Tonight's Property Ladder, Channel 4

Page 1 of 16  
God, didn't you just want to push that woman off the top of her unfinished roof! What was the POINT of this programme?!! I thought it was supposed to be all about making money from property by spending enough, but no more, to do up a tired or dilapidated property, then selling it. Sarah Beeney tried everything to persuade these know-it-alls to revise their plans, yet they not only didn't listen to a word she said, they treated her advice with contempt. You could observe it, most of the time, on the woman's face. And then they had the nerve to say that whether 5,000 or 50,000 profit, it was still a profit! Er, excuse me, Mr & Mrs Property Developer, but there is a 45,000 discrepancy between those two figures, duh!
And then they had to sell their own property to pay for the mismanaged extra work they thought essential - ha bloody ha! Three weeks with friends? How could anyone have stood them for three days?
This show tonight was the nadir of Property Ladder. It was not about making money from property and how to save on costs. It was about a personal tussle between the presenter and some folks who were just not prepared to listen to any advice. And we never did get to hear whether they sold it for half a million or whether, like Colin and Justin found, they are still waiting for the right idiot to come along.
MM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Its just frustrating to watch a people lose money on what could have been a reasonable proposition. Still, its easy to say when you've "gone through the mill". First time round we all make mistakes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, we do. I've made many. But these folks seemed totally unconcerned that they had spent double their original "budget". This is not good business practice. In fact, it's pants.
MM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
But these folks seemed totally unconcerned that they had spent double their original "budget". This is not good business practice. In fact, it's pants.

One thing that made me angry recently was a viewer of our family home, which is up for sale. This woman proceeded to catalogue all her 'special needs' for a house makeover - special taps, marble floors.... I'd almost nooded off by the time she came to lapis-lazuli spittoons. She then expected me to reduce the price of the house by the amount all this garbage would cost her, and put in an offer 60,000 below the price I carefully spelled out for her. Quite deaf to anything that contradicted her.
=== Andy Evans ==Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com Audio, music and health pages and interesting links.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andy Evans wrote:

What counts is what she is prepared to pay and what you are prepared to accept.
The rest is hot air and fluff.
Ive dne teh same: Looked art a crumbling listed cottage, worked out what would be needed to set it right, subtracted that from market value, and offerd 50 grand less than what it was mortgaged for.
Not accepted. Fine. Move on.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But this was their 3rd development in the area (see www.channel4.com)!
Zane.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If they have no employment and therefore no income and having to stay with friends. How do they finance these weird conversions. Note they had an offer of half a million which they rejected (and pigs might fly)It seems apparant the buyer pulled out? Did they ever sell or is this programme a con?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:45:26 -0000, "Peter Coddington"

Do bears shit in the woods?
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

3rd! How on earth did they get past their 1st!
Assuming they got "better" as they went on I'd love to have seen their 1st attempt LOL
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They had the advantage of having expert advise available at all time. They could have learnt from others mistakes and made a lot of money a lot more quickly, still had their house and the them and the buyers would have been happy.
--
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/2003
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It seems that all of these programmes have the same goal in mind, i.e. to make the developers look like idiots. presumably, that is what the programme makers have determined attracts viewers.
I have not seen one version of this type of programme which offers sensible considered information, subsequently put into practice.
As has been said, it would be interesting to see Sarah Beeny and the other "experts", acting as the developers, but perhaps that is not "good television"?
--
Richard Faulkner

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@estate.demon.co.uk says...

To be fair, they generally are idiots, though.
--
Hywel I do not eat quiche
http://hyweljenkins.co.uk /
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hywel Jenkins wrote:

Amateur developers are often idiots. People who do it as a living -- long term, and successfully -- tend to be a lot more rational than that.
--
Cheers,
Harvey
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Harvey Van Sickle wrote:

Darwin. The suilly ones lose money and go back to being management consultants and social wurkahs.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@ntlworld.com says...

None of the people that I've seen on the show seem to realise that they're not development *their* house, but are developing *someone else's* house.
--
Hywel I do not eat quiche
http://hyweljenkins.co.uk /
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hywel Jenkins wrote:

That is because their motivation is not profit, but the realisation of their own ideas.
It took being penniless in a foreign country with no social services to indicate clearly to me the difference between working for yourself, and working for a customer.
And in many ways its just as much fun to bend your skills towards
meeting someone elses design criteria, as your own.
Mind you, spend enough marketng dollars and you can convince the world that what you wanted to produce is what they wanted to buy. See Microsoft.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But would it make good television if the amateurs said, after explaining to Sarah their plans and hearing why she thought they were pants, "You're right, let's do it your way instead"?
Actually, I think it would. And while it would put Sarah in the position of having to prove herself right (positively, as opposed to showing clips of estate agents and prospective buyers echoing her words), it wouldn't really be much of a risk, would it?
Zane.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@albert.wilson.st wrote:

When I sold my business, for really not too bad money, it was handed obver to a sarah like person, who reckoned 'she could have done it so much better'
Withing two years it was on the rocks, and within three was sold off, to a firm who has just sold the dregs of what I built to someone else again.
Subsequently I have seen so many apparently sane people go mad once they had their own propjects to run, especially using other poeples money, that I now realise that the appearance of sanity in business and teh ability to actually achieve a profitable result, are not at all the same thing.
I have a friend of SWMBO's family who runs a substantial building and construction firm. He reckons that 50-7% gross margin is good for the trade. He reckons to achieve that is a question of hard nosed project management, and careful design. Inventiveness and artiness has no place. 99% of customers do not want to live in the millenium dome, but well found properties of flexible layout, and bits that work ON WHICH THEY CAN EASILY IMPOSE THIR OWN STYLE such as it is (not, in most cases).
Big spaces with inteseting features like alcoves and dormers, can be adpated to make amazingly nice rooms. You don't need to make them amazingly nice tho. Leave that to teh buyer. Just spend teh minimum to hint at teh exciting possibilities.
Flattering the ego of the potential buyer ' of course its a very FUNCTIONAL space that you could REALLY add character to by...'
A grotty little bathroom into which a decent bath can never be instrted without seriosu structiral modification has limited appeal. Unless yu can find a rich art fart sucker who thinks its the bees knees.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Except that Sarah Beeny *is* a successful property developer, and her advice on this programme is usually very sound...
G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Exactly. Personally I would like to see how she does it, in the way it should be done.
perhaps the "" around expert made my comment sound sarcastic - it wasnt meant to.
--
Richard Faulkner

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.