How come this house is till on the market

[Anonymous]

There's barely any wall space in the MBR. Where would I put my dresser and armoire? The windows and fireplace take up all of the space.

[Anonymous]

Definitely priced too high.

Agree that the couch is ugly but presumably it doesn't convey. I was watching one of those house hunter shows on cable yesterday (rainy day on vacation) and just laugh at how silly some of the comments are. One person didn't like a house because they didn't like a bookshelf in a room. Another really liked the rattan chairs (that did convey). Seriously - buy a house to get some cheap rattan chairs? It is amazing what people react to so maybe the dated furnishings in the house don't help.

[Anonymous]

Tacky and tasteless.

[Anonymous]

On the off chance it's serious, because it's two fucking million dollars, and there aren't too many prospective buyers at that price range. Plus, it's buile like a pillbox, is close to $500/sq. foot, is pretty unwalkable (if I'm living in the city, I want to be able to get SOMEWHERE without getting in my car). And you'r paying more that $600,000 per bedroom. And full bath.

And the idiot sellers haven;t gotten the memo about housing prices, because thet still think they shoudl be able to sell it for more than they paid for it in 2007.

[Anonymous]

Because this owner is out of touch with reality. They bought the house in April 2007 close to the height of the market at $1.81M. Now they want to sell it at 2-3 years into a recession and a housing market crash for $1.895M. I would like to know if they really think they put in $200K into the house because during that time, you'll be lucky if you get 50.c back for every $1. In any event, they, along with many others, are living in the market they bought in, not in the current reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because Foxhall Crescent homes were built in the 1980s and they are so distinctively stuck in the 1980s. People make fun of them. And there's really no way to update the facades.

Also, even though it has a quarter-acre, the backyard looks unusable for kids.

This. That house - both exterior and interior - looks totally "Dynasty" for me.

You would have to change your names to Alexis and Blake if you bought the house.

[Anonymous]

Gag! You would have to pay me to live in it.

[Anonymous]

Yes there are just less buyers for the $2M pricepoint. Many people during the boom times were buying the properties in this price range using jumbo mortgages- there is less willingness, and less wherewithal, to take on that debt now.

My biggest reaction by far though, was, why in the world did they put the two-car garage on the facade?? It should be a detached garage hidden in the back, or with the garage bays to the side of the house so they aren't visible. It is a travesty to have the garage bays in front, even in a middle-class type house on a smaller lot--- much less a house that is trying so hard to be fancy.

Mainly, the house is trying too hard to be fancy. A house of this style would never feel like home to me. I grew up in a colonial house, and had a happy time growing up, so that is what I gravitate towards- plus that is organic to this country... I would never feel comfortable in the super-fancy, french embassy style home. It isn't me and it isn't most people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because Foxhall Crescent homes were built in the 1980s and they are so distinctively stuck in the 1980s. People make fun of them. And there's really no way to update the facades.

Also, even though it has a quarter-acre, the backyard looks unusable for kids.

Actually, people made fun of the "Foxhall Crescents" houses in the 80's. I knew someone who bought one when it was new, and we thought it was ugly and pretentious. If you haven't driven through there, the houses are all crammed in, and the yards are unusable. You can definitely get a much nicer house in that area for $2 million.

[Anonymous]

Overpriced museum

[Anonymous]

It's expensive, not homey, and stuck in the 1980s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes there are just less buyers for the $2M pricepoint. Many people during the boom times were buying the properties in this price range using jumbo mortgages- there is less willingness, and less wherewithal, to take on that debt now.

My biggest reaction by far though, was, why in the world did they put the two-car garage on the facade?? It should be a detached garage hidden in the back, or with the garage bays to the side of the house so they aren't visible. It is a travesty to have the garage bays in front, even in a middle-class type house on a smaller lot--- much less a house that is trying so hard to be fancy.

Mainly, the house is trying too hard to be fancy. A house of this style would never feel like home to me. I grew up in a colonial house, and had a happy time growing up, so that is what I gravitate towards- plus that is organic to this country... I would never feel comfortable in the super-fancy, french embassy style home. It isn't me and it isn't most people.

Where to begin?! Yes, it's all of this. It's also not even well-done (regardless of the furnishings) for whatever style (French embassy or otherwise) that's it's trying to emulate. Even though I'm a cottage, colonial, traditional sort of person, I can appreciate other styles. The facade of this home is falling far short of attractive.

[Anonymous]

Because it's butt-ugly.

[Anonymous]

B/c no one wants to live in Foxhall Crescent! As others have said, it is tacky, ugly, and the joke of that area.

[Anonymous]

It's decorated and too "customized" for the home owner. Buyers don't want something so "personalized".

I assume there are no problems with foundation, liens, or other home inspection issues that would make it a huge turnoff?