Developers, home flippers - please stop with the luxury vinyl planks on main levels

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LVP is appropriate at that price point.

It absolutely is not.

What exactly are you expecting at $600K in a hot market? Granite floors? Hardwoods that cost around $25,000 for 2,000 square feet?

Other homes that did sell in that area are posted above without LVP. It's possible.

the house with LVP that OP posted is 4 beds 2 baths, 1,700 sq ft. The comparably priced houses in Springfield PP posted are 4 beds, 3.5 baths, 2,500 sq ft 4 beds 2.5 baths and 3,300 sq ft. Both of those houses will be gut jobs. I don't think you'll find a flip at this price point in Springfield without either LVP or the original floors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The DC housing market has broken most of you. $650 may be a starter home in this area, but it is not so cheap that they can’t afford hardwood. It’s still a relatively small portion of the overall cost of the house. In huge swaths of the US, starter homes are in the $250 range, and those may have LVT, but many will have tile or engineered wood. In those areas, any house over $350k would have engineered hardwood, and over $400k would have real wood.

I do wonder if covid lumber shortages may change this for everyone, though. It may be a question of availability, rather than cost.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You want actual hardwood floors there's nothing stopping you from paying for them?

LVP costs $4 per square foot. Hardwood is $10 per square foot.

And LVP is awful for the environment. If people rip it out, it’s even more wasteful. It’s so gross.

Oh please. That's such an annoying classist thing to say. Are you saying the same to the wealthy folks who are tearing out perfectly serviceable kitchens in order to put in fancier stuff?

Or even worse, tearing down perfectly good 50 year old homes to build their monstrosities.

Yes, I also have concerns about people ripping out functional kitchens solely for cosmetic purposes or tearing down liveable homes just to put up something bigger.

Disliking vinyl is not classist. There are other greener, affordable options like cork, linoleum, and some types of carpet. I think a lot of people aren’t aware that it’s not good for the environment, so ultimately I blame flippers and the large rental buildings who seem to churn this stuff out more than the average consumer who is probably not as knowledgeable about flooring materials. This thread is about a flip, which is why I made this comment..

Also, I live in a smaller, older home and am repairing/replacing things as they break. No need to tear down and build a behemoth house. I find a lot of housing choices in our country to be wasteful and bad for the environment.

I had a cork kitchen floor. After a year, it displayed a dent for every pan that was ever dropped on it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LVP is appropriate at that price point.

It absolutely is not.

What exactly are you expecting at $600K in a hot market? Granite floors? Hardwoods that cost around $25,000 for 2,000 square feet?

Other homes that did sell in that area are posted above without LVP. It's possible.

the house with LVP that OP posted is 4 beds 2 baths, 1,700 sq ft. The comparably priced houses in Springfield PP posted are 4 beds, 3.5 baths, 2,500 sq ft 4 beds 2.5 baths and 3,300 sq ft. Both of those houses will be gut jobs. I don't think you'll find a flip at this price point in Springfield without either LVP or the original floors

But they aren't gut jobs, they are preferable vs a badly done flip with LVP flooring. Meh. It's such a turn off, a less fixed up home is preferable.

[Anonymous]

Luxury and vinyl are a contradiction in terms, especially for the environment.




So no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LVP is appropriate at that price point.

It absolutely is not.

What exactly are you expecting at $600K in a hot market? Granite floors? Hardwoods that cost around $25,000 for 2,000 square feet?

Other homes that did sell in that area are posted above without LVP. It's possible.

the house with LVP that OP posted is 4 beds 2 baths, 1,700 sq ft. The comparably priced houses in Springfield PP posted are 4 beds, 3.5 baths, 2,500 sq ft 4 beds 2.5 baths and 3,300 sq ft. Both of those houses will be gut jobs. I don't think you'll find a flip at this price point in Springfield without either LVP or the original floors

Gut jobs? What planet do you live on? Not mine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You want actual hardwood floors there's nothing stopping you from paying for them?

LVP costs $4 per square foot. Hardwood is $10 per square foot.

And LVP is awful for the environment. If people rip it out, it’s even more wasteful. It’s so gross.

Oh please. That's such an annoying classist thing to say. Are you saying the same to the wealthy folks who are tearing out perfectly serviceable kitchens in order to put in fancier stuff?

Or even worse, tearing down perfectly good 50 year old homes to build their monstrosities.

Yes, I also have concerns about people ripping out functional kitchens solely for cosmetic purposes or tearing down liveable homes just to put up something bigger.

Disliking vinyl is not classist. There are other greener, affordable options like cork, linoleum, and some types of carpet. I think a lot of people aren’t aware that it’s not good for the environment, so ultimately I blame flippers and the large rental buildings who seem to churn this stuff out more than the average consumer who is probably not as knowledgeable about flooring materials. This thread is about a flip, which is why I made this comment..

Also, I live in a smaller, older home and am repairing/replacing things as they break. No need to tear down and build a behemoth house. I find a lot of housing choices in our country to be wasteful and bad for the environment.

I am the one who said that this was classist - and I agree that lots of housing choices are bad for the environment. It just seems strange to single out LVP as the thing to harp on, in this tear out and throw out society. There are obvious reasons why people use it, and they may not be able to use cork or carpet, and I just cannot imagine who is putting lino into a flip when they have to appeal to as many people as possible.

Think of it this way - this was a good choice for the environment in the sense that no one tore down the house altogether, but just made some changes to an existing structure.

[Anonymous]

This whole thread is classic DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LVP is appropriate at that price point.

It absolutely is not.

What exactly are you expecting at $600K in a hot market? Granite floors? Hardwoods that cost around $25,000 for 2,000 square feet?

Other homes that did sell in that area are posted above without LVP. It's possible.

the house with LVP that OP posted is 4 beds 2 baths, 1,700 sq ft. The comparably priced houses in Springfield PP posted are 4 beds, 3.5 baths, 2,500 sq ft 4 beds 2.5 baths and 3,300 sq ft. Both of those houses will be gut jobs. I don't think you'll find a flip at this price point in Springfield without either LVP or the original floors

Gut jobs? What planet do you live on? Not mine.

Seriously, that was quite amusing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd have continued the hardwoods down from the upstairs, really wouldn't have cost much for that one floor.

That said, the fact that it is LVP is less annoying than the fact that it is ugly LVP, and the wrong color.

Yes! There is a huge variety of LVP, some ugly, some (imo) beautiful.

When I was renovating my modest house, I ended up with LVP because I couldn't find an engineered hardwood (because I'm on a cement slab) with the look I wanted -- wide plank, light white oak, no sheen. That was popular on design blogs, but no local stores or contractors I spoke to had any idea where to source it. But then I found exactly what I wanted in LVP for -- bonus! -- $1.97 per sf. Here's a pic (with my dog blurred out).

[Anonymous]

^ 16:43 again. But I will admit there are some spots in the house where the installers repeated patterns too close to each other. I wish I'd been aware of that so I could've overseen that better. But thankfully those spots aren't super-obvious. (I hope I'm not the friend a PP was talking about!)

[Anonymous]

It looks nice in pictures, but I find it unsettling in person. An uncanny valley thing, I guess.

[Anonymous]

We have them in our 1m beach house but the better kinds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It looks nice in pictures, but I find it unsettling in person. An uncanny valley thing, I guess.

Why unsettling? Is it the look or the feel?

NV Homes is no longer offering hardwood in many of their developments, solely Rigid Core LVP (or carpet). As a PP said, I think it’s due to lack of availability rather than cost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was looking at some new builds with LVP all through. Why would anyone do that? Immediate no from me.

$5 a sq ft vs $20 a sq ft. That money is either profit, more room to negotiate price, or going towards fixtures and finishes that buyers care more about. They wouldn't do it if it didn't make sense for them financially

You can get decent engineered hardwood form Kahrs for the same price. LVP is trash. I don't want to have to immediately redo the flooring when I move in somewhere.