Author Topic: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.  (Read 28992 times)

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7161
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal
New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« on: November 15, 2018, 07:54:04 AM »
 What I have notice a lot since I have Fire'd at 50 (now 54) is that so many of my friends/associates and so on,  in the same age as me, have maybe one kids left at home and are building or moving into Monstrosities for homes. Were talking 6,8 10,000 square foot homes for 1-3 people and in there mid 50's. They all had 3-4-5k square foot homes with their family's but are doubling in size as the kids move away. From what I know too is most of these people otherwise I have always thought are very smart intelligent people but while i don't care its happening so much I cant help at times to feel like I am missing something, doing things backwards despite knowing I'm not. And I know the area enough to know that all these people are going to be upside when they sell. Are others seeing this as well in your area or is this just in my area? This is not an investment and there not stupid enough people to tell me that so lt just seems every week my DW or I say to each other " Look at that house so and so is building or moving into" . And no I'm Not jealous. I had the big house, the vacation house etc.. and don't miss one bit all the headaches that go with it.

ixtap

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4560
  • Age: 51
  • Location: SoCal
    • Our Sea Story
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #1 on: November 15, 2018, 08:00:30 AM »
My in laws did this in their 70s. They were talking about downsizing, then their daughters refused to come home for Christmas because the 3k+ sq ft home was too small. So they upsized. Perhaps your friends are picturing future grandchildren enjoying the home?

More likely, they feel flush with cash after the last few years of gains and fewer costs for children.

wenchsenior

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3789
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #2 on: November 15, 2018, 08:07:43 AM »
We noticed a bit of a trend of this also.  In some instances it was totally baffling (single people moving from regular houses to mcmansions), but in all cases it seemed to be associated with our friends/acquaintances that were hard core extroverts or who had ambitions to entertain, either for fun or b/c they had professional positions that seemed to call for it.  One instance was a couple who regularly host musical events and touring musicians, plus they rent out parts of their house to students.  Another was a friend who got promoted to department chair,  which gave him even more reason to want to host big parties than he already had.

Admittedly, I always find this baffling, but I dislike large parties. We've only had to host a couple of large parties in my entire adult life, and after making sure most of the guests were set with food/in conversational groups, I spent good chunks of the parties doing work in my office. 

Big parties...:shudder:

Cranky

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3842
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #3 on: November 15, 2018, 08:53:59 AM »
I don’t know anyone who has done this, personally, but I am perplexed by the reasons why people buy giant houses in the first place.

My dh is a dept. chair. Our house is small. We have parties.

SwitchActiveDWG

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 177
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #4 on: November 15, 2018, 09:20:37 AM »
I don’t know anyone who has done this, personally, but I am perplexed by the reasons why people buy giant houses in the first place.

My dh is a dept. chair. Our house is small. We have parties.

Mine too. Smaller houses can actually work better for parties in my experience.

I've seen this trend as well though. My brother in laws parents have an enormous house for just the two of them. Doesn't make much sense to me.

ol1970

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 151
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2018, 09:49:55 AM »
I'm with you on this, I see it too here.  We are in a way too big place ourselves, but really only because it is exactly where we want to live, I purchased it out of bankruptcy at the bottom of the housing cycle, if you want to live on the water the options are extremely limited, and it is paid for.  That is why we have a large house, and I absolutely do not regret it.  That being said I think there are a enormous amount of people who are happy as clams in their work, have overachieved savings wise, could retire tomorrow if they wanted to.  There is way more money out there than you realize.  That being said, if they are like me, all the bases are covered, and you can't take it with you...why not do what make you are your family happiest.  I know this site is all about frugality, and I concur that small and simple is better, a big home will not make you happier permanently (potentially the opposite) but hey peoples wild spending is also one of the things that drives this crazy stock market growth that allows average investors to FIRE early.  People buying a monster house in 2018 might regret it though after the next challenging cycle starts.  I really like having a portion of my NW in waterfront real estate, if the markets (financial or Real estate) drops 50%, I'll still be up on my purchase and happy I've gotten the enjoyment out of it.

Side note/off topic...It would be really interesting for Jim Collins to go back in time are revisit his post on selling his "big" family house.  I think it was 2012/13 or something, would be cool to see what the math looks like after 5 years of big gains and renting vs. owning.  He probably could have lived for free and have an extra $100k to boot, but that is just me irresponsibly speculating.

Scandium

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2827
  • Location: EastCoast
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2018, 10:01:43 AM »
My in laws did this in their 70s. They were talking about downsizing, then their daughters refused to come home for Christmas because the 3k+ sq ft home was too small. So they upsized. Perhaps your friends are picturing future grandchildren enjoying the home?

More likely, they feel flush with cash after the last few years of gains and fewer costs for children.

This sounds likely. My parent's stay in their giant house after all kids have moved out. MY dad says "what if you and your kids come visit, and your sister might have 1-2 kids, and your brother... etc". (neither of my siblings have kids, and we have never all visited at once..)

FIRE@50

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 553
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Maryland
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2018, 10:04:02 AM »
My in laws did this in their 70s. They were talking about downsizing, then their daughters refused to come home for Christmas because the 3k+ sq ft home was too small. So they upsized. Perhaps your friends are picturing future grandchildren enjoying the home?

More likely, they feel flush with cash after the last few years of gains and fewer costs for children.
The grandkids were my first thought. In no way do I agree with that logic, but I wouldn't be surprised if that is what is going on.

Adult children and their kids are allowed to stay in nearby hotels, right? I actually think it is fun to have a bunch of people piled in a medium/small house though. Forces people to talk to each other. Maybe even exchange a few hugs. :)

SnackDog

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1260
  • Location: Latin America
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #8 on: November 15, 2018, 10:19:49 AM »
50s are the age when people sometimes get an inheritance or otherwise feel financially quite comfortable and start to ponder their "dream home". They realize old age and dementia is not far off so this is the last chance to get the home they always wanted and were putting off until kids were out of college.  They splurge.  Most discover this was a mistake and have to unload the place ten years later.

PiobStache

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 204
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2018, 10:21:09 AM »
Without some soundly gathered aggregated data something tells me the observation is mere confirmation bias at work.  People here tend to value small houses, and also tend to dislike "clown houses," so they see people buying clown houses and that's what registers with them vs. the full gamut of what's happening in housing.

undercover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 992
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2018, 10:22:45 AM »
"Bigger" is not a new trend.

Much prefer a smaller, cozier house. Easier to heat, easier to maintain, easier to get around. Why have extra space to just look at?

Much Fishing to Do

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1140
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2018, 10:23:48 AM »
Well, if I had enough money to buy a huge home (AND afford someone to keep it clean/organized so that didnt monopolize my time doing that AND afford the extra bills) I guess I'd do this, though that may very well be a side effect of me having 3 older kids now.  I guess the difference would be what 'enough' money would be.  If it meant I toiled away for 15 years instead of 14 to become FI then maybe I'd do it.  Otherwise its definitely not worth it.  Its kinda like flying first class....I'm not the kind of person who would say coach is enough and therefore why would I never want to fly first class....but I am the kind of person to say flying first class is worth like an extra $50 to me on a 3 hours flight, and given the difference is generally WAY more than that it just doesn't ever happen.....

I guess that means I am jealous of the person who can afford it and also FIRE pretty much the same (somewhat, its not like being jealous of the person who can play a mean guitar)....definitely not jealous of the person who buys it and never sees it cause he's at work...

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7161
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2018, 10:26:41 AM »
Well I am glad others are seeing it as well and I agree that a lot of what your saying could probably or actually is the reason. But as I stated most if not all of these people were living in larger homes to begin with. The waterfront property that I understand as to me that's completely different and at least where I live the waterfront homes don't lose value its just more a case of what % or how fast they go up.  But a home twice the size from 5k to 10k square feet to entertain and in most cases from one subdivision to another I don't get. But to each there own. We use to have parties when we had our larger house but I would prefer now to have a smaller intimate group. And if my house is an inconvenience for my 4 kids to come and visit or whatever then shame on them and then they can have the family parties. But like me lets hope there aways away from that because these peoples kids are in similar ages to mine.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #13 on: November 15, 2018, 10:50:17 AM »
One of my old college acquaintances bought a ~5k sqft house in a new development near the ski areas outside of Denver.  Six bedroom and he was single, no kids, no pets.  There was an entire floor of that house he basically never used.

Paid about $750k for it, and called it an investment.  He figured the appreciation would outpace the property taxes and maintenance costs, and in the meantime, he had an ostentatious display of "wealth" he could use to get laid.  A lot.  Dude was drowning in pussy in that big empty house.

I'm just saying that there are all kinds of crazy reasons people make decisions that look stupid from the outside.  I try not to judge.

mm1970

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10880
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #14 on: November 15, 2018, 10:53:50 AM »
I'm not seeing that at all, but I live in Coastal So Cal, where a tear down can easily run you almost a million.  Unless you've got $3M+, you aint getting an 8000 sf house.

rob in cal

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 333
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #15 on: November 15, 2018, 10:57:20 AM »
  I just think of all the years of extra working involved in having a big house, or extra hours of work now devoted to work because of it.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8186
  • Location: United States
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #16 on: November 15, 2018, 11:19:17 AM »
My parents "upsized" about 15 years ago.

We grew up in a 3 bedroom, 2.5 bathroom house, with a living room, dining room, and playroom, big backyard and pool, 2,600 square feet.  They moved to a 6 bedroom, 5 bathroom house with a HUGE kitchen, and 3 living rooms, nearly no backyard though- about 4,000 square feet. 

They throw a lot of very large parties (100+ people), and my sister and I are able to comfortably visit together with our families (though kids have to share more space now that I have kids too).

They've said they'd like to downsize to about half the square footage, but can't. They will only live within their neighborhood, where they have easy golf-cart access to 4 different golf courses. The neighborhood has 2-bedroom townhomes, but they cost a half-million or more. My parents are mortgage free in their giant home. They don't want to take out a half-million dollar + mortgage to get half as much space.  The equity in their home would obviously pay for it, but it still is a ridiculous amount to pay for a tiny space.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2018, 07:48:59 AM by I'm a red panda »

Mississippi Mudstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2170
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Danielsville, GA
    • A Riving Home - Ramblings of a Recusant Woodworker
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #17 on: November 15, 2018, 11:41:43 AM »
Were talking 6,8 10,000 square foot homes for 1-3 people and in there mid 50's. They all had 3-4-5k square foot homes with their family's but are doubling in size as the kids move away.

I have not seen this trend, but honestly I don't think I personally know anyone whose home exceeds 4000 square feet. When I was looking at homes a couple of years ago, the absolute biggest ones we came across were around 5000 sq.ft., and those struck me as utterly monstrous. My dad is currently planning a ~500 sq.ft. addition to his 3000 sq.ft. house, which he lives in alone since my Mom passed earlier this year, and even that seems ridiculous to me. But he does have 4 kids (each with a spouse), and 12 grandchildren who visit a couple times a year, so it's not like the extra space will go completely unused...It just seems like overkill for one, maybe two weeks out of the year.

jjandjab

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #18 on: November 15, 2018, 11:52:28 AM »
They've said they'd like to downsize to about half the square footage, but can't. They will only live within their neighborhood, where they have easy golf-cart access to 4 different golf courses. The neighborhood has 2-bedroom townhomes, but they cost a half-million or more. My parents are mortgage free in their giant home. They don't want to take out a half-million dollar + mortgage to get half as much space.  The equity in their home would obviously pay for it, but it still is a ridiculous amount to pay for a tiny space.

Sure the townhome seems likes a silly price at 500k, but the flip side is that they could likely get a proportionally silly price for their home (and profit after 15 years) - therefore buying the townhome in cash and having lots left over... Sounds more like they don't really want to downsize, which is fine if they can afford where they are and like it.

My wife and I looking forward to the opposite of what the OP sees. My wife and I bought a huge 6k square foot home years ago and we can't wait to downsize. We can afford it but we plan to sell in the spring as two of our three kids will be out of the house. We get no more enjoyment out of the big house as opposed to our last house which at around 2000-2500 sq feet was a better fit for us.

Altons Bobs

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 339
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #19 on: November 15, 2018, 12:13:00 PM »
I have not seen that trend here.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8186
  • Location: United States
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #20 on: November 15, 2018, 12:19:54 PM »
They've said they'd like to downsize to about half the square footage, but can't. They will only live within their neighborhood, where they have easy golf-cart access to 4 different golf courses. The neighborhood has 2-bedroom townhomes, but they cost a half-million or more. My parents are mortgage free in their giant home. They don't want to take out a half-million dollar + mortgage to get half as much space.  The equity in their home would obviously pay for it, but it still is a ridiculous amount to pay for a tiny space.

Sure the townhome seems likes a silly price at 500k, but the flip side is that they could likely get a proportionally silly price for their home (and profit after 15 years) - therefore buying the townhome in cash and having lots left over... Sounds more like they don't really want to downsize, which is fine if they can afford where they are and like it.


I think they just don't see value in a 500k townhome. In their mind, that price for real estate, regardless of what their home is worth, is just ridiculous.

My parents are bogleheads, they are fine with spending a ton of money.  But it has to be on something that has value to them. (Like $600 for a round of golf at Pebble Beach...!)

dude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2369
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #21 on: November 15, 2018, 12:20:34 PM »
One of my old college acquaintances bought a ~5k sqft house in a new development near the ski areas outside of Denver.  Six bedroom and he was single, no kids, no pets.  There was an entire floor of that house he basically never used.

Paid about $750k for it, and called it an investment.  He figured the appreciation would outpace the property taxes and maintenance costs, and in the meantime, he had an ostentatious display of "wealth" he could use to get laid.  A lot.  Dude was drowning in pussy in that big empty house.

I'm just saying that there are all kinds of crazy reasons people make decisions that look stupid from the outside.  I try not to judge.

HAHAHAHA!!! That's some expensive poon though!

NV Teacher

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 559
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #22 on: November 15, 2018, 01:03:28 PM »
I've seen it go both ways.  Finish raising the family and downsizing to something comfortable and more manageable for aging in place.  And then there is my friend that did something along the lines of up-sizing.  She didn't move to a bigger house (she already has the big house) but she did things like renovate to put in a second washer, second dryer, and third fridge when all of her kids left.  She's happy that now she can do laundry twice as fast.  Seems excessive to me.

Adam Zapple

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 473
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #23 on: November 15, 2018, 01:34:21 PM »
This is not a new trend.  Remember the run-up to 2007-2008?  I don't know anyone with a 10K sq/ft home.  There are few where I live unless you have several million to pay for one.  We have friends who just bought a 4K+ sq/ft home in a new development in a sleepy town.  It is beautiful and I am happy for them.  The neighborhood was loaded with kids and they were making lots of friends among their neighbors.  I can see exactly why someone would buy a nice big house in a nice new neighborhood.  We went to visit and it seemed great.  We just have different plans.  To each his/her own.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #24 on: November 15, 2018, 01:53:23 PM »
HAHAHAHA!!! That's some expensive poon though!

He thought it was worthwhile, all things considered.  Yes he paid a lot of mortgage interest on the house, but he did need some place to live and he figured the house was a good investment.  I haven't talked to him in years, so I have no idea how that worked out for him.

Jenny1974

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 110
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #25 on: November 15, 2018, 02:07:02 PM »
I've seen similar activity as well.  Personally, I can't imagine trying to take care of so much house when I'm retired.  I don't want that much work.  However, I'm also not one to entertain or have large gatherings at my house. 

My former boss retired earlier this year and bought some 6,000 square foot house.  I was perplexed . . . . asked him if they were planning to start a B&B!  He had two kids . . . grown . . . neither of which are married or have children.  Parents have all passed except one who has no interest in moving in with them.  I just envision about 80% of that house going unused.

The most house we ever had was 3,500 square feet and I quickly decided I had no interested in that much house.  Just not my cup of tea.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #26 on: November 15, 2018, 02:55:03 PM »
I just envision about 80% of that house going unused.

Sometimes people buy overpriced houses for the same reason they buy overpriced cars.  They don't actually need 600hp, and everything past that first 200hp is basically wasted in all but a tiny fraction of seconds in the car's life, but they value all of the extra "unused" ponies anyway.  Maybe it's a status symbol, or sex partner bait, or compensating for insecurities, or jealousy over what the neighbor has, or maybe they were raised thinking that ridiculous cars/houses are cool and now they can't make rational decisions anymore because they are emotionally all twisted up about it.

Of course it goes unused.  You think King Louis used every room at Versailles?  It's just another from of conspicuous consumption, a way to say "I am so rich that I can waste money on this frivolous thing for the sole purpose of showing other people how much money I have."  They don't see value in providing clean drinking water to children dying of water-borne diseases.  They don't see value in rescuing abandoned pets, or counseling for abused women, or reading programs for immigrants.  They just want you to think they are wealthy, not actually do anything that wealthy people do, and stupid houses are one way to do that.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2018, 06:38:48 PM by sol »

Dave1442397

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1646
  • Location: NJ
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #27 on: November 15, 2018, 03:39:04 PM »
A friend of mine built a 20,000 sq ft house, mainly because he could, and he always wanted to build his dream home. Once the kids grew up and moved out, he sold it for a nice profit.

Another guy I know sold his house at a loss, on purpose, back in 2009. He said people thought he was crazy to lose a few hundred grand selling in that market, but what they didn't know was that he had his eye on a house that dropped in price from $5 million to $3 million, which he bought. As far as he was concerned, he got a great deal.

ol1970

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 151
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #28 on: November 15, 2018, 03:54:14 PM »
I just envision about 80% of that house going unused.

Sometimes people buy overpriced houses for the same reason they buy overpriced cars.  They don't actually need 600hp, and everything past that first 200hp is basically wasted in all but a tiny fraction of seconds in the car's life, but they value all of the extra "unused" ponies anyway.  Maybe it's a status symbol, or sex partner bait, or compensating for insecurities, or jealousy over what the neighbor has, or maybe they were raised thinking that ridiculous cars/houses are cool and now they can't make rational decisions anymore because they are emotionally all twisted up about it.

Of course it goes unused.  You think King Louis used every house at Versailles?  It's just another from of conspicuous consumption, a way to say "I am so rich that I can waste money on this frivolous thing for the sole purpose of showing other people how much money I have."  They don't see value in providing clean drinking water to children dying of water-borne diseases.  They don't see value in rescuing abandoned pets, or counseling for abused women, or reading programs for immigrants.  They just want you to think they are wealthy, not actually do anything that wealthy people do, and stupid houses are one way to do that.

Or, maybe just maybe they are living more significantly more modestly than you are relative to their (and your) net worth.  Oh and maybe they also give more already as well.  If it makes you and others feel better though to think they are compensating and miserable in their large home that’s cool.  I say when you see a big house assume they worked their ass off for it, totally deserve it, and are blissfully happy with their decision.  But in all seriousness 10,000 is just dumb...I almost bought an NBA player’s house from him out of sheriffs sale and it literally had 10k square feet, an underground 12 car garage separated from the walkout basement with a full wall 12’ long salt water fish tank...on a 2 acre peninsula you needed a bridge to get to...thank the lord I ended up passing because the place I ended up with is way nicer.  Truth be told I’m looking forward to downsizing when the kid is gone to a tropical island getaway with an infinity pool overlooking a string of vocanic islands.  We will go from clown house of 7k square feet to 1,500 square feet and probably will end up kicking in a little more cash to have the perfect place to call the forever home.  Hell everybody loves to say how Warren Buffet still lives in the same house he purchased in 1957, they neglect to mention his $20M estate In Maui overlooking the pacific.  Enjoy life, give more than you take, spend time with the people that are important to you, don’t give an effe what anybody else thinks.  I guarantee I don’t regret the last 6,000 perfect sunsets enjoyed over the water in our backyard.

middo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1772
  • Location: Stuck in Melbourne still. Dreaming of WA
  • Learning.
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #29 on: November 15, 2018, 04:08:26 PM »
My father bought a huge house with his (new) wife when they moved in together, a few years after mum died.  Ostensibly it was so that family could come an visit, and it has been used for that, as the family are all interstate.  But - we could just as easily have stayed in a smaller space in a smaller house, and had probably more fun.

About 1/3 of their house is now effectively shut off and forgotten about.  A couple of years ago they had a sewage flood in there, and it cost their insurance a fortune to fix, and a lot of time and heartache for them.

They would have been better with a more manageable home.  About half the size would have been plenty,

CheapScholar

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 564
  • Location: The Midwest
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #30 on: November 15, 2018, 04:41:35 PM »
I just envision about 80% of that house going unused.

Sometimes people buy overpriced houses for the same reason they buy overpriced cars.  They don't actually need 600hp, and everything past that first 200hp is basically wasted in all but a tiny fraction of seconds in the car's life, but they value all of the extra "unused" ponies anyway.  Maybe it's a status symbol, or sex partner bait, or compensating for insecurities, or jealousy over what the neighbor has, or maybe they were raised thinking that ridiculous cars/houses are cool and now they can't make rational decisions anymore because they are emotionally all twisted up about it.

Of course it goes unused.  You think King Louis used every house at Versailles?  It's just another from of conspicuous consumption, a way to say "I am so rich that I can waste money on this frivolous thing for the sole purpose of showing other people how much money I have."  They don't see value in providing clean drinking water to children dying of water-borne diseases.  They don't see value in rescuing abandoned pets, or counseling for abused women, or reading programs for immigrants.  They just want you to think they are wealthy, not actually do anything that wealthy people do, and stupid houses are one way to do that.

Fucking nailed it.

DreamFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1593
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #31 on: November 15, 2018, 06:33:12 PM »
Were talking 6,8 10,000 square foot homes for 1-3 people and in there mid 50's. They all had 3-4-5k square foot homes with their family's but are doubling in size as the kids move away.

So they already had huge houses and are moving to even larger monstrosities.  I haven't heard of this trend.  I'm single, and in another thread, someone stated that my >2500 sq. ft. home was unnecessarily large.

Most of the houses I see for sale are between 1000 and 3000 sq. ft. - there aren't many over 3000 sq. ft, let alone 6,8, 10K!

couponvan

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8669
  • Location: VA
    • My journal
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #32 on: November 15, 2018, 07:44:39 PM »
I've seen it go both ways.  Finish raising the family and downsizing to something comfortable and more manageable for aging in place.  And then there is my friend that did something along the lines of up-sizing.  She didn't move to a bigger house (she already has the big house) but she did things like renovate to put in a second washer, second dryer, and third fridge when all of her kids left.  She's happy that now she can do laundry twice as fast.  Seems excessive to me.
That sounds brilliant to me. Another washer and dryer for $2,000 to get back 350 hours per
year sitting around waiting for laundry. It would pay for itself in a year. Damn. I am now thinking that is the way to go in our next laundry room!

Leisured

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 696
  • Age: 79
  • Location: South east Australia, in country
  • Retired, and loving it.
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #33 on: November 15, 2018, 07:58:07 PM »
There is opportunity cost. The difference between a $400K house and a $1M house is $600K which is not earning any money. Stay in the smaller house and invest the money saved into equities.

Irregular Joe

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 32
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #34 on: November 15, 2018, 08:06:35 PM »
My parents bought a bigger house when my younger sister moved out.

They had always wanted one in that neighborhood but could never afford it, their whole lives. Now at the peak of their careers and with more disposable income they were finally able to get one.

My parents also don't trust the stock market. My mother likes real estate investments, and the big house in the good school district feels safer for her.

middo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1772
  • Location: Stuck in Melbourne still. Dreaming of WA
  • Learning.
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #35 on: November 15, 2018, 08:13:04 PM »
I've seen it go both ways.  Finish raising the family and downsizing to something comfortable and more manageable for aging in place.  And then there is my friend that did something along the lines of up-sizing.  She didn't move to a bigger house (she already has the big house) but she did things like renovate to put in a second washer, second dryer, and third fridge when all of her kids left.  She's happy that now she can do laundry twice as fast.  Seems excessive to me.
That sounds brilliant to me. Another washer and dryer for $2,000 to get back 350 hours per
year sitting around waiting for laundry. It would pay for itself in a year. Damn. I am now thinking that is the way to go in our next laundry room!

A little off topic, but you wait for your laundry?  Why don't you do something else while it is running?  I use that time for all sorts of other chores (or seduce my wife...)

couponvan

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8669
  • Location: VA
    • My journal
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #36 on: November 15, 2018, 08:30:47 PM »
I've seen it go both ways.  Finish raising the family and downsizing to something comfortable and more manageable for aging in place.  And then there is my friend that did something along the lines of up-sizing.  She didn't move to a bigger house (she already has the big house) but she did things like renovate to put in a second washer, second dryer, and third fridge when all of her kids left.  She's happy that now she can do laundry twice as fast.  Seems excessive to me.
That sounds brilliant to me. Another washer and dryer for $2,000 to get back 350 hours per
year sitting around waiting for laundry. It would pay for itself in a year. Damn. I am now thinking that is the way to go in our next laundry room!

A little off topic, but you wait for your laundry?  Why don't you do something else while it is running?  I use that time for all sorts of other chores (or seduce my wife...)

I wash a load of colors and a load of white practically every week day. Yes, I am stuck in the house for transferring laundry/drying/folding. To be able to leave home after a shorter time would make my life much easier. An additional 3x3 space to save that dilemma seems a lot cheaper than building another entire laundry room. I’m not saying it’s mustachian-just convenience at a lower rate per hour or cost per square foot of other household options that would actually get daily use. If my DH were doing the laundry I might be willing to be seduced while it was running. This is the first house in 21 years of marriage where he knows how to operate the machine, but I guarantee in two more weeks he will forget (I’m currently disabled and cannot really do laundry/folding.)

Abe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2647
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #37 on: November 15, 2018, 09:38:34 PM »
I saw this happen with my parents' friends...kids grew up and moved out, their house grew up too!

I have thought about buying a larger house with an "in-law" suite for my or my wife's parents as they get older. That severely limits the house selection, so isn't really practical in a tight market like southern California. If we moved back east or to the midwest then it may be useful.

ysette9

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8930
  • Age: 2020
  • Location: Bay Area at heart living in the PNW
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #38 on: November 15, 2018, 10:52:17 PM »
The sizes being discussed here boggle my mind. I have stayed in a 3800 ft ^2 house owned by two people and it is cavernous. Certainly it feels big compared to my 1100^2 house. If 3800 is massive then does 10,000 feel like living in a grocery store?

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7161
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #39 on: November 16, 2018, 02:12:40 AM »
Well to my opening its going on all around me. Where I live near the small town we have homes 700 suare feet -1200 and you go a 1/4 mile either way we have subdivision everywhere with minimums of 2k square feet for a 1 story and 2800 for a two story. But for me the lady that added a extra laundry room or did some remodeling it seems though a laundry room wouldnt be my choice instead of doubling the size of the house for status maybe add more things of convenience or arrange what you already have to me more convenient. Obviously with 3-4 kids being gone one would have more space to create bigger social areas if needed.

To go with this I had to get my car emission tested and the lady that owns the auto place i talk to quite a bit and she is on the High School board. She was telling me how the school in its peak was 2700 kids and now is 2200 since I believe 2004. She said there 10 year estimate is down to 1800 so there being more creative with open enrollment. I said there are at least 10 large subdivisions going up what about all those kids and she basically supported my comments. She said that no one is moving out that the area is aging and all these big house you see going up they have no kids. Granted its cheaper to build hear then California but alot more than down south because of basements etc.. but still , I don't think even in my hay day I could have enough parties or entertain to justify doubling the size of my house.  Sadly I think Sol is right its more just about status. But as I smell the roses these people can keep working for the next toy or whatever they had. I had all that stuff in my 30's and 40's and it kept me from my freedom which is why I got rid of it all and made it easier to be fire'd. So to each there own. Just something that is really happening all around us.

Dee18

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2209
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #40 on: November 16, 2018, 07:27:54 AM »
In my neighborhood every fifth house has been upsized, most doubling the square footage.  It’s created serious drainage problems as more yard has been built on and trees have been cut down. What really troubles me about large houses is the same thing that troubles me about large SUVs: they have a serious detrimental effect on the environment. Houses are going from one large AC unit to two or three. Three refrigerators?  I bet they’re drinking bottled water.   Sigh.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8186
  • Location: United States
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #41 on: November 16, 2018, 07:51:10 AM »
The sizes being discussed here boggle my mind. I have stayed in a 3800 ft ^2 house owned by two people and it is cavernous. Certainly it feels big compared to my 1100^2 house. If 3800 is massive then does 10,000 feel like living in a grocery store?

I'm wondering if 10,000 is an exaggeration, or like a single person the OP is thinking of. Google tells me that even Taylor Swift, Ellen DeGeneres, and the Kardashians live in homes that are about 10,000 square feet.  I have a hard time thinking this is a "trend" of "normal" people.

The freaking massive houses in my neighborhood owned by 2 people are 4,000 - 5,000 square feet (including finished basement).  Most houses (with families) in the neighborhood are in the 2,500-3,500 ranges.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2018, 07:54:22 AM by I'm a red panda »

Prairie Stash

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1795
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #42 on: November 16, 2018, 08:11:56 AM »
Well to my opening its going on all around me. Where I live near the small town we have homes 700 suare feet -1200 and you go a 1/4 mile either way we have subdivision everywhere with minimums of 2k square feet for a 1 story and 2800 for a two story. But for me the lady that added a extra laundry room or did some remodeling it seems though a laundry room wouldnt be my choice instead of doubling the size of the house for status maybe add more things of convenience or arrange what you already have to me more convenient. Obviously with 3-4 kids being gone one would have more space to create bigger social areas if needed.

To go with this I had to get my car emission tested and the lady that owns the auto place i talk to quite a bit and she is on the High School board. She was telling me how the school in its peak was 2700 kids and now is 2200 since I believe 2004. She said there 10 year estimate is down to 1800 so there being more creative with open enrollment. I said there are at least 10 large subdivisions going up what about all those kids and she basically supported my comments. She said that no one is moving out that the area is aging and all these big house you see going up they have no kids. Granted its cheaper to build hear then California but alot more than down south because of basements etc.. but still , I don't think even in my hay day I could have enough parties or entertain to justify doubling the size of my house.  Sadly I think Sol is right its more just about status. But as I smell the roses these people can keep working for the next toy or whatever they had. I had all that stuff in my 30's and 40's and it kept me from my freedom which is why I got rid of it all and made it easier to be fire'd. So to each there own. Just something that is really happening all around us.
Its a little sad from the mustachian perspective. All those people are capable of FIRE; travel the world, spend time with family, take the victory lap. Instead, they are house bound.

In my area, houses (with basements) cost $200-240/sf to build, so a 10,000 sf house would be $2 million (adjust for your local building costs). Of course they need to live somewhere, so a 3000 sf house would cost $600,000 to build; thats a $1.4 million discrepancy. Sure its all financed with a mortgage, at a remarkable 2.5%, the interest would only be $50,000/year then...more then my entire budget. When $50k starts being chump change I'll switch to the Boglehead forum.

No matter how I look at it, I could live in Paris for what they have locked up in their large house and tour Versailles on the weekend.

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7161
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #43 on: November 16, 2018, 08:46:45 AM »
The sizes being discussed here boggle my mind. I have stayed in a 3800 ft ^2 house owned by two people and it is cavernous. Certainly it feels big compared to my 1100^2 house. If 3800 is massive then does 10,000 feel like living in a grocery store?

I'm wondering if 10,000 is an exaggeration, or like a single person the OP is thinking of. Google tells me that even Taylor Swift, Ellen DeGeneres, and the Kardashians live in homes that are about 10,000 square feet.  I have a hard time thinking this is a "trend" of "normal" people.

The freaking massive houses in my neighborhood owned by 2 people are 4,000 - 5,000 square feet (including finished basement).  Most houses (with families) in the neighborhood are in the 2,500-3,500 ranges.



If you think that's the case then just start here and move your mouse around till your hearts content. Those people are paying more because of the area. a 250k house by me would be 1.5 Million in California

https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/pmf,pf_pt/70389845_zpid/globalrelevanceex_sort/43.137132,-88.270597,43.06732,-88.387842_rect/12_zm/


Cranky

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3842
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #44 on: November 16, 2018, 08:54:33 AM »
I've seen it go both ways.  Finish raising the family and downsizing to something comfortable and more manageable for aging in place.  And then there is my friend that did something along the lines of up-sizing.  She didn't move to a bigger house (she already has the big house) but she did things like renovate to put in a second washer, second dryer, and third fridge when all of her kids left.  She's happy that now she can do laundry twice as fast.  Seems excessive to me.
That sounds brilliant to me. Another washer and dryer for $2,000 to get back 350 hours per
year sitting around waiting for laundry. It would pay for itself in a year. Damn. I am now thinking that is the way to go in our next laundry room!

Without kids, there’s a lot less laundry! I spend 0 hours waiting for the laundry to be done these days.

OTOH, I know someone with two dishwashers and that seems brilliant.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8186
  • Location: United States
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #45 on: November 16, 2018, 08:57:49 AM »
The sizes being discussed here boggle my mind. I have stayed in a 3800 ft ^2 house owned by two people and it is cavernous. Certainly it feels big compared to my 1100^2 house. If 3800 is massive then does 10,000 feel like living in a grocery store?

I'm wondering if 10,000 is an exaggeration, or like a single person the OP is thinking of. Google tells me that even Taylor Swift, Ellen DeGeneres, and the Kardashians live in homes that are about 10,000 square feet.  I have a hard time thinking this is a "trend" of "normal" people.

The freaking massive houses in my neighborhood owned by 2 people are 4,000 - 5,000 square feet (including finished basement).  Most houses (with families) in the neighborhood are in the 2,500-3,500 ranges.



If you think that's the case then just start here and move your mouse around till your hearts content. Those people are paying more because of the area. a 250k house by me would be 1.5 Million in California

https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/pmf,pf_pt/70389845_zpid/globalrelevanceex_sort/43.137132,-88.270597,43.06732,-88.387842_rect/12_zm/

I saw 7 houses for sale between 8,000 and 15,000 square feet. That's not a huge number.
I found 9 in the same range in a city near me, and I certainly wouldn't say it's a trend to be moving into houses these size, especially after kids move out.  (One that is 13,000 square feet for under a million- sounds like a nice bargain.)

But I guess it just depends how you define trend? Seems like a fringe movement to me.

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7161
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #46 on: November 16, 2018, 09:12:23 AM »
The sizes being discussed here boggle my mind. I have stayed in a 3800 ft ^2 house owned by two people and it is cavernous. Certainly it feels big compared to my 1100^2 house. If 3800 is massive then does 10,000 feel like living in a grocery store?

I'm wondering if 10,000 is an exaggeration, or like a single person the OP is thinking of. Google tells me that even Taylor Swift, Ellen DeGeneres, and the Kardashians live in homes that are about 10,000 square feet.  I have a hard time thinking this is a "trend" of "normal" people.

The freaking massive houses in my neighborhood owned by 2 people are 4,000 - 5,000 square feet (including finished basement).  Most houses (with families) in the neighborhood are in the 2,500-3,500 ranges.



If you think that's the case then just start here and move your mouse around till your hearts content. Those people are paying more because of the area. a 250k house by me would be 1.5 Million in California

https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/pmf,pf_pt/70389845_zpid/globalrelevanceex_sort/43.137132,-88.270597,43.06732,-88.387842_rect/12_zm/

I saw 7 houses for sale between 8,000 and 15,000 square feet. That's not a huge number.
I found 9 in the same range in a city near me, and I certainly wouldn't say it's a trend to be moving into houses these size, especially after kids move out.  (One that is 13,000 square feet for under a million- sounds like a nice bargain.)

But I guess it just depends how you define trend? Seems like a fringe movement to me.





Well here I made it easy for you. Here is a 135 homes for sale so imagine how many arent for sale in ONE county near me starting at 5,000  square feet. The first one is over 16,000 Square feet and I know of  several not for sale over 20,000

https://www.shorewest.com/s_search/sc_lsearch_amt_search_price+DESC/sd_S2/list-status_Active%2CDelayed%2CActiveWO%2CPending%2COffer-Show%2COffer+w~s~Bump/sqft-act-low_5000/listing-state_WI/county_Waukesha/sn_SEARCH_LISTING_P/type_Single+Family+Residential/limited-service_N/#.W-7rl-hKjIU

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8186
  • Location: United States
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #47 on: November 16, 2018, 09:18:25 AM »
The sizes being discussed here boggle my mind. I have stayed in a 3800 ft ^2 house owned by two people and it is cavernous. Certainly it feels big compared to my 1100^2 house. If 3800 is massive then does 10,000 feel like living in a grocery store?

I'm wondering if 10,000 is an exaggeration, or like a single person the OP is thinking of. Google tells me that even Taylor Swift, Ellen DeGeneres, and the Kardashians live in homes that are about 10,000 square feet.  I have a hard time thinking this is a "trend" of "normal" people.

The freaking massive houses in my neighborhood owned by 2 people are 4,000 - 5,000 square feet (including finished basement).  Most houses (with families) in the neighborhood are in the 2,500-3,500 ranges.



If you think that's the case then just start here and move your mouse around till your hearts content. Those people are paying more because of the area. a 250k house by me would be 1.5 Million in California

https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/pmf,pf_pt/70389845_zpid/globalrelevanceex_sort/43.137132,-88.270597,43.06732,-88.387842_rect/12_zm/

I saw 7 houses for sale between 8,000 and 15,000 square feet. That's not a huge number.
I found 9 in the same range in a city near me, and I certainly wouldn't say it's a trend to be moving into houses these size, especially after kids move out.  (One that is 13,000 square feet for under a million- sounds like a nice bargain.)

But I guess it just depends how you define trend? Seems like a fringe movement to me.





Well here I made it easy for you. Here is a 135 homes for sale so imagine how many arent for sale in ONE county near me starting at 5,000  square feet. The first one is over 16,000 Square feet and I know of  several not for sale over 20,000

https://www.shorewest.com/s_search/sc_lsearch_amt_search_price+DESC/sd_S2/list-status_Active%2CDelayed%2CActiveWO%2CPending%2COffer-Show%2COffer+w~s~Bump/sqft-act-low_5000/listing-state_WI/county_Waukesha/sn_SEARCH_LISTING_P/type_Single+Family+Residential/limited-service_N/#.W-7rl-hKjIU

Again, basically the same as my area if I open it up to multiple cities.  It's NOT common. I don't think it's a trend.  Giant houses have always been a thing. It's rare for people to do this.

How many people do you personally know who live in an 8,000 or 10,000 square foot house with only 2 people?  Just wondering?

« Last Edit: November 16, 2018, 09:22:01 AM by I'm a red panda »

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7161
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #48 on: November 16, 2018, 09:23:57 AM »
The sizes being discussed here boggle my mind. I have stayed in a 3800 ft ^2 house owned by two people and it is cavernous. Certainly it feels big compared to my 1100^2 house. If 3800 is massive then does 10,000 feel like living in a grocery store?

I'm wondering if 10,000 is an exaggeration, or like a single person the OP is thinking of. Google tells me that even Taylor Swift, Ellen DeGeneres, and the Kardashians live in homes that are about 10,000 square feet.  I have a hard time thinking this is a "trend" of "normal" people.

The freaking massive houses in my neighborhood owned by 2 people are 4,000 - 5,000 square feet (including finished basement).  Most houses (with families) in the neighborhood are in the 2,500-3,500 ranges.



If you think that's the case then just start here and move your mouse around till your hearts content. Those people are paying more because of the area. a 250k house by me would be 1.5 Million in California

https://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/pmf,pf_pt/70389845_zpid/globalrelevanceex_sort/43.137132,-88.270597,43.06732,-88.387842_rect/12_zm/

I saw 7 houses for sale between 8,000 and 15,000 square feet. That's not a huge number.
I found 9 in the same range in a city near me, and I certainly wouldn't say it's a trend to be moving into houses these size, especially after kids move out.  (One that is 13,000 square feet for under a million- sounds like a nice bargain.)

But I guess it just depends how you define trend? Seems like a fringe movement to me.





Well here I made it easy for you. Here is a 135 homes for sale so imagine how many arent for sale in ONE county near me starting at 5,000  square feet. The first one is over 16,000 Square feet and I know of  several not for sale over 20,000

https://www.shorewest.com/s_search/sc_lsearch_amt_search_price+DESC/sd_S2/list-status_Active%2CDelayed%2CActiveWO%2CPending%2COffer-Show%2COffer+w~s~Bump/sqft-act-low_5000/listing-state_WI/county_Waukesha/sn_SEARCH_LISTING_P/type_Single+Family+Residential/limited-service_N/#.W-7rl-hKjIU

Again, basically the same as my area if I open it up to multiple cities.  It's NOT common. I don't think it's a trend.  Giant houses have always been a thing. It's rare for people to do this.


Well maybe its not a trend in your area but its a trend here. I live in this area and if there are 10 there are 20 new subdivisions going up in this small areas with a lot of little towns.  And if you red my OP then you would know that I said I have numerous friends doing this so i will leave it at that. I have lived here over 50 years so I think I have a better Idea of whats going on around here than you do.

PiobStache

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 204
Re: New Trend I am noticing that I do not understand.
« Reply #49 on: November 16, 2018, 09:27:23 AM »
Sticking my my original thought this is mere confirmation bias.