The term "developer" has become the favorite euphemism of the news outlets for the cause of all unwanted or undesirable growth. "Developers have plans for a new subdivision on 100 acres of farmland"; "Development causes traffic woes"; and similar headlines are thrown at us every day. Somehow, these reckless destroyers of the landscape are running amok in our community without any regard to the citizens. They are referred to as if they were an evil force bent on destroying the very ground under our feet.
I will be the first to admit that not all who build on speculation are interested in creating lasting quality. And there are, ฝากขายบ้าน without a doubt, a few bad apples out there who make all of our jobs more difficult. But most real estate developers are not entitled to the "bad guy" monikers even if you don't like what they're building, for one simple reason: they are building what we want where we want it.
Most real estate speculators are developing land for exactly what homebuyers are asking for: bigger homes (even if it means sacrificing quality), more "features" (vaulted ceilings, round-top windows, solid-surfaced countertops), and more "curb appeal", even if it means no appeal whatsoever on the other three sides of the house. Apparently, most people want wide streets, sidewalks, streetlights, and a landscaped grand entrance to the subdivision, and are apparently willing to trade off lot size for it.
In my business, I am in contact with real estate developers and home builders on a daily basis. The successful ones have at least one thing in common - they don't commit their money to any project without research. Research can be as simple as a walk around a neighborhood to see what people are interested in buying or as complex as a full-scale study of the trends in the region. Occasionally, speculators try new ideas, or bring old ideas back. Disney's Celebration community outside of Orlando is an example of using old town-planning ideas in a new development. They took a big risk, but it wasn't done without exhaustive research. They had a pretty good idea that it was going to succeed before they built it because their research told them that a market existed for it.
When some people see that sign going up announcing a new housing development on the cornfield down the road they cry out that developers are tearing up farmland. It would be much more accurate to say that consumer demand is tearing up farmland. It is never a surprise to me when a hotly-debated rezoning request goes through, one that was vigorously opposed by many members of the community, that those new neighborhoods fill up rapidly.
Consider this: when was the last time that you saw the lots in a new home development go completely unsold? You may have treasured the soybean field or the forest that had been there since you moved to the area but there are many others who don't. If everyone held the opinion that houses shouldn't go there, the land would remain undeveloped. And yet, in our community, they can't turn farmland into subdivisions fast enough. I don't like the quality of some of the new homes I see going up, but they are selling fast-often before they are finished.
When I am in a position to do so, I try to help my clients and my community build smaller, higher quality homes in better-planned subdivisions but that doesn't make me a majority shareholder in public opinion.
I want to have a Property Management Philippines so I search for some relevant information in googles especially in blogs or articles to find more details and considering to avail this kind of service.
ตอบลบ