I would assume a condo would be a better deal for a few reasons.
The property manager would ensure higher quality/repair standards so the condo would be in better shape than a single property home which was run/owned by an individual under less pressure to perform upkeep.
alot of condos are newer than single family homes. When i look at cheap homes (ie, the homes i like) a 28k condo is built circa 1970 and a 28k single family home is build circa 1930.
I dont need luxury or room, just cheapness and something thats not decrepit. A 800 sq. ft. 2 bedroom condo is fine for me. i’d prefer 1400 ft. 3 bedroom or so but thats not a necessity. It is about $15k more though but the extra bedrooms would allow me to sublet if i wanted.
Also, what role does age play in a home’s desirability? I would assume a house built in 1910 would be in worse condition overall but at the same time you’d assume the owner(s) kept it up and revampt it as needed. then again you never know.
Depends also on what you want to do with your spare time: mow the lawn/shovel snow, or enjoy your leisure time. The quality of care of condos is all over the board. It primarily depends on the caliber of the property manager and how well the condo association has managed the funds.
Age is important, but more important is recent upgrades. Age is a factor when considering things like asbestos, aging piping and electrical, etc.
If you are going to buy any property, home or condo, find out when the roof was replaced last, if the electrical has been upgraded, has the boiler/water heater been replaced in the last 20 years (15 for the WH), is there any hazmat in the structure (popcorn ceiling, lead paint, etc.).
By the way, where in the hell are you living that a condo goes for $28K?
Condos are not the problem, condo associations are. Around here, we’ve had condos go without major utilities for long periods of time since the association didn’t pay their part, etc. Just a few days ago in the paper, there was a story about a condo association tacking on an extra $7k fee for major fixes that needed to be done. One person interviewed had an inspector check her unit before she bought it. But not the whole complex. Big mistake. It’ll be cheaper for some people to walk away.
There’s a quote I’ve seen that goes like: Your house is probably the biggest investment you will make in your life, don’t put it in the hands of amateurs.
i live in the midwest, central indiana. Im looking at condos in indiana at places like Bloomington, indianapolis, and surround areas.
Houses & condos start at $8000 in indiana, of course that is for a 1000 sq. ft. built in 1920 but still. 28k is for a semi-decent non decrepit one that was built after the 60s.
The condo v. house choice depends on what you want. Some people really just want an apartment, but want to own rather than rent.
But …
Homes built in the 1930’s were made with real aged timber and plaster walls; condos built in the '70s were probably built with chemically ‘aged’ pine and wall-board; recent condo could be built with ‘engineered’ wood products and wall board with sound insulation. For simple quality of construction, a condo built in the '70s is probably your worst choice.
Give me the single family home anytime. I think that they are more desireable. They hold and appreciate in value more in our area. I like to fix them up, make the yard nice the way we want and there are no neighbors just a wall away.
It depends on what you’re wanting. I’d rather live in a trailer on an acre than in a condo, but I’ve got issues with communal living. I don’t like sitting in my living room and listening to my neighbor’s stereo, or smelling their cooking dinner, or seeing them every time I go to do my laundry. When I come home, I want to be able to get the hell away from people for a while. If that means I’ve got to mow the lawn and rake the leaves and salt the sidewalks, that seems more than fair to me. Other people would do anything to avoid having to do yardwork, and having far less personal space is a fair trade-off to them.
As for the two points mentioned in the OP, those aren’t necessarily the case. Some condos are run pretty crappily, where only the bare minimum is done, and that’s done as cheaply (and often shoddily) as they can get by with. Some single family homes get the best of everything as a long-term investment. You have to investigate each individual condo and each individual house and compare them on a case-by-case basis. Also, newer isn’t always better. Many older houses were built with much higher-quality materials than newer construction. Also, an 80-year-old house has usually had quite a lot of replacements and upgrades, while a 20-year-old house (or condo) often still has all the original stuff and is due for a lot problems.
If you’re looking in Indianapolis, I have a house on the east side I’m trying to sell. Seriously. If you’re vaguely interested, e-mail me; you can get my address from my profile.
Like many have said, a condo is only as good as it’s association.
“Condos combine many of the disadvantages of renting with most of the hazards of hoome ownership”. You can quote me.
As ftg said- the problem is with Condo Associations- often run by retired busybodies who want to interfer in your private live. The horror stories aboud- one owner had to SUE to be allowed to install an airconditioner- after he had his Doc write him a letter explaining it was nessesarry for his health.
One of my freinds had one at the edge of Westwood & Bev Hills. The neighborhood had some crime in it- so the condo assoc- all retired elderly ladies with fairly large sources of indepandent income- voted to install a privaet security system- @$500/mo. he had 2 choice- pay or sell, and the new superhigh condo dues devalued his home so much he had a loss on the sale.
Imagine having a Landlord who was snoopy and a bluenosed busybody- there you have the typical Condo assoc board or manager.
A Condo is a good buy for one classe of buyers- (and THEY need to check out the Condo assoc very carefully)- an “emptynester” that needs to downsize in maint & size, but still wants a “home”.
