What would it take for you to move?

[jpg7n16]

As part of a discussion in another thread, I came up with a scenario that if someone owned a house worth $350k, and "knew" that the value would fall to $200k in the near future; that would be equivalent to someone offering you $150,000 to sell now.

So I posed the question: if I gave you $150,000 would you rent for two years?

And surprisingly, the 1st two answer i got were "nope."


So... how much would someone have to give you to sell your house (you can keep whatever it sells for minus the mortgage owed) and then rent for 2 years?


I'd probably do it for $30-40k, and would be all over $150,000!



People would buy homes for $7500 in tax rebates, what does it take to get them to sell homes?

[jIM_Ohio]

JPG-

I would expect people's responses to change depending on 3 factors

1) what they would do with the money
2) if they have kids which need a specific location (like friends, car pools or amenities)
3) the specific location (some properties are not worth selling)


In my situation, I would sell for a 1k profit in this market (I am under water, so any move to get money out of my house helps my situation).

I have a friend which was offered 50k per acre for 25 acres (1.25 M total) and he laughed at the offer (see item #3 above). He has no neighbors and life at his house is peaceful- bonfires, a nice 280k house on a corner of that plot, and lots of trails to explore.

In 5 years, moving for me becomes tough, as my kids will be in school, and it's highly probable moving would disrupt car pools, babysitters and similar. Those are issues which are tough to put a price on. I make new friends easily, but a 7 yo might have a different perspective.

[cjscully]

I think there are other non-financial factors involved in addition to what's already been mentioned.
- Utter hatred of moving. Therefore will not move unless you HAVE TO.
- Some sort of emotional attachment to the property. Such as you're living in the house you grew up in.

[jpg7n16]

See I would think the value of the home is a big part of it too. But most people don't own a $1 million home. I'd think most people are between $150k-400k. Which $150,000 incentive to move is huge.

You can always find a place to rent nearby. I'm not saying you have to move across country, just out of the house. Rent the house down the street for all I care.


As far as emotional attachment goes, that's what I'm trying to see How much emotional attachment do people have to a home?

Jim's friend above had very high emotional attachment, but I would bet that if offered $1 billion for the property, he'd sell it. That's obviously too high, and $1.25M was too low. But somewhere in the middle is the point at which you can put a value on his emotional attachment.

In the end, emotional attachment is 90+% of the reason. Obv some have houses equipped for disabilities, special wheelchairs, elevators - those things are harder to replace. But for most people, the only things keeping you in your house are the emotions of it all.


I just can't really understand someone in a normal situation with a $200k house, not taking an offer to sell it for $200k, if they got a $150k bonus on top - and only required to rent for 2 years.



You can all tell, my emotional attachment to a house is very low

[MonkeyMama]

I think that an extreme aversion to moving, along with a strong desire to stay in one place, will trump the money for me, any day.

We could have sold our home for over twice what we paid for it ($300k+ profit), just before the real estate bust, but we chose not to. We bought a home so that we could stay in one place. (Though we did consider it at $400k profit, admittedly).

My #1 problem with renting is being forced to move so often. (Really bad where I live - in the boom landlords constantly sold and in the bust they constantly foreclose).

I find it hard to put a price on stability.

I honestly think the stability means more to me than anything. I don't feel emotionally attached to the house in a huge sense. It's what we want, for now, but we actually have no plans to keep it once our kids are grown, either. Logically and emotionally I feel that houses come and go. BUT, with all I have invested in this house, money isn't really going to sway me to just leave it. WE spent all this effort to customize it just how we want - in a very frugal manner. To start over that whole process again does not sound appealing to me in the least.

Our home is semi-custom, and we actually have done a lot of house hunting since living here (When the market bust, land was cheap for a while and we were seriously considering a lateral financial move to more space and land). I think it's that experience, plus how hard it was to find this house in the first place, which sways my decision. I don't have a run-of-the-mill house. If I did, I wouldn't be so attached to staying here. If all I Wanted was a couple of bedrooms, baths, and a kitchen, I'd be happy anywhere. Instead, we looked at hundreds of homes, and nothing was as "perfect" for us as what we already have.

[MonkeyMama]

P.S. My hatred of moving is strong enough that we bought a 5-bedroom house, long before we planned to have kids. I know a lot of people thought we were crazy, but I didn't want to move again and pay realtors fees, moving expenses, and all that jazz if I didn't have to! (Financially, it wasn't a stretch at all - so might as well get what we wanted for the long haul, and be settled).

[greenskeeper]

This is an interesting question because a fellow I work with was offered something similar.

His house which is a 1800's school house with a modern addition (late 70s) sits on an ideal plot of land if the surrounding area was ever to be developed.

The owner of the surrounding land offered him $200,000 and he could live there rent free until he needed the property.

The house is barely worth $100k including the land itself.

He passed on the deal and now is struggling to find a buyer, mainly because the house would need to be razed because it would cost too much to repair.

[cypher1]

I just can't really understand someone in a normal situation with a $200k house, not taking an offer to sell it for $200k, if they got a $150k bonus on top - and only required to rent for 2 years.

I'd take that offer in a heartbeat, bonus or not! Being a new home owner under 2 years,only debt is mortgage (210k), not under yet. I love my house after the projects I've done, location, and convenience for work (for now). But no matter what I've put into it for labor, furniture in preference, I have no hesitation to taking a sale right now. Then again I'm single, no kids, but with 2 renters (extra income is nice). Although I hate the idea of moving all over, everyone has a price to sell. Everyone.
Heck, if my employer were to re=locate me out of state, pay for expenses to move, and sell my house for me, I'd probably take it, depending on the location, even if it meant a 1 yr mandatory contract. No mortgage, but renting would enable me no debt, more income to invest, and more mobility. Plus my 6mo EF would drop significantly to probably half, or = 12mo.

[cypher1]

P.S. My hatred of moving is strong enough that we bought a 5-bedroom house, long before we planned to have kids. I know a lot of people thought we were crazy, but I didn't want to move again and pay realtors fees, moving expenses, and all that jazz if I didn't have to! (Financially, it wasn't a stretch at all - so might as well get what we wanted for the long haul, and be settled).

I can totally relate to that statement. A 4 bedroom was over kill for just me, but I always kept family concept in the far back of my mind. Expensive decision, but still a factor for more than 5+ years down the road. I've helped enough family and friends move to know what I don't want to do every 12 months.

[disneysteve]

I don't know that I'm emotionally attached to my house any more than the next guy. Sometimes, the place is a money pit and a pain in the rear. But it is ours and has been for over 16 years now. Despite my decluttering thread, we have a TON of stuff here and the thought of moving it all, and then doing it all again 2 years later, is all the deterrent I need to stay where I am.

I do not agree with the whole "starter home" concept and folks who constantly trade up. My parents bought their house in 1955 and my mom sold it to go into a senior apartment in 2006. We bought our place in 1994 and plan to stay here at least until retirement. Even then, we might keep it and be snowbirds if there are ties keeping us linked to the local area.

How much would it cost to buy me out, have us rent for 2 years and then move again? Tough question. I know my daughter is very bad at dealing with change and she is having some emotional issues right now as it is, so uprooting her just for money would be very low on my list of things to do right now. If we were to consider it, we'd have to be able to rent a place in our development to disrupt her lifestyle as little as possible. My wife probably wouldn't mind if the place we went to was in better shape, had a dry basement, a bigger kitchen and better insulation. Me, I'm the easy one. I could live in a tent if I had to. It is the packing and moving that would stop me. Just doing that would take us weeks working every spare moment of every day.

It would have to be a truly life-altering amount of money and honestly 150K, while a nice chunk of change, doesn't really qualify for us. Sure, it would pay for college but still, not life-altering. I'd have to say something more like $500,000 would definitely get me seriously thinking about it. I'll have to ask my wife this question and see what she says.

[kork13]

It wouldn't take much at all to get me to move. In fairness, being in the military, it literally only takes a new set of orders for me to move... But beyond that even, I just don't really see the hesitation of so many people against moving and living elsewhere. All my life, my family and I have moved around the globe, from Europe to Asia to the dead center of the US, living in a single place for as long as 7 years, and as short as 9 months. Perhaps I view life differently, but I see moving to a new location as an opportunity -- for new experiences, new adventures, new friends, new sights, and new stories.

My family has mostly always rented, but we have also purchased homes in a couple places. One was sold once we moved, another is even still being rented out, another is being lived in currently, and another sits vacant while repairs/upgrades are made. My family is by no means wealthy (mother a teacher, father a meteorologist, 1 brother in college, 1 in high school, only myself on my own and in the military), but it has never been totally about the money. Each new home, and each new location, has been about simply living in and enjoying the place where you live. Is my family one of vagabonds, making home wherever the winds may take us? Perhaps. But we've enjoyed it, and no one in my family has ever begrudged moving elsewhere (at least, not for long).

So what would it take? The promise of new and enjoyable experiences and opportunities in the future, which includes a means to care for my family. That's all.

[maat55]

I'm not married to my home, but my wife has no interest in renting. I personally, think the market will be lower in two years, so I do see an advantage to selling now and buying later, depending on your area. Where I live, home prices have not dropped much if any.

[scfr]

Hell yea, I would. And I have. Twice.

Sold our first home (a condo) in order to rent super cheap and get ready financially for my husband to quit his salaried job & start his own business. Rented for 3-1/2 years, during the prep & startup phases of the business.

Sold our second home (a house) because we thought the market was unsustainably high. Rode out much of the downturn in rentals (another 3-plus years) and relocated to a lower cost area.

Been in our current home 1-1/2 years, and who knows what the future holds?

Gee - renting is NOT the end of the world! When we were renting we knew that it was for the "greater good" (financial security) so we really did not mind. I estimate that we have shaved at least 10 years off of the number of years we will have to work because we were willing to make the moves we did.

Then again ... I'm one of those "crazy" people who views a house as both a home AND an investment. That means I'm willing to look at home ownership with an unemotional eye as far as the finances are concerned.

Don't get me wrong, I do love my house (and loved my previous house & condo too). And yes, moving is a total pain in the you-know-what, but sometimes it's just the smart thing to do.

And besides ... moving (especially moving long-distance) is the ultimate decluttering exercise!

[disneysteve]

Gee - renting is NOT the end of the world!

Absolutely. I have nothing at all against renting. That isn't my problem with this "what if" scenario. I rented for 7 years in med school and residency and then my wife and I rented for nearly 2 years after we got married. The fact that jpg's offer involves renting for 2 years wouldn't bother me at all.

[Seeker]

As part of a discussion in another thread, I came up with a scenario that if someone owned a house worth $350k, and "knew" that the value would fall to $200k in the near future; that would be equivalent to someone offering you $150,000 to sell now.

So I posed the question: if I gave you $150,000 would you rent for two years?

And surprisingly, the 1st two answer i got were "nope."

So... how much would someone have to give you to sell your house (you can keep whatever it sells for minus the mortgage owed) and then rent for 2 years?

I'd probably do it for $30-40k, and would be all over $150,000!

People would buy homes for $7500 in tax rebates, what does it take to get them to sell homes?

If i "knew" that the value would fall to a tune of $150k, yes, I might sell, take your 150k and rent for two years. But the reality is that I couldn't know.

If it were closer to retirement for us, I'd do this in a heartbeat like say two years before retirement . Even not knowing what the future value of the condo would be. This I might compromise with us preparing for the retirement and lightening the load of "stuff" to move when we do retire and making us less pressured to accept any offer on our home.

Like MM, DS and all the rest, I absolutely hate the entire process of "moving."

Renting is fine, with decent prices, which as previsouly stated, California is a difficult area for renters. Just too many people here.

But in response:
If I were closer to retirement say two or three years max, then I'd consider 150k.
If, as now, we are looking at 15+ more years, then no I'd probably forego the offer as well.

The second part of your question.... how much would it take? I think 500k would be enough to trouble me to move out before I'd really need to do so, or would want to do so. For 500k now, I'd sell and move now.