What is easy to sell - 1BR or 2BR condo

[gekkoplus]

I am interested in knowing market for 1BR condos in comparison with 2BR condos. Which one is easy to sell given they are priced at their current market value?

[MonkeyMama]

The answer to this question can vary quite dramatically based on the market, location, and year.

So I can't say I could answer that question.

In general, I would venture to guess that a 2-bedroom would fare better. But it gets real sticky. Way too many variables. If the price differential between a small house and a 2-bedroom condo is small, then maybe the 1-bedroom would be better. ??? Are there a lot of college students in the area? Retirees?

I frankly wouldn't buy a condo in most US markets. Except for the HCOL areas (the long-term HCOLAs, not the bubbles). I did own a condo in San Francisco in 2000/2001. One bedrooms were just as hot as 2 (we lucked out with 3!)

The market's been so wacky in No. CA though, I have seen it go every which way since... (Why I say it depends on the year...)

[thegoat]

The more bedrooms the better usually...also look for something with at least 1 1/2 bathrooms too...that helps the value or a place where you might be able to put in a 1/2 bath easily if there is only 1 bath.

[gekkoplus]

Well I am eyeing on 1 and 2 bedroom condos priced at 300K and 450K respectively. This is in San Jose (West) area. I want to sell it after 5 years or so.

[Snave]

I would echo that 2 bedrooms are better than one. Think about it this way: a single person or couple that use only one bedroom can always live in a a 2-bedroom, but there is little chance that someone that needs 2-bedrooms will live in a 1-bedroom home. You severly cut the potential buyers if you go with a 1-bedroom. If you can afford it, buy the two.

[disneysteve]

I want to sell it after 5 years or so.

I know this came up in another thread recently, but I wouldn't buy any property with that short a timeline. Too many expenses involved in buying, selling, moving. Too many risks involved such as not being able to sell when the time comes, incurring costly repairs during your short ownership period that you don't recoup when you sell, etc.

If you only plan to be there 5 years, I'd seriously consider renting.

[Gailete]

I can't even fathom paying that much for a one or two bedroom place. For that kind of money I expect 5 Bedrooms 3baths and swimming pool!

In todays market a 5 year time frame I think is tight. It is currently a buyer's market. How long that will last and how much potential for an increase in value in that kind of time span is hard to judge.

I think the question should be what can you truly afford? If you don't have a 20% downpayment you are already looking at a place that is more than you can afford as anything less than 20% means you are also paying the PMI. For the house I just sold that was $60K when I bought it, I paid about $40? a month and was glad to get rid of it as soon as I could. I can't imagine how much a PMI would run you on a $300-450K property and that is money that isn't interest, and isn't anything against the principle. It is just required insurance that you have to pay if you don't put enough down. That is just one of many expenses that you won't get back when you sell.

If buying a place for 5 years will save you LOTS of money over renting then I can maybe see it, but I would still stick with what you can afford. 2 bedrooms might be a tad easier to sell but there are still a lot of singles out there that want to own their own home and might only be interested in a 1 bedroom. I know when I was house hunting years ago, it was hard to find something small enough to fit me and my single frugal budget. I know the banks would have let me buy something almost twice as much as I did, but it was a good thing I stuck to my guns as 6 months after buying the property I was on complete disability and could have never afforded the payments on a higher mortgage. Life happens and you need to be prepared for it.

Gail

[maat55]

It's one thing to set a 5 year date to try to sell or to set it to have to sell. If you have to sell, I would not buy, especially at those prices.

Some of you people need to live in Tulsa. You can buy a mansion for those prices.

[LivingAlmostLarge]

2 bedrooms, but we owned a one bedroom in CA and also made a killing. It was just too expensive to own a 2 bedroom and we sold to a single person who couldn't afford more.

[boosami]

I own a 1500 sq ft two bedroom townhome as a rental property in a large Midwest city. I bought it because I figured it would be easier to sell ultimately than a one bedroom. From a marketability standpoint, the two bedroom is the way to go because there are more possibilities of buyers (single folks, small or new families, owner + roomate, etc.)

I decided to sell it and it's been on the market for almost a year. (I'm in no hurry to sell and don't want to drop my price at all.) With the housing market in a slump, the higher price because of the second bedroom is keeping it from selling. At least in my area, affordable one bedrooms are selling much faster than their higher priced doubles. If I wanted to get rid of it ASAP, I'd have to lower the price drastically.

If you plan on hanging onto the property for a while until the market picks up, I'd say the two bedroom is the way to go. If you need the option to sell fast during a slump, go with a more affordable one bedroom.