|
Property Ladder - kitchen supplier
Watched the program tonight, and was wondering...
They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? |
JoeJoe wrote:
Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? Yeeees...I thought I smelt a rat there too. The hob/oven/extractor were AEG. That's *at least* 150+300+300 = £750 for that lot - probably significantly more (an AEG chimney extractor is ~£500). -- Grunff |
In message , Grunff
writes JoeJoe wrote: Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? Yeeees...I thought I smelt a rat there too. The hob/oven/extractor were AEG. That's *at least* 150+300+300 = £750 for that lot - probably significantly more (an AEG chimney extractor is ~£500). details of the suppliers for each project are on th website, though it doesn't seem to have this one (yet) http://www.channel4.com/life/microsi...ogrammes/pl_in dex.html -- Chris French, Leeds |
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 01:09:46 +0100, "JoeJoe" wrote:
Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? That episode last night really got on my nerves, as everything that Sarah suggested was rejected out of hand, with a sneer even, by the two women. I don't know why SB bothers, as hardly anyone on any episode I've seen has heeded her advice at all. And while the finished article last night did look nice overall, the mistake with the placement of the kitchen was utterly stupid. I am convinced that the butch one just refused to back down for fear of losing face. Oh, and how convenient for her big toe to play up when the extent of the work required was realised! We do have doctors in this country. I just thought it was creating a big effect by 'working' with one foot in a bucket. The same with the loft. Even after the building inspector had warned them about the sorry state of the roof timbers, referring to the ones which had been cut away, what did they do? Get the odd-jobber to attach some very flimsy looking metal struts! MM |
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 01:09:46 +0100, "JoeJoe" wrote:
Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. -- Mike Halmarack Drop the EGG to mail me. |
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 10:03:29 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote: On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 01:09:46 +0100, "JoeJoe" wrote: Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? That episode last night really got on my nerves, as everything that Sarah suggested was rejected out of hand, with a sneer even, by the two women. I don't know why SB bothers, Big Bucks? as hardly anyone on any episode I've seen has heeded her advice at all. Seems to be the standard formula devised to provide just the right amount of tension and conflict for the average 'soap' viewer, or with this genre should that be Swarfega? And while the finished article last night did look nice overall, the mistake with the placement of the kitchen was utterly stupid. Well spotted! I am convinced that the butch one just refused to back down for fear of losing face. Oh, and how convenient for her big toe to play up when the extent of the work required was realised! A 'baddy' through and through. We do have doctors in this country. True! And if you live long enough you'll get to meet one. I just thought it was creating a big effect by 'working' with one foot in a bucket. Yes, absurdly theatrical eh? The same with the loft. Even after the building inspector had warned them about the sorry state of the roof timbers, referring to the ones which had been cut away, what did they do? Get the odd-jobber to attach some very flimsy looking metal struts! You'll win the "perfect viewer" prize Mike. :) -- Mike Halmarack Drop the EGG to mail me. |
"Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. |
"IMM" wrote in message ... "Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. A lot of the people I've seen on that show have only made money because house prices have risen while they've been doing it up. In some cases they'd have been better of doing nothing to it at all, leaving it unlet and just selling it a year later. Bob |
Bob wrote:
"IMM" wrote in message ... "Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. A lot of the people I've seen on that show have only made money because house prices have risen while they've been doing it up. In some cases they'd have been better of doing nothing to it at all, leaving it unlet and just selling it a year later. Bob I'd have took the £15 pure profit that the solicitor offered and used it as a deposit on a finished house /then/ waited 12 months for the price to rise in line with the rest of the street. but then I'm a sensible bloke and not a lesbitarian with an axe to grind :-) RT |
"R Taylor" wrote in message ... Bob wrote: "IMM" wrote in message ... "Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. A lot of the people I've seen on that show have only made money because house prices have risen while they've been doing it up. In some cases they'd have been better of doing nothing to it at all, leaving it unlet and just selling it a year later. Bob I'd have took the £15 pure profit that the solicitor offered and used it as a deposit on a finished house /then/ waited 12 months for the price to rise in line with the rest of the street. but then I'm a sensible bloke and not a lesbitarian with an axe to grind :-) Exactly what my wife said. |
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:57:18 +0100, "IMM" wrote:
"Mike Halmarack" wrote in message .. . At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. Yes, sloth seems to beat plastering skill every time. -- Mike Halmarack Drop the EGG to mail me. |
"Bob" wrote in message ... "IMM" wrote in message ... "Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. A lot of the people I've seen on that show have only made money because house prices have risen while they've been doing it up. In some cases they'd have been better of doing nothing to it at all, leaving it unlet and just selling it a year later. Near enough. A house done up sells quicker and does tend to get the top of the range in that area/house type. Selling a house quickly, some may be on the market for over 6 months, can be an earner in itself. |
"R Taylor" wrote in message ... Bob wrote: "IMM" wrote in message ... "Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. A lot of the people I've seen on that show have only made money because house prices have risen while they've been doing it up. In some cases they'd have been better of doing nothing to it at all, leaving it unlet and just selling it a year later. Bob I'd have took the £15 pure profit that the solicitor offered and used it as a deposit on a finished house /then/ waited 12 months for the price to rise in line with the rest of the street. How do you know house prices are going to rise? That is a "big" gamble. The cost in buying property: stamp duty, fees, etc, are never fully assessed. Many people look at the market values they bought and sold and then think they made a profit, when in fact they probably drew even. but then I'm a sensible bloke and not a lesbitarian with an axe to grind :-) One good thing about these progs is that it puts off amateur developers, by letting them know that making big bucks is not easy and at times virtually impossible. |
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:40:41 +0100, "IMM" wrote:
One good thing about these progs is that it puts off amateur developers, by letting them know that making big bucks is not easy and at times virtually impossible. Just the opposite in my opinion but there's bound to be some differences of perception. -- Mike Halmarack Drop the EGG to mail me. |
"Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:40:41 +0100, "IMM" wrote: One good thing about these progs is that it puts off amateur developers, by letting them know that making big bucks is not easy and at times virtually impossible. Just the opposite in my opinion but there's bound to be some differences of perception. Beany does emphasis that many are not making a lot of money, if any. When you look at the time from looking for the property and finally selling and then you divide the profit into an hourly rate, you may be better off stocking shelves on the side at Tesco. I knew one so-called highly paid manager who earned about the same as a bus driver who worked as much overtime as he could get. When they worked out how many hours per week they worked it was about the same. One was paid a salary and one for all the time he worked. These amateur developers tend to work long hours on their projects, so any profit is not as great as you think when the time is considered. |
"IMM" wrote in message ... "Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:40:41 +0100, "IMM" wrote: One good thing about these progs is that it puts off amateur developers, by letting them know that making big bucks is not easy and at times virtually impossible. Just the opposite in my opinion but there's bound to be some differences of perception. Beany does emphasis that many are not making a lot of money, if any. When you look at the time from looking for the property and finally selling and then you divide the profit into an hourly rate, you may be better off stocking shelves on the side at Tesco. I knew one so-called highly paid manager who earned about the same as a bus driver who worked as much overtime as he could get. When they worked out how many hours per week they worked it was about the same. One was paid a salary and one for all the time he worked. These amateur developers tend to work long hours on their projects, so any profit is not as great as you think when the time is considered. But those developers may not be able to get a job where they could make that money working normal hours. I agree that salaries are a scam though - you get to be called "professional" but don't get paid for all the time you work. Quite remarkable how people just put up with it. Bob |
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:01:27 +0100, "Bob" wrote:
A lot of the people I've seen on that show have only made money because house prices have risen while they've been doing it up. In some cases they'd have been better of doing nothing to it at all, leaving it unlet and just selling it a year later. Exactly the conclusion I came to while idly perusing the first series. Especially as, in a rising market, unimproved properties will still sell. [Anyone know what the time lag is between filming and airing these sort of programmes ? Whenever I watch one of the relocation ones, I am bewildered by the prices which sometimes seem to be so low as to be unreal at times.] -- Never mind what road we're on... keep your eyes on the carrot! Mail john rather than nospam... |
"JoeJoe" wrote in message ...
Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? The prices quoted for kitchens in all of these property programmes just dont add up - it's just not possible to get kitchens of *any* quality and have them fitted for the prices they quote. I've stopped getting annoyed about it. |
I'd have took the £15 pure profit that the solicitor offered and used
it as a deposit on a finished house /then/ waited 12 months for the price to rise in line with the rest of the street. but then I'm a sensible bloke and not a lesbitarian with an axe to grind :-) Exactly what my wife said. I hate to say it but "mine too" LJ |
IMM wrote:
"R Taylor" wrote in message ... Bob wrote: "IMM" wrote in message ... "Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. A lot of the people I've seen on that show have only made money because house prices have risen while they've been doing it up. In some cases they'd have been better of doing nothing to it at all, leaving it unlet and just selling it a year later. Bob I'd have took the £15 pure profit that the solicitor offered and used it as a deposit on a finished house /then/ waited 12 months for the price to rise in line with the rest of the street. How do you know house prices are going to rise? Experience That is a "big" gamble. The cost in buying property: stamp duty, fees, etc, are never fully assessed. Many people look at the market values they bought and sold and then think they made a profit, when in fact they probably drew even. but then I'm a sensible bloke and not a lesbitarian with an axe to grind :-) One good thing about these progs is that it puts off amateur developers, by letting them know that making big bucks is not easy and at times virtually impossible. hmm, 40k on the last property and c60 on this one ... seems quite simple, really ! 'course, if I took into account every hour I worked then I'm sure that a/ I wouldn't do another one, ever, and b/ I was probably on £3/hour. personally, I'll keep at it specifically for the cash lump sums which make all the aggro, dirt, pain, headaches and BS evaporate as if they never existed. RT |
Yes, sloth seems to beat plastering skill every time The butch one made a point of broadcasting how easy it was to plaster ceilings but this was not shown. So who did plaster the ceilings? |
"JoeJoe" wrote in message ... Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? If you went along to a kitchen shop with a Channel 4 film crew and start talking about them appearing as a supplier on the programme's web site, I wonder what sort of discount you could expect? |
I was surprised they even got it finished because twice they showed
them peeling off wallpaper an inch at a time with their fingers! Sarah Beeny is not always right with her suggestions. She used to advise selling up as fast as possible and moving onto the next property in the first series. At that time property prices were shooting up and you could quite easily end up selling and by the time you found another suitable property the price could have risen substantially negating any profit you'd have made. Also in the first series she advised a young couple, doing up a £40k odd home in Norfolk, to buy a restored £800 fireplace out of a very small budget (I think even the kitchen was only around £600). Not one person viewing the home or any estate agent made any comment about it afterwards. It was a total waste of money. |
StealthUK wrote:
I was surprised they even got it finished because twice they showed them peeling off wallpaper an inch at a time with their fingers! made me laugh out loud that did. incredible. 'course, it's a good job they were lesbitarians, any woman worth her salt wouldn't have risked her nails peeling wallpaper :-) I have a deep suspicion that respective mummys and daddys played a very large but behind scenes role in the completion of that project. RT |
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 10:26:43 +0100, Mike Halmarack
wrote: On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 10:03:29 +0100, Mike Mitchell wrote: On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 01:09:46 +0100, "JoeJoe" wrote: Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? That episode last night really got on my nerves, as everything that Sarah suggested was rejected out of hand, with a sneer even, by the two women. I don't know why SB bothers, Big Bucks? as hardly anyone on any episode I've seen has heeded her advice at all. Seems to be the standard formula devised to provide just the right amount of tension and conflict for the average 'soap' viewer, or with this genre should that be Swarfega? And while the finished article last night did look nice overall, the mistake with the placement of the kitchen was utterly stupid. Well spotted! I am convinced that the butch one just refused to back down for fear of losing face. Oh, and how convenient for her big toe to play up when the extent of the work required was realised! A 'baddy' through and through. We do have doctors in this country. True! And if you live long enough you'll get to meet one. I just thought it was creating a big effect by 'working' with one foot in a bucket. Yes, absurdly theatrical eh? The same with the loft. Even after the building inspector had warned them about the sorry state of the roof timbers, referring to the ones which had been cut away, what did they do? Get the odd-jobber to attach some very flimsy looking metal struts! You'll win the "perfect viewer" prize Mike. :) Perfect *frustrated* viewer, perhaps! MM |
"JoeJoe" wrote in message ... Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? Have a look at MFIs prices today, just orderd enough units to do an "L" 2.6x2.6m inc. sink,taps, hob, cooker, extractor and dishwasher (all stainless). Plus a 2 breakfast bar with stainless legs, plus a utility with a 1.6m top with a 1000 base underneat and a space for the dishwasher. Includes a drawline unit and two 1000 wall cabinets. Plinths, cornice and faced panels for end cabinets. Total price £1198.00, plus its not a crappy kitchen, doors aren't solid wood but fully wrapped etc so should last a few years of tenants. Feeling quite chuffed actually! |
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:57:18 +0100, "IMM" wrote:
"Mike Halmarack" wrote in message .. . At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. So who would have taken up that offer of £50K from the solicitor? I would have been sorely tempted. Making £15,000 profit, give or take, in a matter of days is seriously easy money. MM |
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 10:09:54 GMT, "R Taylor"
wrote: Bob wrote: "IMM" wrote in message ... "Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. A lot of the people I've seen on that show have only made money because house prices have risen while they've been doing it up. In some cases they'd have been better of doing nothing to it at all, leaving it unlet and just selling it a year later. Bob I'd have took the £15 pure profit that the solicitor offered and used it as a deposit on a finished house /then/ waited 12 months for the price to rise in line with the rest of the street. but then I'm a sensible bloke and not a lesbitarian with an axe to grind :-) Were they lesbitarians? I would never have known. MM |
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 12:41:15 +0100, "in2minds" wrote:
I'd have took the £15 pure profit that the solicitor offered and used it as a deposit on a finished house /then/ waited 12 months for the price to rise in line with the rest of the street. but then I'm a sensible bloke and not a lesbitarian with an axe to grind :-) Exactly what my wife said. I hate to say it but "mine too" Mine would have said it, but I'm not married. MM |
Mike Mitchell wrote:
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:57:18 +0100, "IMM" wrote: "Mike Halmarack" wrote in message ... At 3 am this morning my wife asked me why the living expenses are not shown for these couples who drop everything else to do up the selected properties whilst appearing on TV. Is the program mainly intended as entertainment, information or heavily slanted advertising on behalf of needy housing market professionals? I suppose it could be seen as some or all of those. The amount of people who make little or lose is astounding. Doing up property to sell is a dodgy game and you have to know what you are doing and the market the house is in. Beany knows her stuff and if her guidelines are followed you will make money, or not lose. The most important point is know the market the house or flat is in and what will add value in that market. So who would have taken up that offer of £50K from the solicitor? me, like a shot. I'd have snatched the offer so fast he'd have had to count his fingers after ;-) RT |
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 11:52:14 +0100, Mike Halmarack
wrote: On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:40:41 +0100, "IMM" wrote: One good thing about these progs is that it puts off amateur developers, by letting them know that making big bucks is not easy and at times virtually impossible. Just the opposite in my opinion but there's bound to be some differences of perception. Justin and Colin seemed to hit problem after problem with their £1m house programme. Even now, I'm still not sure just how much actual profit they made purely from the refurbishment, i.e. not because the TV was helping them. I wonder how long it would take an ordinary bloke to acquire a one-million-pound house from a standing start and without any help whatsoever? MM |
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 12:18:34 +0100, "IMM" wrote:
"Mike Halmarack" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:40:41 +0100, "IMM" wrote: One good thing about these progs is that it puts off amateur developers, by letting them know that making big bucks is not easy and at times virtually impossible. Just the opposite in my opinion but there's bound to be some differences of perception. Beany does emphasis that many are not making a lot of money, if any. When you look at the time from looking for the property and finally selling and then you divide the profit into an hourly rate, you may be better off stocking shelves on the side at Tesco. True, in purely financial terms, maybe. But stocking shelves at Tesco must be soul destroying, whereas at least when you're working on doing up a property you're on the go on YOUR terms, pulling down, building up, getting materials, finding out how to do things, making mistakes, working outside in the fresh air, being your own boss, and so on. I knew one so-called highly paid manager who earned about the same as a bus driver who worked as much overtime as he could get. When they worked out how many hours per week they worked it was about the same. One was paid a salary and one for all the time he worked. These amateur developers tend to work long hours on their projects, so any profit is not as great as you think when the time is considered. But again, a bus driver's job must be pretty boring, driving the same routes day after day, year in, year out. It must be very stressful, too, in today's horrendous traffic. MM |
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 12:30:43 +0100, John Laird
wrote: On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:01:27 +0100, "Bob" wrote: A lot of the people I've seen on that show have only made money because house prices have risen while they've been doing it up. In some cases they'd have been better of doing nothing to it at all, leaving it unlet and just selling it a year later. Exactly the conclusion I came to while idly perusing the first series. Especially as, in a rising market, unimproved properties will still sell. [Anyone know what the time lag is between filming and airing these sort of programmes ? Whenever I watch one of the relocation ones, I am bewildered by the prices which sometimes seem to be so low as to be unreal at times.] I thought the same when they said they'd paid £35K for that property in Lincs. I'm currently looking for properties in Lincs and you've got to pay around £135K for a detached 2-bed bungalow. Even a terraced property seems to be a lot more than £35K! Mind you, that property was in a bit of a state, wasn't it? MM |
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 13:53:04 +0100, "Neil Jones"
wrote: "JoeJoe" wrote in message ... Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? If you went along to a kitchen shop with a Channel 4 film crew and start talking about them appearing as a supplier on the programme's web site, I wonder what sort of discount you could expect? Forget the film crew, just take along a couple of mates with a posh looking camera 'to test angles' and you might be signing on the dotted line before you know it! But I suppose that when the programme did not materialise, they would sue someone's arse off! MM |
"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
... That episode last night really got on my nerves, as everything that Sarah suggested was rejected out of hand, with a sneer even, by the two women. I don't know why SB bothers, as hardly anyone on any episode I've seen has heeded her advice at all. But that's the whole point, innit? If everyone on the prog said 'Yeah, Sarah, wow, great idea we'll do that' to everything she came up with it wouldn't be "good" TV, would it? Much better to have lots of conflict, and stupid prats making saft statements and digging ginormous holes for themselves. I often wonder how many filmed projects never actually get shown because they run smoothly, to budget and time, and the protagonists actually heed Beeny's advice... David |
"Lobster" wrote in message ... "Mike Mitchell" wrote in message ... That episode last night really got on my nerves, as everything that Sarah suggested was rejected out of hand, with a sneer even, by the two women. I don't know why SB bothers, as hardly anyone on any episode I've seen has heeded her advice at all. But that's the whole point, innit? If everyone on the prog said 'Yeah, Sarah, wow, great idea we'll do that' to everything she came up with it wouldn't be "good" TV, would it? Much better to have lots of conflict, and stupid prats making saft statements and digging ginormous holes for themselves. I often wonder how many filmed projects never actually get shown because they run smoothly, to budget and time, and the protagonists actually heed Beeny's advice... The same format for Grand Designs, although last nights went smoothly. Yet near end Kevin McCloud said it was running over budget, and the architect had told him that was because they ordered more extras not because of delays or mismanagement. The only suspense McCloud put in was that he thought the interior would be naff and it wasn't, it was brilliant. I wouldn't like to pay to heat that place. Little insulation anywhere. |
"TonyK" wrote in message ... "JoeJoe" wrote in message ... Watched the program tonight, and was wondering... They claimed to have spent £1200 on their kitchen, which was of decent size, including appliances (which looked pretty expensive ones), and installation. I buy 3-4 per year, and have a joiner friend that fits them for me for £400 each. I tend to buy mine from MFI/B&Q/etc middle-range, and with very good quality fitting they usually look pretty good. For similar kitchen to the ones I buy the sheds/MFI charge at least £1000 for fitting. Even if I exclude the extra units that they had in their beautifully appointed (NOT) utility room, where can one find all this lot for that price? Have a look at MFIs prices today, just orderd enough units to do an "L" 2.6x2.6m inc. sink,taps, hob, cooker, extractor and dishwasher (all stainless). Plus a 2 breakfast bar with stainless legs, plus a utility with a 1.6m top with a 1000 base underneat and a space for the dishwasher. Includes a drawline unit and two 1000 wall cabinets. Plinths, cornice and faced panels for end cabinets. Total price £1198.00, plus its not a crappy kitchen, doors aren't solid wood but fully wrapped etc so should last a few years of tenants. Feeling quite chuffed actually! What was the delivery time? What make of appliances? |
"IMM" wrote in message ... "Lobster" wrote in message ... "Mike Mitchell" wrote in message ... That episode last night really got on my nerves, as everything that Sarah suggested was rejected out of hand, with a sneer even, by the two women. I don't know why SB bothers, as hardly anyone on any episode I've seen has heeded her advice at all. But that's the whole point, innit? If everyone on the prog said 'Yeah, Sarah, wow, great idea we'll do that' to everything she came up with it wouldn't be "good" TV, would it? Much better to have lots of conflict, and stupid prats making saft statements and digging ginormous holes for themselves. I often wonder how many filmed projects never actually get shown because they run smoothly, to budget and time, and the protagonists actually heed Beeny's advice... The same format for Grand Designs, although last nights went smoothly. Yet near end Kevin McCloud said it was running over budget, and the architect had told him that was because they ordered more extras not because of delays or mismanagement. The only suspense McCloud put in was that he thought the interior would be naff and it wasn't, it was brilliant. I wouldn't like to pay to heat that place. Little insulation anywhere. That's was what the ground pump was for wasn't it, a one off payment of 10,000 euro's for life not bad! |
"Dave Jones" wrote in message ... "IMM" wrote in message ... "Lobster" wrote in message ... "Mike Mitchell" wrote in message ... That episode last night really got on my nerves, as everything that Sarah suggested was rejected out of hand, with a sneer even, by the two women. I don't know why SB bothers, as hardly anyone on any episode I've seen has heeded her advice at all. But that's the whole point, innit? If everyone on the prog said 'Yeah, Sarah, wow, great idea we'll do that' to everything she came up with it wouldn't be "good" TV, would it? Much better to have lots of conflict, and stupid prats making saft statements and digging ginormous holes for themselves. I often wonder how many filmed projects never actually get shown because they run smoothly, to budget and time, and the protagonists actually heed Beeny's advice... The same format for Grand Designs, although last nights went smoothly. Yet near end Kevin McCloud said it was running over budget, and the architect had told him that was because they ordered more extras not because of delays or mismanagement. The only suspense McCloud put in was that he thought the interior would be naff and it wasn't, it was brilliant. I wouldn't like to pay to heat that place. Little insulation anywhere. That's was what the ground pump was for wasn't it, a one off payment of 10,000 euro's for life not bad! One off payment? They cost to run. They estimate 6 years payback. Then the cost of the electricity to run it must be colossal after too. Very little insulation in that place, and those Atlantic winds blowing in. UFH only on the ground floor. To run a heat pumps is about the same cost as natural gas. |
"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message ... On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 11:52:14 +0100, Mike Halmarack wrote: On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:40:41 +0100, "IMM" wrote: One good thing about these progs is that it puts off amateur developers, by letting them know that making big bucks is not easy and at times virtually impossible. Just the opposite in my opinion but there's bound to be some differences of perception. Justin and Colin seemed to hit problem after problem with their £1m house programme. Even now, I'm still not sure just how much actual profit they made purely from the refurbishment, i.e. not because the TV was helping them. I wonder how long it would take an ordinary bloke to acquire a one-million-pound house from a standing start and without any help whatsoever? MM As I recall they didn't work their way up the property ladder, they just jumped to 7 different steps regardless of wether they made a profit or not, bit of a con really. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter