4 ms·

> it's hard to sell a home with rooms that are bright, unique colors I hate people that think like this. You are living in this house, correct? It is your hom

• waterside81 10y ago
  The comment didn't state that beige in of itself is a bad colour, but when it comes to selling the house, a neutral colours works best because presumably it gives prospective buyers the idea of starting with a blank slate and not inheriting someone else's design decisions.
  • mhurron 10y ago
    > not inheriting someone else's design decisions. It takes a day to paint a room, your not inheriting anyones paint job unless you want to.
    • wtetzner 10y ago
      It doesn't matter, it still shapes the buyer's opinion of the place, even if it's only subconsciously. [edit] punctuation.
    • SystemOut 10y ago
      That's not really the point, though. Being in the market for a new house I can say that I really have to fight certain biases to look past a home that has hideous color choices (subjectively speaking). I tend to then find more faults in these houses. Houses that are relatively neutral are much easier for me to envision what I'd do with them differently and so I find myself picturing my family living there. As a seller I would want to maximize more of the latter obviously. Edit: I should also add that since we will be selling our house we recently painted the rooms that were "our colors" to more neutral ones to make it easier to sell.
• hueving 10y ago
  It's costing you future money when you paint it a 'non-natural' color in the lost prospective buyers. This is fine if you're loaded with disposable income, but for the vast majority of the US it's not worth it.
  • mhurron 10y ago
    > It's costing you future money when you paint it a 'non-natural' color in the lost prospective buyers And how is that? No one is coming to buy it while it is my home. Oh, and it was painted not beige in the first place, so apparently it didn't cost them 'future money' either. Your home isn't an investment.
  • stephencanon 10y ago
    This is false (or at least, is not universally true, and is false pretty frequently). It's costing you some of the future buyer pool, but making it more desireable to another portion of the buyer pool: those who have similar taste to you. Because these are exactly the people who are most likely to like other (non-paint-color) aspects of a house that you also like, this is a positive trade off (unless you anticipate needing to sell on short notice, in which case, yes, be as generic as possible). Make the house you want to live in. There are enough people that someone else will want to live in it, too, and in the meantime you'll be happier.
    • hueving 10y ago
      No, if people like to have funky colors, they would be expecting to paint a house when they buy it anyway. >There are enough people that someone else will want to live in it, Sure, but not nearly as many as would want to live in it if it didn't have a purple shag carpet and black walls. Anything you do to reduce your buyer pool costs you money. You either accept a shallow pool of offers or repaint it to undo whatever it was you did to start with when you're ready to sell, which also costs money.
      • stephencanon 10y ago
        > No, if people like to have funky colors, they would be expecting to paint a house when they buy it anyway. This argument applies equally to people who like beige, if they even exist. Some people are good at imagining what a house will look like after painting. Most are not. Of the latter group, some like bold colors. None of this should be controversial at all.
• B-Con 10y ago
  But most people don't repaint their house (in my experience, at least). If the paint colors don't offend them, they're OK with it.