Property

  • Erstellt am 2016-09-06 21:12:46

PhiTh

2016-09-08 12:37:02
  • #1


Well, that’s complete nonsense now. Nobody here is talking about speculation that the value of the house will double but rather whether the house will lose value with normal maintenance and care. I have supported this with a real example from my experience and I still believe that you can’t generally say that a house there "loses a lot of value" and is only okay for "living down". You are certainly right that a house in a small village is probably not a "value appreciation object" but that is not its purpose according to my understanding!

My father bought his building plot 30 years ago for 34 DM/m², I have now paid 86 €/m² in the same village. Just as building land costs or is worth more today, property prices here in the village have also developed upwards. Basically, today a house on our market for 400,000 € is not unusual, but I strongly doubt that these houses cost 800,000 DM to build 30 years ago. Of course, this varies regionally. My better half comes from the new federal states where some villages are almost dying out and houses that were expensive to build 30 years ago are now sometimes worth nothing. I don’t know the OP’s area but I assume that this is not the case around Gießen.

In my opinion, when deciding village or not village, it also depends on what kind of house you want to build. The higher-priced the house, the harder it will be in the future to find someone willing to pay that price. That is certainly easier in the city. If you build a normal standard, I assume that with normal development the house will also not lose value.
 

Sebastian79

2016-09-08 13:13:27
  • #2
One must say that you, Dirk Grafe, are apparently very "narrow-minded" when it comes to living in the countryside – for whatever reason.

Just as no one can guarantee that a house will be worth twice as much in 30 years, you cannot say that a village location is "catastrophic" for value retention. That's just as unprofessional...

Recently, there was a report that urban flight is perhaps slowly reversing – also because prices are simply no longer affordable there. You more or less tore that apart saying it was just a report...

I would suggest arguing a bit less aggressively, because that seems to be a red line for you. And that has nothing to do with "I just want to help people from themselves" ;).

Of course, I am writing this subjectively because I consciously chose to live in a village... since then, by the way, growth in the village regarding new buildings has "massively" increased compared to previous years ;)
 

DG

2016-09-08 23:40:43
  • #3


Yes – and when I look at your example for 3 minutes from a professional point of view, I see 10 points where the examples are not comparable or your basic claim is not correct.

That’s not a problem, laypeople have every right to have no idea. But this is not about opinions, it’s about valuation. Valuation is indeed influenced by opinions and interpretations – but you can’t turn a workhorse into a racehorse. And Besperde is simply a workhorse, you can tell that just by looking at the standard land value.



It’s not about opinion. If the maximum standard land value in the town is €80, then there are reasons for that. There is a current thread here in the forum where a prospective buyer wants to offer €1300/m² for a building plot, but expects not to get it for under €1400/m². Do you seriously want to discuss whether these two comparable values represent different demand levels?



Let’s assume that is actually the case (although I would have 10 immediate questions about your example that you won’t be able to answer on the spot, so your statement is not supported), then that’s the development … for YOU. That says absolutely nothing about the development in Besperde, as long as one doesn’t even know where your house or your father’s house is located!?



Which is nonsense anyway, because the houses 30 years ago would have had to be worth €400,000 / 1.025^30 = about €200,000, which corresponds to about 400,000 DM. Maintenance/depreciation through wear and tear also doesn’t seem to exist with you – so you have to ask how much should have been invested in a 400,000 DM house in the last 30 years for it to be worth €400,000 today?



Correct. What is (almost) not regionally different, however, is a standard land value of €80. €80 is a (upmarket) village. Period. End of story.

You will not find a spot in Germany where you can buy a building plot in a pure residential area for detached single-family houses for €80 – and at the same time have a street-/S-Bahn connection within walking distance.



What is shocking about this is only that you obviously know the procedure but exclude the risk for Besperde. That is negligent – the scenario you know from the new federal states is definitely real for Besperde. I have no idea how one can ignore that!? If Besperde cannot keep pace with other communities/places in the area, then the town will die permanently – how else do you explain that there is a development area with freshly developed plots that haven’t been sold for several years (!!!)?



If you built a normal standard 30 years ago in the “wrong” place, you are already ruined today or limited to living it down yourself – even in the “West.” There are developments that were built 30-40 years ago and today there is a ghost town with empty houses.

You have to keep that in mind and communicate it, even if it hurts – the TE is asking an absolutely legitimate question, namely about the retention of value of a possible plot in the location mentioned. To answer that you can nicely build there for €400,000 and that in 30 years you can most certainly or very likely expect “double” (less inflation) in value retention (!) is …

… simply put: Nonsense.

Anyone buying a building plot in Besperde these days has to want to live there or have/realize a special strategic location advantage. Anyone who only aims for value retention there is wrong. Value appreciation is simply a risky gamble.

Best regards
Dirk Grafe
 

DG

2016-09-09 00:15:19
  • #4


By no means. I grew up in the village, live (centrally) in a small town, and deal with "village" professionally every day. Village life also has advantages, but you shouldn't tell people who come from Canada and have "unlearned" how things work in Germany over several years that "village" = "value retention" just because there's coincidentally a highway exit there. That's just as stupid as explaining to people that you no longer need a LAN cable because there is Wi-Fi. At that point, you are - quite rightly - uncompromising because that is nonsense too.



No. We can make a short-term bet on the value retention of a square meter in Besperde. Notarized, each of us deposits €1000 into an escrow account, in 30 years we will compare how Besperde has performed compared to any high-price index.

The winner takes it all, the loser pays the notary fees - you will lose at least 99.5%.

I know you don't understand that, but I still have to point it out to the OP. Just as you have to point out to users that Wi-Fi is not the same as LAN.



I did not dissect the report but pointed out that the report must be viewed in detail: you have to look closely at which village is gaining new residents - and which is not. And most importantly... why are people a) leaving and b) going where specifically?

A short report in Der Spiegel can’t deliver that, especially since the article also mentioned a departure from Hamburg (artist couple) due to cost reasons (so they actually didn’t want to leave Hamburg, but could no longer find affordable housing for themselves), while at the same time there is still an increasing graph for Hamburg in the article. Because outflow is still more than compensated by migration/refugees.



I am aware that I write aggressively/provocatively - but it's simply not acceptable to sell village life to an OP who comes from Canada and is used to a completely different mindset in Germany and then link that to double returns at the same time.

That is irresponsible, and highly so.

Whoever wants village life and knows what they are getting into can also gladly buy in the village. As I said, I grew up in the village, I know what village life is. But I also know what it is not.

Best regards
Dirk Grafe
 

haydee

2016-09-09 12:03:18
  • #5
Also think that maintaining value in a village will be difficult. Unless it is so close to the commuter belt of a city that it is only a matter of time before the S-Bahn stops nearby.

We have everything in the village. School, daycare, after-school care, kindergarten, library, doctors, banks, supermarkets, gas station, hairdresser, 1 cafe, 1 pub, 1 pizzeria, bakery, playground, basketball hoops, quarter pipes, tennis, soccer, etc,
10 minutes to the highway, 15 minutes to the next city
and we have an incredible vacancy of properties 40 years and older.

We build there – when the demolition thing finally works out – because it suits us. However, I don’t believe the vacancy will decrease in the next 30, 40 years.
The conditions are not right. When I look at my old elementary school class, half have moved away
 

Bava

2016-09-09 20:45:25
  • #6
I think only the location matters. I live in a real village: about 400 inhabitants, a church and a pub, nothing else. No baker, no supermarket, no bank, no highway connection, nothing. No public transport except school buses. The nearest town (20,000 inhabitants) is 3 km away and there is a hill in between that makes cycling difficult. You need a car for almost everything and the young people have a moped or scooter as soon as possible. The nearest highway entrance is 20 minutes away.

But the place is "booming", every free building plot is currently being developed and new land is being opened up. We have gained many families in recent years. The reason: We are located between Augsburg and Munich and especially more and more people from Munich are moving to our area and also to our very rural but also very idyllic village.
I was born in the village and even when I lived in Munich I always wanted to come back here and never build anywhere else. The other young people from our village also like to stay here. The disadvantage of the "boom" for us locals: We often can no longer afford to build here. So it is common for us to expand the parents’ house or build on the parental property (my option). But I just want to live here and the future value of my house doesn't matter to me.
 

Similar topics
15.02.2012Total cost for house 130,000 plot 70,00013
25.02.2015Low standard land value: potential problem in property valuation?26
14.02.2018Is meter removal or meter rental during vacancy legal? No!38
29.08.2015Buy building plot and budget planning for a semi-detached house12
23.11.2015Land value too low - therefore no approval for construction financing79
07.03.2017Building plot in the 2nd row with a narrow driveway13
12.04.2017Standard land value and hillside property11
04.01.2019Which building plot to choose from 2 options?43
18.12.2018Meaningful financing - building plot, new construction separate22
23.05.2019Building site, how do you see the chances?31
04.05.2019Property with a price significantly higher than the standard land value23
06.11.2019Is the standard land value for a building plot in a private sale binding?14
27.12.2020Construction site: high noise level and flood area30
21.07.2021Which building plot would you prefer?18
17.08.2021Land Market Price vs Land Guideline Value40

Oben