday.


The key thing is to listen to advice, but not take all of it. Bits of
advice I got from my builder that worked were 'make the rooms as big as
possible' Bits that didn't were 'you don't need a big flue on an open
fire' and you can't use underfloor heating as your sole heating on teh
ground floor'. And of course 'it doesn't get much more expensive just
because its bigger'

total cost about twice his estimate, ene sacking him halfway thtough,
and its still not finished :-)

Never mind, get another chunk of finishing done this Xmas.




Mungo ;-)

RichardS wrote:


b) because I do not believe ANY estimates of cost or effort or timescales
given on home make-over programs (they get all their labour for free and
therefore conveniently forget to factor it into their estimates)


I looked at that roof, and thought 'bugger me, thats a doddle, any pro
roofing company would have that stripped in one day, felted and battened
in tow, and finished professionally in three, cost about 3 grand'.

They took two weeks and it was 2 1/2 grand. Total plonkers

In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


She's a complete cow. Arrogant little tart. Another Anne Robinson clone.

No No No No, NatPhil! Noohhh! She has wonderful knockers.
Robinson is simply [as above], with no redeeming features whatsoever.

Not only do we now have 'its frightfully clever to be stupid' (celebrity
XXXXX) we now have its frightfully clever to pretend to be clever and
put people down.

I preferred the old BBC, format where it was frightfully clever to be
clever, and not put people down at all.

Absolutely with you on that one, old chap.

John

"Mike Hibbert" wrote in message
...

Is anyone (other than me) watching the £1 million property experiment on
the
Beeb? Every weeek you get two arrogent blokes ignoring well meant advice.
They are going to have to get their comeuppance soon!


Sadly the two blokes are fellow Scots. In the week before last they said on
camera
that they had worked "so hard" ... keyrist! picking a kitchen in a fancy
kitchen store!

So how about a new telly program - Sarah and one of the Scots lads (Colin
and ????) to
actually do some "first level" diy in a pair of houses. This is just to see
if Sarah can actually
do what she says, and to show one of the boys what real work actually
consists of.

In their defence, I wonder if the pair of lads slipped into "daytime tv"
mode. I'm starting to
refer to all such daytime "home" shows as "superlative tv" - all full of
"wonderful", "brilliant",
"gorgeous" and other inappropriate adjectives.

Mungo

Just like "I think I'll put a skylight there" or "I'll just create a
corridor there".

I wasn't happy with him just cutting a hole for the skylight. No props, no
trimmer joists. Nothing. Cut two rafters just like that.

Making a corridor is less so, although the holes in the wall could be
structural.

Christian.

Oh aye, one more point: on these programs you see the developer changing
their
mind on the spur of the moment.
Just like "I think I'll put a skylight there" or "I'll just create a
corridor there".

Now if I tried that here in Scotland I'd probably be lynched by Building
Control at
the local council.
So my presumption is that the regulations are different down in England.

Someone wanna confirm/deny this with regard to spur-of-the-moment changes to
plans?

TIA

Mungo

In article , Mungo Henning
writes
Sadly the two blokes are fellow Scots. In the week before last they said on
camera
that they had worked "so hard" ... keyrist! picking a kitchen in a fancy
kitchen store!

They shall forever be known by me as Julian & Sandy . . . .
--
fred

"Christian McArdle" wrote in message et...
Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

I thought that idea of having the downstairs bathroom was pure inspiration,
allowing a separate bathroom and still having a dining area and a larger
kitchen. Until she said it, I couldn't think of a solution to the house's
odd layout. It's such a shame the couple were too thick to listen to her.

Why not an internal bathroom at the top of the stairs, positioned
between the two bedrooms? Could have used that redundant Velux rather
more effectively too!

David

In message , Mungo Henning
writes
Oh aye, one more point: on these programs you see the developer changing
their
mind on the spur of the moment.

So my presumption is that the regulations are different down in England.


Well they can be regarding various things, something's you could change,
some things not.

The guy a week or two ago was a total tit tough. ****ing off all his
neighbours, and causing delays etc. by starting work on party walls
without the necessary PWA permissions, scaffolding being put onto the
neighbours flat roofs and 'builder' walking around on them. Ruining a
room in the flat downstairs via a leak.......
--
Chris French, Leeds

In message , Colin Blackburn
writes
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 10:00:49 -0000, David Kent
wrote:


Mark S. wrote in message
...
At last!!

Someone gets a "spanking" for ignoring well meant advice. ;-)

Mark S.


I did not see the second half of the programme

Did they replace the roof?

Yes, begrudgingly. They also added a skylight to the bathroom at the
same time.

How much did it sell for?

92,000 IIRC. That gave them a profit of just 500 based on the 75,000
valuation before they decided to renovate. Of course, they disputed
that it would have sold for 75 at the time and so they estimated their
development profit as a higher proportion of the total profit (they
bought for 50,000 I think.) Their total budget tripled from their
original 5,000 to 15,000.

Colin

So they bought for £50K, spent £15K, and sold for £92K

That looks like a profit of £27K before costs of purchase, sale, and
interest, (notional if not actual).

They didnt sell it for £75K, and a valuation for its own sake is often
way out, so we will never know what they might have sold it for.
--
Richard Faulkner

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 19:07:58 GMT, fred wrote:

They shall forever be known by me as Julian & Sandy . . . .

Bona Builders :-))

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 17:51:53 +0000, John wrote:

In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


She's a complete cow. Arrogant little tart. Another Anne Robinson clone.

No No No No, NatPhil! Noohhh! She has wonderful knockers.

And a delightful arse.

Robinson is simply [as above], with no redeeming features whatsoever.

Robinson is an annoying squeaky-voiced harridan.

Not only do we now have 'its frightfully clever to be stupid' (celebrity
XXXXX) we now have its frightfully clever to pretend to be clever and
put people down.

I preferred the old BBC, format where it was frightfully clever to be
clever, and not put people down at all.

Absolutely with you on that one, old chap.

Totally agree.


--

Dave

In article , Grimly
Curmudgeon writes
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 17:51:53 +0000, John wrote:

In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


She's a complete cow. Arrogant little tart. Another Anne Robinson clone.

No No No No, NatPhil! Noohhh! She has wonderful knockers.

And a delightful arse.

Robinson is simply [as above], with no redeeming features whatsoever.

Robinson is an annoying squeaky-voiced harridan.

Poor old Tony wotisname eh?..

Not only do we now have 'its frightfully clever to be stupid' (celebrity
XXXXX) we now have its frightfully clever to pretend to be clever and
put people down.

I preferred the old BBC, format where it was frightfully clever to be
clever, and not put people down at all.

Absolutely with you on that one, old chap.

Totally agree.



--
Tony Sayer

In article , No-one No-
me writes
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 19:07:58 GMT, fred wrote:

They shall forever be known by me as Julian & Sandy . . . .

Bona Builders :-))

6mins into tonight's programme and all I can say is ******S

oh, and LOL btw :-)
--
fred

So they bought for £50K, spent £15K, and sold for £92K

That looks like a profit of £27K before costs of purchase, sale, and
interest, (notional if not actual).
And presumably the taxman will want around £8K of that.
It's all gambling. I know people who were standing up when the music stopped
in the 80s, and still haven't recovered.

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 20:05:04 +0000, Richard Faulkner
wrote:

So they bought for £50K, spent £15K, and sold for £92K

That looks like a profit of £27K before costs of purchase, sale, and
interest, (notional if not actual).

They didnt sell it for £75K, and a valuation for its own sake is often
way out, so we will never know what they might have sold it for.

Of course but it would have undoubtedly gone for much more than the 50,000
they paid since the other house in the area would've too. For what it's
worth the valuations they got after renovation ranged from 85 to 90,000,
they sold for 92.

What the presenter was trying to get them to see is that they didn't make
the whole profit from the renovation and they *may* have even made a loss
on that part. This was not a couple just doing up their own house to sell
but a couple attempting to make money through development, if they
continue in this way they may never be out of pocket but they're not going
to make a living. The bulk of the work was done by friends and a builder
working for a special rate meant there costs were much lower than they
could have been. They also added the rent they made renting the house out
prior to renovation into the sums.


Colin
--

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:20:01 -0000, "RichardS" noaccess@invalid
wrote:

You're not alone. I have developed a reputation amongst SWMBO's family as a
complete and utter pessimist and cynic and nit-picked.....

Check!

a) because I shout at the screen and generally give up on a film every time
computer screen output is accompanied by chirping noises from said computer;

Hahaha! I thought I was the only one that did that, along with
analogue lockswitches that beep and security doors that make noises!

b) because I do not believe ANY estimates of cost or effort or timescales
given on home make-over programs (they get all their labour for free and
therefore conveniently forget to factor it into their estimates)

Has anyone here had a 'changing rooms' type experience? I don't
believe for a minute that some of those things are really done in 2
days......

d) because of all the nasties that I see them doing with plumbing and
electrics.

You're talking about DIY SOS here aren't you

Well, I might be most upset, but then I'm not the kind of person to buy a
newly done-up house! At least I'd have evidence if they'd done anything
really naughty....

We're not either. It irks me that the results of property ladder style
stuff always looks like either a bloody show house that's not summat
I'd imagine anyone living in, or an office complex!
--
cheers,

witchy/binarydinosaurs

"Lobster" wrote
"Christian McArdle" wrote
| I thought that idea of having the downstairs bathroom was pure
| inspiration, allowing a separate bathroom and still having a
| dining area and a larger kitchen.
| Why not an internal bathroom at the top of the stairs, positioned
| between the two bedrooms? Could have used that redundant Velux
| rather more effectively too!

ARAICR the stairs ran across the whole width of the house, so would probably
have involved some even more tortuous corridor arrangements. There wasn't
any space to spare.

Although I think a downstairs bathroom for the second bedroom could be an
adverse selling point for a family home (little Johnny wanting a wee in the
middle of the night) for an adult house-share the asset of having a second
bathroom would outweight the disadvantage of it being downstairs, and
buy-to-let was a major target market. I think it would have been about the
best to do with an awkward house.

But what twits spend about £3,500 on a kitchen in a 2-up 2-down and don't
even fit a draining board.

They did tidy the back yard up nicely though, which is something overlooked
by most of the comba^Wcontestants.

Owain

"Colin Blackburn" wrote
| What the presenter was trying to get them to see is that they didn't
| make the whole profit from the renovation and they *may* have even
| made a loss on that part. This was not a couple just doing up their
| own house to sell but a couple attempting to make money through
| development, if they continue in this way they may never be out
| of pocket but they're not going to make a living.

Exactly. They never seem to take into account that they're supposed to be
paying themselves a wage out of this. No point in going through all the
aggro (even if some of them don't actually work very hard) to end up with a
profit less than would be achieved by staying in an easy 9-5 job.

Owain