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
news
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
news
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
news
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.