Andy Bradford wrote:
I don't think that they don't care about quality. Its that they cannot
afford it.
Let's review your comments from the last couple days:
- Consumers can't afford quality. That's why houses are built poorly.
- Consumers want small yards. That's why developers cram lots of houses
on the land they buy. (Oh, and Andy knows exactly 2 people who want
small yards, therefore it's all the consumer driving this, and not
developers)
Repeat after me: Developers build houses to make money. They will cut
cost in every possible way. Houses haven't gotten cheaper over the
decades. House prices have out-paced inflation at least 5 to 1. Why
isn't the quality going *up* if houses are getting more expensive?
Houses are not Transformer toys. Toys have gotten cheaper. Houses have
gotten more expensive, and yet both toys and houses have gone *down* in
quality. Yes, comparing houses to toys is logical fallacy (proof by
false analogy, actually).
It's really very easy: Developers are greedy. Bottom line. End of story.
There is no other explanation. It really is that simple. Oh, and don't
throw out the "well, if we didn't buy their houses, they wouldn't build
with such low quality." The population of Utah is going *up*. There is a
house shortage. There is a population surplus. When low supply and high
demand meet, you get high prices. Period. And it's exactly this kind of
environment where developers can get away with cost-cutting measures
like poor quality standards and small lot-size to home-size ratios.
Happy house hunting everyone! :)
--Dave
P.S. The uninformed populace doesn't help any, but it's certainly not
the driving force here.
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
