Comment of the Day: House Poor or Furniture Poor

COMMENT OF THE DAY: HOUSE POOR OR FURNITURE POOR “Roche Bobois designs are a still a little too blobby (i.e., French) for my taste, but it makes [more] sense to me to buy a $400k mid century mod and fill it with nice Bobois furniture than to buy a $800k faux Tuscan Villa and fill it with Pottery Barn.” [Patrick, commenting on Internum Takes Over Where Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams Took Off]

19 Comment

  • I was just about to say, it’s been over 24 hours since I’ve seen a “faux Tuscan…” comment on this site. I’m glad my faith in (the predictability of the comments on) swamplot has been restored.

  • I hope that comment was in jest because it’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard financially speaking.

    Every style that imitates something else is “Faux”… Faux Colonial, Faux Ranch, etc. The “Faux Tuscan” is what sells and sells well in today’s market, nobody is buying 1920 sh*tholes unless it’s lot value.

  • good one @ commonsense!!!

  • wrong, the gov’t encourages you to buy the biggest house you can and then just write off the interest so spending money on furniture over a house doesn’t make much financial sense. just buy an 800K modern.

  • Roche Bobois sells splendid furniture.
    Perhaps they think you’re too blobby.
    …or too French. Have another freedom fry.

  • Udunno: What a pathetic jab at Patrick for stating his opinion of french design furniture (even though he follows it up with saying he’d rather fill it with said design than buy the $800k ‘faux tuscan’)
    If someone says they don’t care for French food do you shout “Xenophobe!” at them?

  • What PRECISELY is French design furniture,
    Cody? Because it is all over the map.

    Not a fan of blanket statements, which also means I’m not a fan of your’s.

    Sorry if you fear I’m defending the French.

    …and no, I am indifferent to French food
    in general and to those who offer their opinions of same.

    What a pathetic defense…of…something, Cody. But congrats on shoehorning your vocab word-of-the-day into your “defense”.

    Roche Bobois offers superb furniture, and I’ve had good luck with Ligne Roset. as well. Highly recommended!

  • I thought I posted this last night, maybe it didn’t pass moderation or maybe I didn’t hit send? Second attempt:

    Commonsense, you say “nobody is buying 1920 sh*tholes unless it’s lot value.” If one person buys a 1920 house for more than lot value, you are proved wrong. Guess what…

  • I agree with commonsense that this is a dumb statement. Spend money on the house, which is an asset that should appreciate over time and not on furnishings which loose their value.

  • Udunno: You’re asking me what’s French design furniture? I have no idea. I don’t what it looks like, and have no opinion on it. Also, I don’t know who Roche Bobois or Ligne Roset are, and don’t really care about the whole topic.
    I only thought it was a bit hasty of you to use a tired “have a freedom fry” line on the guy, which suggests he was being ‘anti french’, when he wasn’t.

  • Mel, let me explain to the kids in the back of the class… When a general statement is made, there’s an expectation of a couple of “anomalies”, therefore a single example or a couple of examples “against” vs. thousands of examples “pro” does not a counter-point make.

  • commonsense, you made the statement, not me.

  • I like pottery barn…some people can’t afford the high end 10,000.00 for a sofa…really now kids get real.

  • > …spending money on furniture over a
    > house doesn’t make much financial sense.

    Only if you’re convinced that houses are an appreciating asset. Since I don’t, I think you get more satisfaction for your money by going for a smaller interior with nicer furniture than vice versa.

    And you can take the furniture with you, unlike the 800k mod house, which will be very hard to sell.

    For the record (and just to irritate our resident Libertarian crank(s)), my wife and I live in a 1500 sqft 1920s bungalow with a $9000 sofa. But that’s a personal preference, not a virtue…

  • “A couple of anomalies?”

    How about the fact that 4 of the 5 most expensive homes sold in the Houston area in 2008 were built before 1950?

    How about the fact that 8 out of the 10 most expensive neighborhoods in the Houston area feature homes where the average age of the home is over 40 years old?

    How about the fact that the most expensive house (price per square foot) in Houston right now is a 1935 original on Lazy Lane?

    How about the fact that there are only three homes on the market right now priced over $1,000 a square foot and those houses were built in 1935, 1926, and 1965?

    The simple truth is, there is a HUGE demand for well loved older houses in Houston. People are paying a premium to be in areas like River Oaks, Shadowland, Broadacres, Southampton, and Boulevard Oaks and in those areas, the older homes are valued higher than the builder junk that is flooding the market.


  • Noone who has seen what kindergartners can do to furniture would spend $9000 on a couch. My house on the other hand I think has a greater chance of surviving them.

  • Don’t get your panties in a bunch, I was referring specifically to old crap homes on tiny lots i.e. Heights, Montrose, Rice Military etc. that are torn down for the Faux Tuscans. Secondly, price per square foot skews results because the homes are much smaller compare to new construction. I’ve seen many 1,000 sq foot homes on good lots that go for more per sq. ft. than a brand new 6,000 sq. ft. home next door.

  • No wad here since I am going commando.

    That said, your comment about price per square foot might work in another market, but not in Houston. The houses that are priced over $1,000 per square foot are 14,365 square feet, 8,228 square feet, and 7,751 square feet.

    Feel free to try again though!

  • Doofus and commonsense need to switch handles. Stat.