Are you worried that 3D-printed homes will crash your home value?

[swampwiz]

It seems that homebuilding is on the verge of having a major disruption from 3D-printing.  Now, while some folks say that everything, like plumbing & electrical, will be 3D-printed, I'm just thinking about the "shell' of the house that is currently done after the foundation form is dug - i.e., the "stick building".  If this part of construction could be done for $10/ft^2, that's going to make homes much MUCH cheaper, and the folks who will have bought right before then will have their values crash as new homes will be so much cheaper.

I myself am in the market to upgrade my home, but this is making me think that I should wait until the revolution happens.

[VoteCthulu]

Just because the cost of building a house goes down doesn't mean that housing prices will crash. Most of my home value is in the property, it will take some time for new construction methods to become commonplace.

I would be happy if my insurance rates went down due to lower replacement costs, though.

[PoutineLover]

I think it will take a long time for 3D printed homes to replace traditional housing, but I see a huge market for that type of building in under developed countries where the housing is currently inadequate, and for disaster relief rebuilding. It would also be a cheaper way of building subsidized housing. What I suspect is that governments and charities will be able to provide housing for much cheaper rates, while people who have more money will still buy "premium materials" traditional housing.

[Mississippi Mudstache]

Hahaha. Construction is one of the few industries that has been impervious to gains in productivity in the last two decades. If you think 3D printing is going to flip that switch overnight, I suggest you get comfortable while you wait.

[big_slacker]

It seems that homebuilding is on the verge of having a major disruption from 3D-printing.  Now, while some folks say that everything, like plumbing & electrical, will be 3D-printed, I'm just thinking about the "shell' of the house that is currently done after the foundation form is dug - i.e., the "stick building".  If this part of construction could be done for $10/ft^2, that's going to make homes much MUCH cheaper, and the folks who will have bought right before then will have their values crash as new homes will be so much cheaper.

I myself am in the market to upgrade my home, but this is making me think that I should wait until the revolution happens.

I think you might be waiting a while for this revolution. The first POCs have just been done and I bet you won't see widespread adoption and use for 10-20 years. Even then, this is for new home construction. And do you think developers and construction companies are going to pass on their lower costs to home buyers?

I would not delay buying a house for this reason.

[YttriumNitrate]

Isn't it also significantly less expensive to mass produce modular houses off-site, put them on a truck, and then assembly them at a job site? That system of house production has been around for decades and has not crashed the price of housing.

[swampwiz]

Lastly, as big_slacker stated, just because the builder's cost goes down, does not mean those savings will be passed along nor does it mean it will crash housing prices.

Canonical economic theory dictates that the rentier value due to the mismatch of retail prices and wholesale costs quickly dissipates.  Once this technology gets seasoned - and properly given the seal of approval from HUD - what is to stop a few national company from selling its home shell construction, and also its competitors?  It seems to me that the expensive part of home construction is both the high degree of labor and management of building the shell (i.e., after building the shell, it's just renovating, something that Home Depot or any home renovation retail store could handle, and without a big rentier profit margin) that allow home builders to extract a high rentier profit margin.  I think this new technology is going to wallop the home builders like Amazon has walloped the shopping mall.

[swampwiz]

Isn't it also significantly less expensive to mass produce modular houses off-site, put them on a truck, and then assembly them at a job site? That system of house production has been around for decades and has not crashed the price of housing.

Not really - at least not in areas that don't have a high cost of general labor.  I could see this in expensive-labor areas, though.  It seems that all the modular home building does is do the stick building in slightly more efficient manner (i.e., because of being in a factory, with tooling, etc.), mainly arbitraging the labor, as the embedded labor for a home in Boston gets purchased at a factory in rural Alabama, etc.

[Much Fishing to Do]

Hopefully I'm not the only one who, for a moment, pictured a giant 3-D Printer printing the whole house as one piece before I caught up....

[zolotiyeruki]

The problem with 3d printed houses is that all you get is the above-ground structure, and that only represents a relatively small part of the total build cost.  Before the 3d printing can happen, you have to excavate and pour the foundations, run some utilities (water, sewer), and get permits.  During the pour, you still have to install sills and ledgers.  After the pour, you still have to do internal wall finishing, external wall finishing, install windows and doors, flooring, cabinets, plumbing, electrical, HVAC, trim and paint, landscaping, driveway paving, and roofing.  That's a lot of cost that's not affected by 3d printing.

So what you really have to compare is 3d printing on one side vs prefabricated or stick-built walls and floors.  Prefab sections of houses are done pretty dang quickly and cheaply nowadays.  Concrete is also more expensive than wood.  At this point, 3d printing houses looks to me a lot like a hammer desperately seeking a nail to pound.

[fattest_foot]

I was actually in a class recently with a guy who had been in construction contracting for a long time.

He made a statement that even if two buildings look identical, the reality is that each one is vastly different. Just taking into account the soil underneath the building, each one has different considerations in how they're built to be safe.

[LWYRUP]

No.

I live in a desirable, built-out area with virtually no SFH lots left. (Every so often someone with a good lot subdivides, or someone gathers together a few scraps, but the area is built out unless it is rezoned to allow duplexes or triplexes). 

My house is a bit outdated in some ways but well built with real hardwood floors throughout, solid wood doors, extra thick drywall plus brick exterior, etc.  You couldn't build a pre-fab house next door without knocking down the original house, and even then it wouldn't be same.

I have thought about buying a patch of undeveloped land in a vacation area and buying one of those new large luxury trailer thingies rather than buying a vacation house someday.  It would seem to me to be way cheaper than what some of those homes are priced for resale.  So I could see pre-fab housing having an impact in certain markets.

I doubt I'll buy a vacation home though.  I think I'd rather FIRE. 

[Michael in ABQ]

That $1 million house in the Bay Area didn't cost a whole lot more to build than a $300,000 house a hundred miles away. A 2x4 and a sheet of plywood cost about the same all over the country and construction wages don't vary by a huge amount either. The big difference is the land value for one house might be $700,000 and for the other might be $50,000. Regulations in some HCOL areas also drive up prices as well.

A 3-D printed house might result in some labor savings but it still takes so many cubic feet of concrete and so many board feet of lumber and so many feet of pipes and wires to build a house. Whether it's doen by a person or a machine the material savings aren't going to be a whole lot. Of course as we've seen throughout history, replacing labor with capital usually occurs when the latter is cheaper. The machinery will have a high upfront cost and builders aren't going to automatically pass every bit of savings on to the homeowner. They'll still have labor costs to run and maintain the machine.

[swampwiz]

The problem with 3d printed houses is that all you get is the above-ground structure, and that only represents a relatively small part of the total build cost.  Before the 3d printing can happen, you have to excavate and pour the foundations, run some utilities (water, sewer), and get permits.  During the pour, you still have to install sills and ledgers.  After the pour, you still have to do internal wall finishing, external wall finishing, install windows and doors, flooring, cabinets, plumbing, electrical, HVAC, trim and paint, landscaping, driveway paving, and roofing.  That's a lot of cost that's not affected by 3d printing.

So what you really have to compare is 3d printing on one side vs prefabricated or stick-built walls and floors.  Prefab sections of houses are done pretty dang quickly and cheaply nowadays.  Concrete is also more expensive than wood.  At this point, 3d printing houses looks to me a lot like a hammer desperately seeking a nail to pound.

For slab foundations without a basement, the excavation is not a big deal - just a crew of form diggers (who can be quite hilarious as they shoot the sheet while digging) - and after the dig, the pouring of the slab could be done by the printer spigot.  Sure, there are the other costs (although I think the inner walls could be made cheap by just painting, or by slapping up some wallpaper) that won't be affected, but half, maybe more, of the total cost nowadays is in getting the shell up.  And like I had said, all this other stuff can be independently sourced, with a lot of it being able to get be done by an aggressive do-it-yourselfer.  I think I have a good feeling for this as I went through Hurricane Katrina, and I saw how homes could be rehabbed for about half (if not less) than the cost of new construction (i.e., from the home being down to the studs).

[Mississippi Mudstache]

There is no revolution coming. People in wealthy countries are inherently stubborn about what they will accept in a home's appearance and materials. I'm no exception - no way in hell I'm living in a concrete box, whether it's 3D printed or laid in blocks by workers earning $10/hour. But like I said, enjoy your wait.

[trollwithamustache]

At the end of the day, a lot of people don't want houses that cheap.

There are a mess of methods to pre-fab, shop build ect standardized modular (dirty word too much like trailer home!) out there to make a much cheaper.

 But we want to customize and redesign. So people do.

[NoraLenderbee]

In my HCOLA, people buy 50-year-old bungalows for 800K, tear them down, and build McMansions on the lots. If construction costs go down, it just means more money to spend on decorating their marble bathrooms. The value is in the land.

[Jrr85]

No.

I live in a desirable, built-out area with virtually no SFH lots left. (Every so often someone with a good lot subdivides, or someone gathers together a few scraps, but the area is built out unless it is rezoned to allow duplexes or triplexes). 

My house is a bit outdated in some ways but well built with real hardwood floors throughout, solid wood doors, extra thick drywall plus brick exterior, etc.  You couldn't build a pre-fab house next door without knocking down the original house, and even then it wouldn't be same.

I have thought about buying a patch of undeveloped land in a vacation area and buying one of those new large luxury trailer thingies rather than buying a vacation house someday.  It would seem to me to be way cheaper than what some of those homes are priced for resale.  So I could see pre-fab housing having an impact in certain markets.

I doubt I'll buy a vacation home though.  I think I'd rather FIRE.

What are you referring to here?  The pre-fab stuff I have seen that are nice quality are ridiculously expensive or are just price competitive with traditional stick built homes. 

[mm1970]

There is no revolution coming. People in wealthy countries are inherently stubborn about what they will accept in a home's appearance and materials. I'm no exception - no way in hell I'm living in a concrete box, whether it's 3D printed or laid in blocks by workers earning $10/hour. But like I said, enjoy your wait.

Ha ha this is funny because...
One of my friends lost her house in one of our fires.

They basically rebuilt as a concrete box, called "The Fortress".  I mean, it's a good design and all.

[mm1970]

No.

I live in a desirable, built-out area with virtually no SFH lots left. (Every so often someone with a good lot subdivides, or someone gathers together a few scraps, but the area is built out unless it is rezoned to allow duplexes or triplexes). 

My house is a bit outdated in some ways but well built with real hardwood floors throughout, solid wood doors, extra thick drywall plus brick exterior, etc.  You couldn't build a pre-fab house next door without knocking down the original house, and even then it wouldn't be same.

I have thought about buying a patch of undeveloped land in a vacation area and buying one of those new large luxury trailer thingies rather than buying a vacation house someday.  It would seem to me to be way cheaper than what some of those homes are priced for resale.  So I could see pre-fab housing having an impact in certain markets.

I doubt I'll buy a vacation home though.  I think I'd rather FIRE.

What are you referring to here?  The pre-fab stuff I have seen that are nice quality are ridiculously expensive or are just price competitive with traditional stick built homes.

I imagine that depends on location.  Home costs for the pre-fab stuff they make in my home town seem to range from $50k to $100k.

Which is cheaper than stick-built.

[LWYRUP]

No.

I live in a desirable, built-out area with virtually no SFH lots left. (Every so often someone with a good lot subdivides, or someone gathers together a few scraps, but the area is built out unless it is rezoned to allow duplexes or triplexes). 

My house is a bit outdated in some ways but well built with real hardwood floors throughout, solid wood doors, extra thick drywall plus brick exterior, etc.  You couldn't build a pre-fab house next door without knocking down the original house, and even then it wouldn't be same.

I have thought about buying a patch of undeveloped land in a vacation area and buying one of those new large luxury trailer thingies rather than buying a vacation house someday.  It would seem to me to be way cheaper than what some of those homes are priced for resale.  So I could see pre-fab housing having an impact in certain markets.

I doubt I'll buy a vacation home though.  I think I'd rather FIRE.

What are you referring to here?  The pre-fab stuff I have seen that are nice quality are ridiculously expensive or are just price competitive with traditional stick built homes.

Ok.  Not to spill the beans too much on the plan, but as an example:

Buy this lot for $250k:  https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/Lusby-MD-20657/pmf,pf_pt/36644144_zpid/66535_rid/CHESAPEAKE-BAY-WATERFRONT_att/globalrelevanceex_sort/38.416341,-76.305371,38.284412,-76.525097_rect/11_zm/

Spend $150k (larger unit, including install) for one of these:  https://www.jachomes.com/Photo-Gallery

Total cost $400k for new home on large lot, versus $500k for older home on smaller lot:  https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/Lusby-MD-20657/pmf,pf_pt/36638072_zpid/66535_rid/CHESAPEAKE-BAY-WATERFRONT_att/globalrelevanceex_sort/38.416341,-76.305371,38.284412,-76.525097_rect/11_zm/

Maybe there are lot clearing / paving costs I am not considering?  Seems like that would not get you all the way to $100k. 

[swampwiz]

What you are missing, which others have stated already, is the value of the land.

Yes, I understand that in such an market environment of lower construction costs, any excess spending power, for those who wish to use it, would go back into higher value for the land.  Of course, as I'm talking about new construction, that pretty much means on the edge of the urban areas where there is developable land, and thus the land cost would not be so much.  What would happen in this schema is that the existing homes in the good, close-in neighborhoods would continue to hold their value, to some degree - i.e., some folks who might have decided to buy into there might come to the conclusion that the difference in price from a farther out place with new construction is too much.  I guess that I should have prefaced my proposition to only count those far-off exurbs.  Of course, in smaller towns, aside from a few historical old buildings, there would be no extra value for buying in a "close-in" since everything is not too far away.  That said, I would think that Moustachers would be the type of homebuyer that would be attuned to value, which means not paying too much for the land component. 

[swampwiz]

Ok.  Not to spill the beans too much on the plan, but as an example:

Buy this lot for $250k:  https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/Lusby-MD-20657/pmf,pf_pt/36644144_zpid/66535_rid/CHESAPEAKE-BAY-WATERFRONT_att/globalrelevanceex_sort/38.416341,-76.305371,38.284412,-76.525097_rect/11_zm/

Spend $150k (including install) for one of these:  https://www.jachomes.com/Photo-Gallery

When I bought my first home in 1990, I paid $16K for the lot and $55K for the construction.  This is the type of division of cost that I am thinking about with my proposition.

Total cost $400k for new home on large lot, versus $500k for older home on smaller lot:  https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/Lusby-MD-20657/pmf,pf_pt/36638072_zpid/66535_rid/CHESAPEAKE-BAY-WATERFRONT_att/globalrelevanceex_sort/38.416341,-76.305371,38.284412,-76.525097_rect/11_zm/

[jlcnuke]

No.

I live in a desirable, built-out area with virtually no SFH lots left. (Every so often someone with a good lot subdivides, or someone gathers together a few scraps, but the area is built out unless it is rezoned to allow duplexes or triplexes). 

My house is a bit outdated in some ways but well built with real hardwood floors throughout, solid wood doors, extra thick drywall plus brick exterior, etc.  You couldn't build a pre-fab house next door without knocking down the original house, and even then it wouldn't be same.

I have thought about buying a patch of undeveloped land in a vacation area and buying one of those new large luxury trailer thingies rather than buying a vacation house someday.  It would seem to me to be way cheaper than what some of those homes are priced for resale.  So I could see pre-fab housing having an impact in certain markets.

I doubt I'll buy a vacation home though.  I think I'd rather FIRE.

What are you referring to here?  The pre-fab stuff I have seen that are nice quality are ridiculously expensive or are just price competitive with traditional stick built homes.

Ok.  Not to spill the beans too much on the plan, but as an example:

Buy this lot for $250k:  https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/Lusby-MD-20657/pmf,pf_pt/36644144_zpid/66535_rid/CHESAPEAKE-BAY-WATERFRONT_att/globalrelevanceex_sort/38.416341,-76.305371,38.284412,-76.525097_rect/11_zm/

Spend $150k (including install) for one of these:  https://www.jachomes.com/Photo-Gallery

Total cost $400k for new home on large lot, versus $500k for older home on smaller lot:  https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/Lusby-MD-20657/pmf,pf_pt/36638072_zpid/66535_rid/CHESAPEAKE-BAY-WATERFRONT_att/globalrelevanceex_sort/38.416341,-76.305371,38.284412,-76.525097_rect/11_zm/

Yes, you can buy a mobile home for much less than a traditional home. In fact, that's been the case for decades. However, that hasn't had much of an impact on the prices of traditional homes for a number of reasons (including how they are treated as personal property since they aren't permanently affixed to the land, different loan requirements from most/many mortgage companies, less secure in natural disasters and thus more prone to damage in general, etc).

[bacchi]

Printing the stick frame of a house will be great for DIY. It'll really cut down on framing time.

[thd7t]

Printing the stick frame of a house will be great for DIY. It'll really cut down on framing time.

Not really.  Pre-built stick framed walls have been common for light construction and are getting even more common.  The equipment is consolidated, the production facility is weather protected, there's incredibly low waste and construction is faster.  3D printing on site would be slower and more challenging.  It would also include transporting more materials to a site.

It seems like this technology is trying to disrupt a market that truss-builders disrupted decades ago.

[zolotiyeruki]

Printing the stick frame of a house will be great for DIY. It'll really cut down on framing time.

Now, I could definitely see the value in a fully robotic wall-building factory.  Robots cut all the 2x4s, lay them out, nail them together, cut the sheathing to shape and attach it, etc.

[BTDretire]

 Here's a link for printing third world housing shows a few sconds of printing.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/12/17101856/3d-printed-housing-icon-shelter-housing-crisis

[thd7t]

Printing the stick frame of a house will be great for DIY. It'll really cut down on framing time.

Now, I could definitely see the value in a fully robotic wall-building factory.  Robots cut all the 2x4s, lay them out, nail them together, cut the sheathing to shape and attach it, etc.

It would be an incremental change.  Robots have been cutting trusses since the 1990s and I'm pretty sure the same factories do panelized stud wall construction.  Layout is usually done with lasers, but humans were laying the actual members in those locations last I visited one (in 1999).

[MilesTeg]

It seems that homebuilding is on the verge of having a major disruption from 3D-printing.  Now, while some folks say that everything, like plumbing & electrical, will be 3D-printed, I'm just thinking about the "shell' of the house that is currently done after the foundation form is dug - i.e., the "stick building".  If this part of construction could be done for $10/ft^2, that's going to make homes much MUCH cheaper, and the folks who will have bought right before then will have their values crash as new homes will be so much cheaper.

I myself am in the market to upgrade my home, but this is making me think that I should wait until the revolution happens.

No, because the value of my home has very little to do with the materials used. It's almost entirely location and labor.

[BlueMR2]

Nope, not worried.  My house is not a store of value for retirement, it is merely a place to live.  If 3D printed homes are all the rage and are cheap, then I'd expect the value of my home to drop to match.  I'm in exactly the same boat if I want to sell/buy at that point.  Although, I expect old style custom homes are likely to retain a higher value.

I actually don't understand why home prices go up anyways.  They should drop like cars do...  The maintenance on an old home is just like driving around in an old clunker...

[Jrr85]

No.

I live in a desirable, built-out area with virtually no SFH lots left. (Every so often someone with a good lot subdivides, or someone gathers together a few scraps, but the area is built out unless it is rezoned to allow duplexes or triplexes). 

My house is a bit outdated in some ways but well built with real hardwood floors throughout, solid wood doors, extra thick drywall plus brick exterior, etc.  You couldn't build a pre-fab house next door without knocking down the original house, and even then it wouldn't be same.

I have thought about buying a patch of undeveloped land in a vacation area and buying one of those new large luxury trailer thingies rather than buying a vacation house someday.  It would seem to me to be way cheaper than what some of those homes are priced for resale.  So I could see pre-fab housing having an impact in certain markets.

I doubt I'll buy a vacation home though.  I think I'd rather FIRE.

What are you referring to here?  The pre-fab stuff I have seen that are nice quality are ridiculously expensive or are just price competitive with traditional stick built homes.

Ok.  Not to spill the beans too much on the plan, but as an example:

Buy this lot for $250k:  https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/Lusby-MD-20657/pmf,pf_pt/36644144_zpid/66535_rid/CHESAPEAKE-BAY-WATERFRONT_att/globalrelevanceex_sort/38.416341,-76.305371,38.284412,-76.525097_rect/11_zm/

Spend $150k (larger unit, including install) for one of these:  https://www.jachomes.com/Photo-Gallery

Total cost $400k for new home on large lot, versus $500k for older home on smaller lot:  https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/Lusby-MD-20657/pmf,pf_pt/36638072_zpid/66535_rid/CHESAPEAKE-BAY-WATERFRONT_att/globalrelevanceex_sort/38.416341,-76.305371,38.284412,-76.525097_rect/11_zm/

Maybe there are lot clearing / paving costs I am not considering?  Seems like that would not get you all the way to $100k.

Gotcha.  Where I live, all of those models would get hammered value wise because they look like trailers.  There are modular homes that don't look like trailers, but the ones I've found aren't really a lot cheaper than stick built.  All you are doing is basically manufacturing the panels and shipping them to the site for erection.  I still like those options but they don't save much if any money. 

i guess the problem is that you can't manufacture a house and ship it without the low ceilings and sloping roof that tips you off that it's a manufactured home, and if you try to ship without a roof you, you can't do all the finish work at the manufacturing site, and therefore dont' save much money. 

I have seen a few smaller modular homes that are designed ina  way that the low pitched roof doesn't matter, but they are expensive per sq ft.  I haven't looked real hard though, so maybe there is somebody out there doing something in between.

[MaaS]

I think this is a classic case of Amara's Law, where we overestimate the impact of tech in the short-term but underestimate the impact in the long-term.

We're a ways off from this sort of application/scale IMO.  I don't doubt 3D printing will disrupt the industry, but I do doubt that it'll happen within a time frame that "waiting it out" is a viable option. 

[LWYRUP]

No.

I live in a desirable, built-out area with virtually no SFH lots left. (Every so often someone with a good lot subdivides, or someone gathers together a few scraps, but the area is built out unless it is rezoned to allow duplexes or triplexes). 

My house is a bit outdated in some ways but well built with real hardwood floors throughout, solid wood doors, extra thick drywall plus brick exterior, etc.  You couldn't build a pre-fab house next door without knocking down the original house, and even then it wouldn't be same.

I have thought about buying a patch of undeveloped land in a vacation area and buying one of those new large luxury trailer thingies rather than buying a vacation house someday.  It would seem to me to be way cheaper than what some of those homes are priced for resale.  So I could see pre-fab housing having an impact in certain markets.

I doubt I'll buy a vacation home though.  I think I'd rather FIRE.

What are you referring to here?  The pre-fab stuff I have seen that are nice quality are ridiculously expensive or are just price competitive with traditional stick built homes.

Ok.  Not to spill the beans too much on the plan, but as an example:

Buy this lot for $250k:  https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/Lusby-MD-20657/pmf,pf_pt/36644144_zpid/66535_rid/CHESAPEAKE-BAY-WATERFRONT_att/globalrelevanceex_sort/38.416341,-76.305371,38.284412,-76.525097_rect/11_zm/

Spend $150k (larger unit, including install) for one of these:  https://www.jachomes.com/Photo-Gallery

Total cost $400k for new home on large lot, versus $500k for older home on smaller lot:  https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/Lusby-MD-20657/pmf,pf_pt/36638072_zpid/66535_rid/CHESAPEAKE-BAY-WATERFRONT_att/globalrelevanceex_sort/38.416341,-76.305371,38.284412,-76.525097_rect/11_zm/

Maybe there are lot clearing / paving costs I am not considering?  Seems like that would not get you all the way to $100k.

Gotcha.  Where I live, all of those models would get hammered value wise because they look like trailers.  There are modular homes that don't look like trailers, but the ones I've found aren't really a lot cheaper than stick built.  All you are doing is basically manufacturing the panels and shipping them to the site for erection.  I still like those options but they don't save much if any money. 

i guess the problem is that you can't manufacture a house and ship it without the low ceilings and sloping roof that tips you off that it's a manufactured home, and if you try to ship without a roof you, you can't do all the finish work at the manufacturing site, and therefore dont' save much money. 

I have seen a few smaller modular homes that are designed ina  way that the low pitched roof doesn't matter, but they are expensive per sq ft.  I haven't looked real hard though, so maybe there is somebody out there doing something in between.

I can see that the modular homes are not as nice so maybe not a perfect fit.  (The unimproved lot is much nicer, though, 5 times as large with a private beach, so it's hard to see how it shakes out.)  In any case, I could see more of the value of a home being in the land rather than the structure in coming years.

[Mississippi Mudstache]

I think this is a classic case of Amara's Law, where we overestimate the impact of tech in the short-term but underestimate the impact in the long-term.

We're a ways off from this sort of application/scale IMO.  I don't doubt 3D printing will disrupt the industry, but I do doubt that it'll happen within a time frame that "waiting it out" is a viable option.

I agree with this: evolution vs. revolution. Change is inevitable, but it's not going to happen on a time scale that would crash home prices or make "waiting it out" a viable option.

[inline five]

Nope, not worried.  My house is not a store of value for retirement, it is merely a place to live.  If 3D printed homes are all the rage and are cheap, then I'd expect the value of my home to drop to match.  I'm in exactly the same boat if I want to sell/buy at that point.  Although, I expect old style custom homes are likely to retain a higher value.

I actually don't understand why home prices go up anyways.  They should drop like cars do...  The maintenance on an old home is just like driving around in an old clunker...

Home values mostly go up due to the location (land). A small amount due to cost of materials.

[Norioch]

No. Homes becoming cheaper is a good thing. My home is for living in, not for selling. If I ever sell, then I'll still need a place to live so I'll need to buy another one anyway, and if all homes are uniformly cheaper, then I'll make less money in the sale of my current home but also won't have to spend as much money buying my new home, so I'll be no worse off.

[thriftyc]

Question: "Are you worried that 3D-printed homes will crash your home value?"

Answer: No

[Dicey]

Question: "Are you worried that 3D-printed homes will crash your home value?"

Answer: No

Me, too. Well, it was gonna be "Nope", but tv's answer is close enough.

[Rosy]

The problem with 3d printed houses is that all you get is the above-ground structure, and that only represents a relatively small part of the total build cost.  Before the 3d printing can happen, you have to excavate and pour the foundations, run some utilities (water, sewer), and get permits.  During the pour, you still have to install sills and ledgers.  After the pour, you still have to do internal wall finishing, external wall finishing, install windows and doors, flooring, cabinets, plumbing, electrical, HVAC, trim and paint, landscaping, driveway paving, and roofing.  That's a lot of cost that's not affected by 3d printing.

So what you really have to compare is 3d printing on one side vs prefabricated or stick-built walls and floors.  Prefab sections of houses are done pretty dang quickly and cheaply nowadays.  Concrete is also more expensive than wood.  At this point, 3d printing houses looks to me a lot like a hammer desperately seeking a nail to pound.

For slab foundations without a basement, the excavation is not a big deal - just a crew of form diggers (who can be quite hilarious as they shoot the sheet while digging) - and after the dig, the pouring of the slab could be done by the printer spigot.  Sure, there are the other costs (although I think the inner walls could be made cheap by just painting, or by slapping up some wallpaper) that won't be affected, but half, maybe more, of the total cost nowadays is in getting the shell up.  And like I had said, all this other stuff can be independently sourced, with a lot of it being able to get be done by an aggressive do-it-yourselfer.  I think I have a good feeling for this as I went through Hurricane Katrina, and I saw how homes could be rehabbed for about half (if not less) than the cost of new construction (i.e., from the home being down to the studs).

Here are both pics of the house and of the actual 3D printer at work (scroll down to third pic)  https://www.digitaltrends.com/home/icon-newstory-3d-printed-homes/?utm_medium=push&utm_source=1sig&utm_campaign=One%20Signal

Living in hurricane country I immediately scoffed at the idea of a 3-D printed house, but then I read the article and realized it is built with concrete. Game changer.
Besides in Florida, there are no basements or you'd be standing in water.

These are good looking cabins was my first thought - doesn't look any different from other modern Architecture, the perfect tiny house or build more than one.
Would look lovely nestled behind our large oak trees on our corner double lot:)

No reason to be worried about house values crashing because of 3-D homes. The question is how big of a market share will they end up with and is this a solution for people who are currently pushed out of the housing market in the US?
Personally, I can't think of anything worse to live in than a trailer, one rusting metal sardine can standing next to another, but I'd be happy to live in one of these.

I think these 3-D homes would be an ideal housing solution for all the baby boomers and once they are done for the 83 million millennials which are following - an unprecedented number for an entire generation.
Build them like a community  - make sure there is plenty of greenery-parks and trees - put in a hospital and pools and recreation/health/sports. Ban cars for the most part in the community, allow only golfcarts, allow only small shops, cafes, groceries with apartments over the shops.

The Villages here in Florida are an upscale model for this type of community for the over 55 crowd with deep enough pockets - small villas enjoying great success and acceptance. This could be the mustachian version for all generations.

Our bungalow may be small, but it is solid block construction and has withstood several hurricanes - with the type of overhang like in the 3-D model that is advantageous for hot climates, saving energy and keeping the house cooler. I would love to see a $ cost comparison between a bungalow from the 60's with vernacular construction methods and these new 3-D printer homes.
Which one would be more cost effective to not just build, but maintain in the long run?

Thanks OP, interesting topic.

[Milizard]

Where I live, concrete block homes are valued less. It's crappy insulation for the cold winters.  Ymmv, by the area you live in.

[swampwiz]

It seems that homebuilding is on the verge of having a major disruption from 3D-printing.  Now, while some folks say that everything, like plumbing & electrical, will be 3D-printed, I'm just thinking about the "shell' of the house that is currently done after the foundation form is dug - i.e., the "stick building".  If this part of construction could be done for $10/ft^2, that's going to make homes much MUCH cheaper, and the folks who will have bought right before then will have their values crash as new homes will be so much cheaper.

I myself am in the market to upgrade my home, but this is making me think that I should wait until the revolution happens.

No, because the value of my home has very little to do with the materials used. It's almost entirely location and labor.

Well, the labor required to build the house would go down.  That's the whole point.

[cerat0n1a]

I live in a village where many of my friends live in houses that are several hundred years old. The idea that a new method of building homes has any relation at all to the price of property is pretty hard to get my head round.

[HipGnosis]

Hopefully I'm not the only one who, for a moment, pictured a giant 3-D Printer printing the whole house as one piece before I caught up....

But that is kinda what it is

[Rosy]

Where I live, concrete block homes are valued less. It's crappy insulation for the cold winters.  Ymmv, by the area you live in.

True - where I live it doesn't snow and the coldest winter in memory was 30 degrees for one night.