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

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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.