Tiny House Hunters - General Discussion

[aguabella]

A lot of the people they highlight are mooching off friends or family by parking their tiny homes on those friends' property.

 

I agree - but smart friends and family would set up a monthly rental rate.  If they waited until after the moochers moved in, they're probably ex-f&f!  It's actually easy to calculate the monthly utility cost of variance appliances in order to estimate a reasonable monthly rental rate, adding on a space rental rate to the various expenses.  Smart f&f would have set it up in advance.

 

Could that be a new badge of honor in the tiny house community, DownTheShore?  That is, how many bumps on the noggin some of these people have?  Hmmm, maybe some of them could use a few more to avoid tiny houses altogether, lol!

[Mu Shu]

A lot of the people they highlight are mooching off friends or family by parking their tiny homes on those friends' property.

What do you do when you having a falling out with your friend or family, they sell their property, or code enforcement shuts you down for living in a temporary residence full time? These people aren't home owners. They legally own an RV.

There was a case in Virginia where someone rented out their real house in a desirable neighborhood and lived in a tiny house in the backyard. The neighbors complained, and they were ordered to stop living in it. The lost their entire investment, since the other option was to live in RV parks, which can be as much monthly to rent as an apartment 3 times the size of their shack.

[topanga]

 

Well I was pleasantly surprised that the lady who bought the camper for her tiny home did such a good job rehabbing it! So far it has been my favorite tiny house. If she wanted she could have even put a small recliner next to the daybed sofa in the living area and she could have also put a real toilet in the bathroom, depending on if she had sewage hookup. We did something similar with a camper that we had at a lake campground, the rehabbing part. I miss that little camper.

I saw this episode for the first time the other day. I liked the lady, too, and I'm glad she got the camper. She and her friend really hooked up the decor. I loved the scene when she was trying to climb into the loft bed, and her friend was helping her. Some great physical comedy--they looked like Tina Fey and Amy Poehler. 

[mojito]

For me, it would be more be economically feasible, understandable, and interesting for HH to focus on people who downsize to smaller homes, living the way many of us geezers did back in the olden days. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for the modern luxury of an additional bathroom or a kitchen with an island that allows a few kids to do homework or just casually keep company with the Mom or Dad, whoever is cooking. It is 2015 after all. But kids can double up. I'm sure there are families out there who have gone this route and not necessarily out of financial necessity. They do it because it puts more $ in their pockets each month and gets everyone to share more. This would still require a scaling back but not cutting back so severely that the next home you want to buy is a McMansion.

 

Same for single people/empty nesters. 2 bedrooms. Company has the second bedroom. Children can make do with bunkbeds in the second bedroom, the pullout couch. The inflatable bed. These things work fine for the 5 days that people will be there.

 

That's simplicity without the silliness of living in an outhouse. The reason that I think tiny homes are silly is that people seem more caught up on how "cute" the place looks and how it has all these cubbyholes and lofts when their needs are not nearly as simple as they pretend they are. As DowntheShore stated, so many still want king-size beds, full-size appliances, and bathtubs. Shower, queen or full-size beds, apartment 'fridges. That's keeping it simple and bearable. 

[Mu Shu]

Mojito, you just pitched a great new show. We can call it HH-Downsizing. The minimum is 400 square feet, and we will max out at 1,000.

I always laugh at the "Realtors" showing tiny homes. What, do they get a $75 dollar commission for their hard work? If I were a realtor and some moron wanted me to show him 20k sheds I would laugh my ass off. No profit for realtors in tiny house nation.

[aguabella]

Great idea, HH Downsizing.  Could be a problem that participants wouldn't purchase a shiny new toy, the tiny house itself, tricking it out with even more toys.  The Downsizers already have ample consumer goods - they won't be purchasing new pieces of mini furniture, eco-goods and/or appliances. 

 

Unfortunately, HGTV might see HH-D as actively promoting (net) negative consumption.  Great for the planet and homeowners but HGTV advertisers and Scripps' stock price???  Uh, not so much.  Unless HGTV's main advertiser is Goodwill or the like, I'd be surprised to see HGTV greenlighting an HH-D pilot.  Too bad - great idea! 

 

True, in the real world, I doubt many realtors bother chasing the nearly non-existent commissions available from tiny house transactions.  Haven't builders promoted most of the HGTV featured tiny homes?  For the realtors that appear on HGTV, giving up nearly 40 hours of their time, I'm sure they hope to actively promote their brand.  Plus, they probably suspect that the majority of tiny housers won't last for the long-term.  They will become move-up buyers - possibly sooner rather than later. 

 

And, tiny housers' friends and family may very well involve a fairly high percentage of add'l tiny housers.  All together, it sounds like a target-rich environment of move-up buyers!  The realtors who help out prospective tiny house buyers for (basically) free may be on to something.  Assuming a low average age for tiny housers and they provide stellar service, realtors might be acquiring new clients for the long haul, i.e. the remaining term of their RE practices.

 

Read somewhere that the first family (family of 5, IIRC) to build on an HGTV tiny house construction show bailed after barely a year.  That's an incredibly quick turnaround for a realtor, waiting in the wings, ready to assist a move-up buyer with their next RE transaction!

Edited December 31, 2015 by aguabella

[proserpina65]

It's one of my favorites, and it's only 325 square feet.  I could live there, happily.

 

I could never live in something anywhere near that small, but I'd be interested in watching a show about small, but practical apartments/houses.  But the tiny houses on these shows are rarely (if ever) practical.

[proserpina65]

Never mind - someone else already answered it better than I could.

Edited December 31, 2015 by proserpina65

[Neurochick]

I'd just like to see more sensible tiny home buyers, like the teacher with the fisherman's cottage.

I'm tired of the starry-eyed noodle brains who want to go small, but still want their bathtubs, and full-size appliances and king-sized beds. And who want to fit two people and multiple pets in that space.

I want to hear about the nuts and bolts of tiny living. What do you do when you don't have a friend or relative who happens to own a convenient piece of farmland? How are those composting toilets working out when someone's got the runs? Have they ever fallen off the loft ladder, or banged their head on the loft ceiling during sex? When they wash dishes or use the washer, where does the waste water go?

 

I agree.  I can't stand those lofts in the tiny homes.    When I was in my 20's I had a bf who built a loft bed in his studio apartment, which was a great use of space.  The loft fit either a full mattress or a queen; and you could sit up in it without your head touching the ceiling, because the ceiling was pretty high, bf was 6'2" so he made it work for him.  The lofts these people have, no way. 

Edited December 31, 2015 by Neurochick

[Mu Shu]

Great idea, HH Downsizing. Could be a problem that participants wouldn't purchase a shiny new toy, the tiny house itself, tricking it out with even more toys. The Downsizers already have ample consumer goods - they won't be purchasing new pieces of mini furniture, eco-goods and/or appliances.

Unfortunately, HGTV might see HH-D as actively promoting (net) negative consumption. Great for the planet and homeowners but HGTV advertisers and Scripps' stock price??? Uh, not so much. Unless HGTV's main advertiser is Goodwill or the like, I'd be surprised to see HGTV greenlighting an HH-D pilot. Too bad - great idea!

True, in the real world, I doubt many realtors bother chasing the nearly non-existent commissions available from tiny house transactions. Haven't builders promoted most of the HGTV featured tiny homes? For the realtors that appear on HGTV, giving up nearly 40 hours of their time, I'm sure they hope to actively promote their brand. Plus, they probably suspect that the majority of tiny housers won't last for the long-term. They will become move-up buyers - possibly sooner rather than later.

And, tiny housers' friends and family may very well involve a fairly high percentage of add'l tiny housers. All together, it sounds like a target-rich environment of move-up buyers! The realtors who help out prospective tiny house buyers for (basically) free may be on to something. Assuming a low average age for tiny housers and they provide stellar service, realtors might be acquiring new clients for the long haul, i.e. the remaining term of their RE practices.

Read somewhere that the first family (family of 5, IIRC) to build on an HGTV tiny house construction show bailed after barely a year. That's an incredibly quick turnaround for a realtor, waiting in the wings, ready to assist a move-up buyer with their next RE transaction!

That's a good long term strategy possibly, but wouldn't it be a better strategy to focus on young condo buyers? Tiny housers don't seem to be upwardly mobile IMO. You would be better off in the rental game, and may be able to convert potential renters into buyers.

Anyway, that's why I put realtor in quotes. These aren't real houses with real building codes, so they're not sold like traditional housing is. Most of these sheds are built and sold by the manufacturer. Just like an RV or trailer.

[aguabella]

That's a good long term strategy possibly, but wouldn't it be a better strategy to focus on young condo buyers? Tiny housers don't seem to be upwardly mobile IMO. You would be better off in the rental game, and may be able to convert potential renters into buyers.

Anyway, that's why I put realtor in quotes. These aren't real houses with real building codes, so they're not sold like traditional housing is. Most of these sheds are built and sold by the manufacturer. Just like an RV or trailer.

 

I agree, Mu Shu - although I haven't maintained any statistics, IIRC, as mentioned above, most of the HGTV tiny house search reenactments have been have been directly sold by the builders.  That said, if Tiny HH accurately represents that real world population, these buyers don't appear down on their luck, to me.  And yes, b/c they're essentially trailers, it's difficult to obtain financing, so these buyers had access to a chunk of change ($$$).

 

Thinking about a few random Tiny HH participants, yurt girl was from a wealthy family.  (I believe she's using that thing as her office and crashing at her folks' mansion!)  A few others appeared to be young professionals, e.g. the RN and student loan girl.  The horsey girl (+ husband) came from $$$.  (I suspect she's using hers as a farm trailer, available when she needs to do overnights or attend horse shows.)  Wouldn't be surprised if either the property her folks financed already had a small home on it or they're in the process of building.  Just a hunch.  

 

Hey, wasn't the fisherman's cottage guy a move-up buyer?  He'd dumped the tiny house in favor of a small home.  And, the shed man with daughter had access to a nice pad.  (Everybody see that game room?)  BTW, he forgot to mention during the episode, lol, that he's also worked as an adjunct education professor.  So, he's not simply a small-town kindergarten teacher, the role that HGTV assigned him.  Somehow, I think he'll move up in a year or two.  In OK???  He can afford it!

 

Oops, sorry - didn't mean to include so many examples.  In any event, that's what my thinking was.  And, I'm sure a sharp realtor could easily determine the upwardly mobile tiny housers and use his/her valuable marketing / networking time wisely.  Needless to say, given the above, I believe the tiny housers will become young condo buyers, shortly!

 

 

Happy New Year, everyone!

Edited January 1, 2016 by aguabella

[mojito]

 

Mojito, you just pitched a great new show. We can call it HH-Downsizing. The minimum is 400 square feet, and we will max out at 1,000.

I think maxing out at 1000 sq ft would be excellent.

 

Unless HGTV's main advertiser is Goodwill or the like, I'd be surprised to see HGTV greenlighting an HH-D pilot.

Now that would be interesting. Funny, about Goodwill.  I guess this kind of show would work on some non-HGTV network. It could even be a little snarky about the tiny movement. The natural sponsors would be home improvement stores, I would think. Take anyone scaling back because they want to have less money go towards mortgage payments....I would imagine that they would still want a very nice-looking place to live, and nice flooring and cool kitchens and baths would still be within budget. Hmm....maybe this is the kind of show Home Depot would sponsor, even on HGTV. 

 

Needless to say, given the above, I believe the tiny housers will become young condo buyers, shortly!

Or boomerang kids, living in their parents' basements. Except for the downsizing Mom and the teacher who bought the small home, some of the people I've seen in recent (repeated) shows don't strike me as people who would end up with a condo paying condo fees, not on their own dimes anyway.

 

I'm only going on what is depicted in these shows, I do not research these people to see who lives in their parents' mansions or who have other jobs.

[DownTheShore]

There does seem to be a strong thread of "cheap" in a lot of those single, tiny home buyers. How many of them wind up getting the smallest home they can, even when it means that they are severely limited in how they can live? That's something that I can't understand.

I freely admit that I have too much stuff and that it would pain me to get rid of it, because the things either contain memories or else they make my home more pleasant to me. I like having more than an ottoman or a padded bench to sit on.I don't want to basically camp permanently.

[Mittengirl]

Amen to not wanting a padded bench as the main seating. I just had one of those milestone birthdays that ends in O my god when did I get this old. I need a nice cozy, comfy place upon which to park my middle-aged body. Not a hunk of wood with a three-inch foam seat and throw pillows that offer no back support.

And I am not going to go hang out at someone's house if they can't offer me a comfortable chair to sit on. And an indoor, flush toilet. I have my doubts that those that insist they need room to entertain end up having many visitors, once everyone's curiousity is satisfied.

[caci]

There used to be some design show and some designers would put in ottomans that the homeowners could use for "extra entertaining seating". My back just hurt thinking about it.

I live in a small place (not a tiny home) and it does make you think about how much stuff you really need. However, there are still some basic conveniences that I think people still want such as a full size couch or a bigger than dorm room size refrigerator. Wait til there are a few days of bad weather and the homeowners are stuck inside with a half empty frig and a few pads to sit on. Not relaxing at all!

[chessiegal]

We just watched the tiny house where a spoiled brat bought a house on wheels and parked same house in her parents driveway of their 6,000 sq. ft. house. So her need to live small was a grown-up dollhouse on her parents property. What an entitled little snot.

[Showthyme]

I would like to see a follow-up show on every one of these homeowners. I imagine that most with families move to larger quarters after the novelty wears off.

 

The wish list often includes entertaining or being able to accommodate overnight guests. I don't get it. I could live in a tiny house easily by myself but would not expect children to live there with me. It seems selfish. As a guest, I would feel uncomfortable using a bathroom that only has a curtain. What about the smell and the sounds made in a bathroom? I think I would rather go outside behind a bush.

 

It amazes me when someone in a couple says that 400 square feet is too big. They want something smaller and easier to clean. I would be cleaning compulsively if I lived in something that small.  Everything would have to be in its place.

[mojito]

 

We just watched the tiny house where a spoiled brat bought a house on wheels and parked same house in her parents driveway of their 6,000 sq. ft. house. 

It was like seeing Jed Clampett's car parked in front of his mansion.

 

I often read statements about people "hate watching" a show. I've never understood taking time to watch something I hate. But this Tiny House Hunters....It's two parts bewildering and one part fascinating. Does anyone have a copyright on "WTF Watching" yet?

[CoolMom]

Improves which matters, aguabella? I think living in a tiny home can help environmentally if the homeowners are using less fossil fuel to heat and light their homes and less water for everyday maintenance. And if you have less room for stuff, theoretically you're not buying as much Stuff, therefore reducing your carbon footprint.

 

--But I'm curious about trash collection. Will you get trash pickup if you aren't a city resident paying city taxes, or do you take your garbage someplace? 

--Recycling is easier since most cities have recycling drop-off locations. 

 

But can someone explain what a composting toilet does (ewwww), and where you're supposed to do with the raw sewage compost you create? 

 

We  have a vacation home in the mountains (not tiny), it's so far out that we have to take our own trash into town.  The cost to dump your trash is $1 per bag up to 40 gallons. Recycling is free.  You can hire a company to do it but we're not there enough to pay them. 

[Neurochick]

There used to be some design show and some designers would put in ottomans that the homeowners could use for "extra entertaining seating". My back just hurt thinking about it.

I live in a small place (not a tiny home) and it does make you think about how much stuff you really need. However, there are still some basic conveniences that I think people still want such as a full size couch or a bigger than dorm room size refrigerator. Wait til there are a few days of bad weather and the homeowners are stuck inside with a half empty frig and a few pads to sit on. Not relaxing at all!

 

I notice that a lot of these tiny homes are purchased by young people.  When you're young you don't think of bad weather (and that depends on where you live), it's okay to have a loft bed, it's okay to have a small refrigerator, when you're young you don't think about, "what if this happens?" or "what if that happens?"

[mojito]

Good point about the short-sightedness of youth. They are often looking at right here, right now. So I give up $40K for this non-investment. I can make some more money later.

 

But wouldn't the story of the Three Little Pigs still be fresh in their young minds? Or the film footage of yet another college party/celebration-turned-riot where they (try to) overturn a car? Or the increasingly common story of a bear looking for a dumpster?

 

[Don't take the last paragraph (too) seriously.]

[DownTheShore]

That is a thought, though. Bears attracted to the smell of food.

"Don't come knockin' while this tiny hoise is rockin'" may just mean that a bear is trying to find a way in - lol.

[dga28]

I notice that a lot of these tiny homes are purchased by young people.  When you're young you don't think of bad weather (and that depends on where you live), it's okay to have a loft bed, it's okay to have a small refrigerator, when you're young you don't think about, "what if this happens?" or "what if that happens?"

also whats the resale on something like that?...doesnt seem like it would have any positive equity compared to a traditional house...seems more like buy a vehicle...

[aguabella]

I think maxing out at 1000 sq ft would be excellent.

Now that would be interesting. Funny, about Goodwill.  I guess this kind of show would work on some non-HGTV network. It could even be a little snarky about the tiny movement. The natural sponsors would be home improvement stores, I would think. Take anyone scaling back because they want to have less money go towards mortgage payments....I would imagine that they would still want a very nice-looking place to live, and nice flooring and cool kitchens and baths would still be within budget. Hmm....maybe this is the kind of show Home Depot would sponsor, even on HGTV. 

Or boomerang kids, living in their parents' basements. Except for the downsizing Mom and the teacher who bought the small home, some of the people I've seen in recent (repeated) shows don't strike me as people who would end up with a condo paying condo fees, not on their own dimes anyway.

 

I'm only going on what is depicted in these shows, I do not research these people to see who lives in their parents' mansions or who have other jobs.

 

The big box retailers know who their customers are and tailor their marketing and promotional efforts, accordingly.  For the most part, for tiny houses, that'd be the builders - not the eventual buyers.  The builders spend minor $$$ constructing standard model units (a shell) and then finish them with the buyers' chosen paint colors, tricking them out with the buyers' other designated options.  So, direct-to-consumer advertising probably wouldn't be the best use of their marketing $$$. 

 

Unless and until there's a resale market for these units, I'd be surprised to see a large amount of home renovation $$$ spent.  By the time they see their selected options as dreaded "dated" finishes, these buyers will have tired of the units and abandoned them.  That's my belief, anyway. 

 

I don't see these buyers, the young professional types I'm discussing, as future boomerang kids, either.  They've tasted the freedom from parental control and have sufficient income to remain on their own.  Some of them were escaping their parents to begin with.  Others were divorced so not likely, statistically, to return to the parental nest.  Plus, financially speaking, they'll be looking around for a tax deductions in a few years, around the same time as they tire of living in a box.

 

Condo fees in most of the areas depicted on THH (so far, anyway) are typically inexpensive.  (It's not the metro area / city rates of $200+ monthly.)  If they're like many younger buyers, they could probably find a condo or other small home in these areas with fees less than their monthly health club dues, i.e. a net monthly savings. 

 

City regulations don't allow trailer parking and/or second units so HGTV hasn't aired any major city episodes - at least that I can recall.  We'll see if the cities rezone a few areas for trailer parking, like mobile homes - ugh, perish the thought, lol!  They'll be moving on then, for sure!!

 

I don't have the time (or desire) to research these people but I do know, from years of experience, how HGTV and their production companies set up / write / story-board and film episodes.  If you see a yurt perfectly set up for someone's business but never see the proposed, completed, kitchen unit, let alone one even started, and the girl has wealthy parents ... that's a major clue, to say the least.

 

Same thing for horsey girl, searching for land to go with her trailer.  Golly-gosh, slipped her mind to mention that her folks (or other family members, haha) had sprung for a $175K lot.  What else did she conveniently forget to mention, lol?  BTW, ever seen such perfect, coordinated holiday decorations that weren't done by a professional?  Just sayin' - wouldn't surprise me if she asked the production company to hire her mom's designer to stage that place.  Hey, if they wanted to air the episode during holiday time, why not?

 

I do the same - use the information depicted in the shows.  In addition, I pay attention to what's not depicted during the episodes.  (Sometimes we can deduce as much or more by what they conveniently and purposely omit, IMHO.)

Edited January 5, 2016 by aguabella

[mojito]

 

I don't see these buyers, the young professional types I'm discussing, as future boomerang kids, either.  They've tasted the freedom from parental control and have sufficient income to remain on their own.  Some of them were escaping their parents to begin with.  Others were divorced so not likely, statistically, to return to the parental nest.  Plus, financially speaking, they'll be looking around for a tax deductions in a few years, around the same time as they tire of living in a box.

Maybe it's the times, or attitudes towards money. I see young professionals as people with a degree of independence, too, but also with degree of financial savvy. That would preclude putting down all your cash on a tiny home, which may do nothing more than depreciate with time. My peers all lived in apartments and saved for houses. I don't even know anyone who purchased a condo, not even those in the NYC or DC metropolitan areas. We saw a home (which would've included co-ops and condos) as an investment. 

[KittyS]

These people are ridiculous. I think most of them just want the prestige of saying they live in a tiny house. Not having permanent connections to water, sewer, and electricity is mind-boggling. You might as well just live in an RV and not have to worry about having a trailer to move your house around. Also, the price per square foot of these homes is very high, plus you have to buy the land.

I, too, would be totally on board with a show about small permanent (fixed?) homes between 500 and 1000 square feet.

Edited January 5, 2016 by KittyS

[zxy556575]

I suppose we'll be seeing these next.

 

Less than 50 sf! I win!

[mojito]

And, for the homeowner who desires better protection from the elements, there's this.

 

lordonia, you still win because yours is easily transported.

Edited January 5, 2016 by mojito

[Mu Shu]

Nope, I'll never be down on my luck enough to poop, eat, and sleep in the same tiny room.

It's time for the final frontier if we've run out of space to live in.

[aguabella]

Maybe it's the times, or attitudes towards money. I see young professionals as people with a degree of independence, too, but also with degree of financial savvy. That would preclude putting down all your cash on a tiny home, which may do nothing more than depreciate with time. My peers all lived in apartments and saved for houses. I don't even know anyone who purchased a condo, not even those in the NYC or DC metropolitan areas. We saw a home (which would've included co-ops and condos) as an investment. 

 

If I understand your post correctly, mojito, you believe, in general, that young professionals, by definition (?) are financial savvy?  If studied, I believe they'd behave like any other population or subset thereof, i.e. some would be more financially savvy than others.

 

Then, the remainder of your post indicates that for you, financially savvy people follow RE's conventional wisdom - that is, to save up a downpayment by living in apts, purchasing a sfd (single family home) asap, avoiding condos.  If I added to that program, it'd include moving up to more valuable RE if/when equity growth allows it.

 

Most previous generations, in general, probably believe that model / method served them well.  Terrific, if they're satisfied but how can previous generations project their goals and methods onto today's Next Gen and Millenials?  Current young adults grew up in a vastly different time with very different circumstances.  Why would they follow the same path when so many things have changed? 

 

Plus, they weren't raised to scrimp and save - they're used to getting what they want, when they want it.  (Raised by the same parents who scrimped and saved to give them that better life, ironically!)

 

I've reviewed historic RE returns many times over the years;  the numbers are staggering.  IIRC, real returns, meaning inflation-adjusted (how investments are usually compared) over long periods of time, 100+ years, including multiple boom and bust cycles, approximate 2% or slightly less.  (No, that isn't a typo, BTW!)

 

Add in estimated maintenance costs, etc. and RE returns are negative.  Studies vary, depending on the period studied and figures included but, again IIRC, I believe other, typical, conservative investment alternatives always beat RE.  Plus, RE is the most illiquid "investment".  (If you deduct an appropriate time value of money factor from that return - ouch!)

 

Because I'm familiar with these figures, I always encourage buyers to consider the consumption value of their RE purchases instead of solely focusing on their home's "investment" value.  When I see younger, tiny house buyers, I believe they're at the apartment stage of that lifecycle. 

 

Amortizing their tiny home purchase over their estimated living period plus their monthly land / utility hookup rental cost, one hopes they're minimizing expenses so they can move up to a small sfd when they reach the next stage.   Moreover, they're definitely receiving consumption value between an overall pride of ownership plus their belief that they're minimizing their environmental footprint.

 

Considering tiny house resale values, we don't have enough data, IMHO.  So far, there's little or no resale market.  The only thing we can compare tiny houses to is the mobile home.  And, we know what happens in that resale (not) market.

 

Given the above, tiny housers may be more financially savvy than the rest of us!  Although it's a high $$$/sf amount, if they continue minimizing their expenses and have the discipline to save and invest other available funds, they should build more wealth over time than their parents and grandparents.  (Will they move up to smaller sf home, not a mcmansion!) 

 

As mentioned above, I do believe they're the next move-up buyers.  When their friends (and they, themselves) couple and/or marry and begin having kids, they'll move into the next phase, in a sf home.  No matter how much HGTV wants viewers to believe these buyers are adopting this lifestyle for the long-term - isn't going to happen.  So, that's my prediction.  Time will tell!

 

P.S.  I'll be surprised if we see many WATN episodes, if any.  The casting agents might not locate anyone remaining in their tiny homes, unless the cameras return after only a very short period of time!

Edited January 8, 2016 by aguabella

[mojito]

 

If I understand your post correctly, mojito, you believe, in general, that young professionals, by definition (?) are financial savvy?  If studied, I believe they'd behave like any other population or subset thereof, i.e. some would be more financially savvy than others.

Skip the term "young professionals". I was just using your term, but clearly, we have different ideas of who those people are.

 

So I'll just speak of people who have decent incomes, who don't live at home, and understand investing in real property as opposed to dropping a wad of cash on personal property. If people are not able to understand the whole concept of scrimping and saving, well, they're perfect candidates for tiny homes on wheels. More power to them. 

 

 

.... if they continue minimizing their expenses and have the discipline to save and invest other available funds, they should build more wealth over time than their parents and grandparents.

Yes, that's true of everyone. Only others will live in homes that appreciate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financially savvy young professionals understand the difference between plunking down a wad of cash on personal property versus plunking it down on real property. 

[aguabella]

Skip the term "young professionals". I was just using your term, but clearly, we have different ideas of who those people are.

 

So I'll just speak of people who have decent incomes, who don't live at home, and understand investing in real property as opposed to dropping a wad of cash on personal property. If people are not able to understand the whole concept of scrimping and saving, well, they're perfect candidates for tiny homes on wheels. More power to them. 

 

Yes, that's true of everyone. Only others will live in homes that appreciate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financially savvy young professionals understand the difference between plunking down a wad of cash on personal property versus plunking it down on real property. 

 

As mentioned in previous posts, the tiny house buyers include various groups besides young professionals, e.g. divorcees and empty-nesters, among others.  Like the young professionals, these groups are going through interim phases of their lives.  Divorcees will forge a new path, sans spouses and empty-nesters want to enjoy some alone time after 20 years (approx.) of raising children.

 

If we assume that HGTV's Tiny-HH participants represent a fairly accurate cross-section of tiny house buyers, then so far, I seriously doubt tiny house buyers will remain in that type of housing for the long-term - defined as 5+ years but probably < 3.  So, going back to our original topic, I believe the realtors that farm this group may have the right idea.  These groups will become move-up buyers in a fairly short period of time - probably less time than your typical starter home buyer.

 

I remember posters, above, questioning why the Bakersfield environmental attorney (recent divorcee) was decorating her renovated RV to coordinate with that field of fruit trees.  Anyone seriously believe that trailer will move from that location in the near future?  Not me - that's for sure.  The attorney will move up to another home but her friends will retain the 5K unit on their land.  Just sayin'  Mobile homes and trailers rarely move.  (I doubt tiny houses will differ.) 

 

As indicated above, I certainly believe in saving and investing.  I don't believe, however, that everyone must follow any particular program to achieve financial success.  At this point in time, we don't know if the tiny houses will have future resale value.  The market determines that.  We compare them to mobile homes b/c that's the best model available.  In 5-10 years, we'll have better data.

 

New home subdivisions, built in phases over multiple years, tend to suffer in resale value during the early years.  (New buyers typically buy a newer model instead of a resale unit.)  At this point in time, according to information on the tiny house resale website (will try to locate link, later), new buyers prefer new-builds.  Same thing - takes a while for any equity to kick in.

 

Using that for a model, if/when new-builds drop off, a resale market may grow and develop.  We'll see.  In the meantime, if buyers hold on to them for 5 years or so, including both the purchase price amortization plus land rent and utilities, etc., the monthly costs may be less than an apartment.  Or, if they unload them in less than 5 years, if they can recoup some of their purchase price, the numbers might work out well.

 

Good news - with their lower monthly costs, they can save a downpayment!

[Mu Shu]

True tiny house people aren't in it to save money for a larger home. They are trying to get by living in a 20k box while working part time and spending their money traveling. There are some doing it to save who have great jobs and dreams of upward mobility, but the prime directive of tiny housers is cheap living for life, or for the foreseeable future.

[aguabella]

True tiny house people aren't in it to save money for a larger home. They are trying to get by living in a 20k box while working part time and spending their money traveling. There are some doing it to save who have great jobs and dreams of upward mobility, but the prime directive of tiny housers is cheap living for life, or for the foreseeable future.

 

Have seen all the new THH episodes but can't remember anyone with a 20K budget, working part-time to travel.  That said, I'm sure we could find a few tiny owners doing just that.  And, given RE returns 2% or less after adjusting for inflation, it may be a terrific idea, i.e. cheap living to either invest the excess funds or spend time travelling.  (Many people, like me, urge homeowners to avoid thinking of their personal residence as an investment.)  Hey, why not?

 

I, like many others, believe that in a year or two they'll tire of bumping their heads every night in a loft and want to move up to a larger space.  And, if they've coupled up by that time and/or plan to have kids, they may need / want more space.  If they truly care about the planet, perhaps it'll be 1,000 sf.  Instead of WATN, HH could produce HH, Movin' on Up!

 

If they travelled and neglected to save, well, isn't the bank of Mom and Dad open, lol?

[Neurochick]

Some people want to spend their money on houses, other want to spend their money on travel.  Not everybody couples up and/or has children.  What about them?

[aguabella]

Some people want to spend their money on houses, other want to spend their money on travel.  Not everybody couples up and/or has children.  What about them?

 

Definitely, Neurochick.  I agree - any given population includes a mix of people, that can typically be represented on a bell curve.  Some of the single, childless owners may tire of bumping their heads every night and move.

 

I'd love to revisit these owners in a year or two and see how many, on a % basis, remain in a tiny house.  What's your guess?

[aguabella]

These people are ridiculous. I think most of them just want the prestige of saying they live in a tiny house. Not having permanent connections to water, sewer, and electricity is mind-boggling. You might as well just live in an RV and not have to worry about having a trailer to move your house around. Also, the price per square foot of these homes is very high, plus you have to buy the land.

I, too, would be totally on board with a show about small permanent (fixed?) homes between 500 and 1000 square feet.

 

That's it, KittyS. - the consumption value of living in a tiny house.  It's no different to me than someone buying a McMansion - they derive pleasure and a different type of payoff, showing it off to their friends.

 

BTW, I doubt very few of them take the permanent step of buying land.  Feels as if these places are destined for new, updated mobile home parks ...

Edited January 8, 2016 by aguabella

[Neurochick]

Definitely, Neurochick.  I agree - any given population includes a mix of people, that can typically be represented on a bell curve.  Some of the single, childless owners may tire of bumping their heads every night and move.

 

I'd love to revisit these owners in a year or two and see how many, on a % basis, remain in a tiny house.  What's your guess?

 

I know I could live in a small space, but not one with a loft.  Maybe they'll still be in small houses or apartments.  Like I said before the "tiny houses" are nothing more than studio apartments.

[aguabella]

I know I could live in a small space, but not one with a loft.  Maybe they'll still be in small houses or apartments.  Like I said before the "tiny houses" are nothing more than studio apartments.

 

Definitely, as I mentioned above, they might be on the apartment phase, if we compared them to previous generations.   And, yes, they can save, if they care to.  Or travel and borrow a future downpayment if/when they're ready for that 1,000 sf small home. 

[proserpina65]

Some people want to spend their money on houses, other want to spend their money on travel.  Not everybody couples up and/or has children.  What about them?

Most of them don't waste their money on tiny houses on wheels.  But then, they wouldn't be on this ridiculous show.

[Mu Shu]

The tiny housers I am referring to are the real tiny housers who live in these sheds. There is a whole community on YouTube. I have my doubts about whether any of the people on the show actually mean to live in these things for a long time. The horse people were extra hinky. I think they wanted an in laws or rental unit (possibly a unit for someone who would be working in the horse farm), and not something they would live in. I have no idea what Tina Yothers was doing with the shed with lifts of death. It looked like not only was her parents house huge, it looked like it was two houses tacked together which would make more sense to live in.

[Showthyme]

This show has inspired me to pare down my stuff. For that reason, I love this show. Hubby and me and our two kids lived in our RV for six months while waiting for our home to be built. It was surprisingly comfortable. I became the mix and match queen to create a small working wardrobe. Life was easy living in the RV. I definitely see the appeal and could see myself living in a very small home again.

 

It is too restrictive to live in a small space with children. How do they entertain their friends or get some peace from dear old mom and dad?

 

It is shocking how much people are paying for these tiny houses that are not mobile. The average monthly cost to park an RV is $600 per month plus an upcharge for utilities. At the end of the day, I don't see the cost savings because these small houses will not appreciate at the same value as a traditional house.

[Peanut]

I live with my two cats in a 756 sq ft condo, and I do have a lot of space.  There are some units in my building that are 450 sq ft and I've seen people do incredible things with them.  Though the couple with the great Dane sold their place when they had a kid and moved to the burbs, so I don't think that tiny is good for someone with a family.  

 

I had also at one point considered lofting my bed, but I just had surgery and realize that this would've been a terrible idea.  I already have a high bed with drawers and storage underneath and getting in and out of that was painful.  

 

I also need a bathroom with a door that closes.  I did see the episode with the bathroom with just the curtain, and no, I could not do that if anyone was over. 

 

I do miss the show Small Space, Big Style.  It was on when I bought my condo and was really helpful in helping me make some choices.  

 

Oh, and another reason I couldn't have a tiny house - I have framed band posters all over my walls.  (this makes me an adult...as a teenager, I just taped them to the walls....)  Where would I put them in a 200 sq ft box???

[izabella]

Oh, and another reason I couldn't have a tiny house - I have framed band posters all over my walls.  (this makes me an adult...as a teenager, I just taped them to the walls....)  Where would I put them in a 200 sq ft box???

 

You could attach them all together and make a door for the bathroom.  You could hang them from the ceiling.  You could use them as shutters for the windows.  You could get a Murphy bed, and attach them to the bottom so you would see them when the bed was up.

 

Lol, I can't help mocking these people and their tiny houses..

[Kohola3]

Lol, I can't help mocking these people and their tiny houses..

 

I want to see a follow up a year later - I bet the majority do not still live that lifestyle.  It looks so "cute" when it's being built but you'd have to negotiate every single purchase (one in, one out) and I don't think  lot of people would deal well with being on top of each other all of the time. I'm single but I still need my space!  

 

I think I'd feel as though I were suffocating if I had to squeeze against a counter just to get through a hallway. I'm not claustrophobic but showering in some of those bathrooms would send me in that direction!

[psychoticstate]

Why do all these tiny home on wheels seekers feel they need to have space for overnight guests?  They make it sound as though they have constant company (which in my book is known as roommates.)  Maybe if you have that many guests that often a 200 square foot space isn't going to work for you?

 

I just watched the episode with the married couple who are both chefs.  Nice enough people but their logic was bizarre.  $40k budget, desiring 200 square feet so they can move around as often as they like.  (Are there that many chef jobs readily available throughout the country?)  First home was $10k over budget and right under 200 square feet but with more of a "standard" kitchen.  Husband obsessing over the extra $10k.  Second home was one of those gooseneck things that expanded out and was $30k over budget.  Knew they obviously wouldn't choose that one.  Third property was a tiny little thing $10k under budget.  Husband rhapsodized over how they could turn the living room area into more kitchen space (what happened to needing space for the ever present visiting family and overnight guests?), with the builder telling them that would run about $5-6k.  They were also quoted an additional price to add some type of skylight to the ridiculously cramped loft space so they wouldn't feel as though they were in a box.  Husband, naturally, wanted the third option because it was under budget, even with all the so-called improvements. 

 

The show made it appear they chose the first home because it would be road ready in 24 hours versus having to wait 2 weeks to customize the tinier thing.  Did no one think to argue that with the husband's desired "improvements" that not only would they lose all of what little living space they had but it would put the home that much closer in price to the first home but with less space? 

 

I liked the episode immediately following much better.  The homebuyer was an artist in Philly and looking at actual homes.  It did annoy me that she had supposedly made up her mind on the first property, her boyfriend said he liked the second and she did a complete flip flop and then decided her mind was made up to get the second.  Really?  I would have gone with the first one based on the neighborhood, the fantastic upstairs space and the fact she could walk to work.  But that's just me.

 

I do like seeing some of the organizational and space saving ideas - - mostly from the homes with an actual foundation - - but I could live without ever hearing another potential homeowner seeking for a tiny house saying "This is so tiny!" 

[selhars]

Watching an episode now….a young woman (student) wants a "house" that's 100 sf feet. That's not a house that's a ROOM!

I mean really…... 100 sq ft? I don't care if many of the homes being two levels once you count loft space….it's a room.

 

Crazy people always have to take  the good idea -- of downsizing -- to the ridiculous and the extreme.

 

Anyone see the episode with the Florida couple with two different gender kids (7-year-old boy and 4 year-old girl) -- who bought the shipping container house? For god's sake the kids didn't have anywhere to sleep….and there was only the BATHROOM sink which she used for food prep. That can be down rich unsanitary. I know it's judgmental to say it…but these people are not right in the head.

 

Why do all these tiny home on wheels seekers feel they need to have space for overnight guests?  They make it sound as though they have constant company (which in my book is known as roommates.)  Maybe if you have that many guests that often a 200 square foot space isn't going to work for you?

 

 I've noticed just the opposite…in all of the shows I've seen, no has said anything at all about having people over. So my question was going to be ----do they ever plan to have anyone over?….WHERE would the person sleep? On the damned floor? In the show with the family with kids…. there was no room for THEM to sleep -- and the mom was washing and prepping food in the effing bathroom for goodness sake.

Who the hell would WANT to go over there….where would you sit to eat the bathroom prepped food?

Edited February 16, 2016 by selhars

[biakbiak]

The old episade that aired tonight that showed the younger womn spend $59,000 because living in a 2 bedroom was just "too" much and than parked on her parts extremely large property with their 6,000 ft plus house was everything wrong with this stupid ass movement.

[selhars]

I don't research many house hunters (on a percentage basis) but over the years have reviewed numerous HH/HHI backstories.  Have yet to find an episode plot that was entirely accurate.

 

HH, and HHI  are known for being fake, or should I say having aspects of the show made up…..

-- The house hunters have already picked their house…so the search is faked.

-- The "realtors" -- may not even be realtors at all -- let alone their realtor.

-- At least on HHI -- the plot line of WHY and WHEN the person moved to the country is made up, or 'changed' from the truth

(the couples may not be a couple; the person may have lived in the country for years, not just moved there; the realtor likely isn't a realtor at all)

 

So as for TINY House Hunters…I totally expect most of what I see isn't true.

And I think it's a shame…because so so totally unnecessary.

Edited February 16, 2016 by selhars

[psychoticstate]

Watching an episode now….a young woman (student) wants a "house" that's 100 sf feet. That's not a house that's a ROOM!

I mean really…... 100 sq ft? I don't care if many of the homes being two levels once you count loft space….it's a room.

 

Crazy people always have to take  the good idea -- of downsizing -- to the ridiculous and the extreme.

 

Anyone see the episode with the Florida couple with two different gender kids (7-year-old boy and 4 year-old girl) -- who bought the shipping container house? For god's sake the kids didn't have anywhere to sleep….and there was only the BATHROOM sink which she used for food prep. That can be down rich unsanitary. I know it's judgmental to say it…but these people are not right in the head.

 

 

 I've noticed just the opposite…in all of the shows I've seen, no has said anything at all about having people over. So my question was going to be ----do they ever plan to have anyone over?….WHERE would the person sleep? On the damned floor? In the show with the family with kids…. there was no room for THEM to sleep -- and the mom was washing and prepping food in the effing bathroom for goodness sake.

Who the hell would WANT to go over there….where would you sit to eat the bathroom prepped food?

I've seen the Florida couple with the two kids in the shipping container a few times.  I still don't get it.  No way are they living in that full time.  No way.  There is zero storage, no kitchen and the two kids are sharing a bed above the parents?  Yeah right.  The siblings aren't going to want to share their space for long - - and it's one thing to share a bedroom with each having a twin bed but to put both of them in the same bunk?  No.  Where do these nitwits hang out when it's raining outside?  The only place to sit is on the bed or maybe in the shower.   That bathroom has zero privacy which, again, is ridiculous.  It's not like the kids are tiny.  I would have to unfriend these fools if they were my friends and expected me to come over and hang out in some container.  I don't think so. 

 

The old episade that aired tonight that showed the younger womn spend $59,000 because living in a 2 bedroom was just "too" much and than parked on her parts extremely large property with their 6,000 ft plus house was everything wrong with this stupid ass movement.

 

I know Seattle is expensive but surely she could find a small condo for $60k outside of Seattle?   I just don't see the logic in spending that kind of money for something that isn't likely to appreciate.  How often is she planning on driving around?  What do these people do that allows them to be on the road constantly?  Then this person parks her tiny home on wheels in the center of her parents' driveway?  Why on earth didn't she just get an RV or something like that?

 

The 94 square foot micro "home" was insane.  Who would pay $11k for that?    It doesn't seem practical for anyone, much less someone with two cats. 

 

Even the permanent home with the foundation was crazy.  The storage space was good but the kitchen "area" wouldn't even be a kitchenette in my book and the loft space was stupid.  If you're building it with the expectation that it has a foundation, why wouldn't you make enough headroom and space for the loft?  I get why builders are limited with the mobile homes but you aren't limited in the same way with permanent type structures.