I was forwarded this article recently that talked about how I San Francisco it is extremely expensive to own any kind of property let alone simply trying to find a place to rent. To illustrate this point, there was this property as you can see which was listed at $350,000. As you can tell, the property itself is not in a condition for people to live in.
I’m not sure if this is just in a wealthy area to sensationalize the point of course since I don’t live there to understand what the prices are, but this made me think of a topic that came up about real estate. Essentially, from an investment point of view whenever you make big purchases like this it should be more about the land you buy as oppose to the house itself. As an example, you could purchase something as simple as an older two level condo in a good area only to then have a company want to pay you say three times the value of the place because they want to build a large modern day condo with like twenty floors. Like there, the value was more about the land itself.
I would wonder if in this case as an example you could just haggle the price if this “house” was actually a large factor in the pricing. I suppose it’s a good point to keep in mind since a lot of people consider their homes as an investment which they would want to sell later for more money. In this example too, it makes me wonder how much it would cost you to build a home like a tiny one.