Is living in a condo considered a failure?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Land appreciates. Buildings depreciate. It's that simple. That's why condos tend to produce less wealth in the long run. That doesn't mean condos in Manhattan aren't valuable in Manhattan. But condos in northern Virginia are garbage.

Fortunately condo owners own an undivided percentage interest in the underlying land.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, plenty of our well off Alexandria friends are downsizing to condos in the DC area as we become empty nesters and near retirement. Condos are great for those starting out and those who don’t want the hassles of home ownership at retirement.

Yes, flushing $3k 4k 5k 6k down the drain in rent every month until you croak is so wise. Avoiding all those "hassles" and making corporate landlords filthy rich.

What rent? You buy a condo just like you buy a house. The monthly fee is for utilities, pool, cleaners, landscaping, emergency fund, etc

The fastest growing sector of "condos" are build-to-RENT by corporate landlord developers. It's a massive racket and frankly all of those parasites should be denied zoning.

I have owned two condos and one was in a building that didn’t permit tenants. Owner occupied only. The other is over 90% owner occupied.

You can ask the condo board about their policies with renters.

Same here. Our board is extremely strict about rentals, and even in a large high rise building we've got a really tight community of awesome neighbors. I grew up in a big house on a really big estate and there's no way I wanted to have all of that management/upkeep for myself. I could have a house if I wanted to, but prefer the ease and comfort of an extremely low-maintenance and low-stress home. Don't let others' snobbery trick you into believing that they are actually somehow better than you. You only get one life - live it for yourself, not to impress the jerks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Land appreciates. Buildings depreciate. It's that simple. That's why condos tend to produce less wealth in the long run. That doesn't mean condos in Manhattan aren't valuable in Manhattan. But condos in northern Virginia are garbage.

Can you imagine living in a condo in a hellhole like London. Total failure at life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You get constant comments? From who? I can't imagine ever having an opinion on this for a family member or friend.

You're in serious denial if you think friends, family, associates and colleagues don't judge you based on where you live and type of house. Especially since they don't even need to ask you to suss it out, takes about five seconds on Google. If you have kids, you don't think other parents want to know where you live and what sort of stature you have? You're dreaming.

I agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Land appreciates. Buildings depreciate. It's that simple. That's why condos tend to produce less wealth in the long run. That doesn't mean condos in Manhattan aren't valuable in Manhattan. But condos in northern Virginia are garbage.

Fortunately condo owners own an undivided percentage interest in the underlying land.

Yes, the tiny, tiny bit of land that underlies the building, divided among many owners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, plenty of our well off Alexandria friends are downsizing to condos in the DC area as we become empty nesters and near retirement. Condos are great for those starting out and those who don’t want the hassles of home ownership at retirement.

Yes, flushing $3k 4k 5k 6k down the drain in rent every month until you croak is so wise. Avoiding all those "hassles" and making corporate landlords filthy rich.

What rent? You buy a condo just like you buy a house. The monthly fee is for utilities, pool, cleaners, landscaping, emergency fund, etc

The fastest growing sector of "condos" are build-to-RENT by corporate landlord developers. It's a massive racket and frankly all of those parasites should be denied zoning.

I have owned two condos and one was in a building that didn’t permit tenants. Owner occupied only. The other is over 90% owner occupied.

You can ask the condo board about their policies with renters.

Same here. Our board is extremely strict about rentals, and even in a large high rise building we've got a really tight community of awesome neighbors. I grew up in a big house on a really big estate and there's no way I wanted to have all of that management/upkeep for myself. I could have a house if I wanted to, but prefer the ease and comfort of an extremely low-maintenance and low-stress home. Don't let others' snobbery trick you into believing that they are actually somehow better than you. You only get one life - live it for yourself, not to impress the jerks.

Look how status obsessed you and PP reveal yourself to be, making it known you live in a "good" upper rung condo free of rental proles. But then you condo dwellers get triggered when folks who can afford a superior SFH look down on you. Pretty funny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Land appreciates. Buildings depreciate. It's that simple. That's why condos tend to produce less wealth in the long run. That doesn't mean condos in Manhattan aren't valuable in Manhattan. But condos in northern Virginia are garbage.

Fortunately condo owners own an undivided percentage interest in the underlying land.

The land value is usually such a small percentage of the overall value of the property that it has a minimal impact on appreciation. Unless a super majority of the HOA agrees to sell the land value is effectively $0.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In NYC there a a handful of small coop buildings down in SOHO where they are on the super expensive blocks for Boutique shopping with some of the highest rent per square feet around. The coop building owns the ground floor and collects the rent.

One building was feature in the NY Times a few years back. It has "negative monthly maintenance" Meaning the commercial rent is higher than cost to run building and owners get a check paid to them each month. That is crazy.
You are mentioning one rare exception to the rule. Most condos in NYC have high fees that are comparable to rent in many parts of the US.

I dont think any single family home could beat that deal.