Wait, what? Someone made an offer for this? And I came here to say that no amount of blurry and mal-rotated pictures can make this place look less disgusting.
Built in ’65? Whoa. This place looks like it’s been rode hard and put away wet. Just like the photographer. But I suppose that’s how long-term neglect happens… folks just keep piling instances of short-term neglect, like lackadaisical photo taking, one upon another.
I simply do not understand why anyone would purposefully take pictures of water and mold damage. Anyone interested is going to see it eventually. Better to show them the good stuff to draw them in, then let them get a feel for the place in person before they come face to face with the inadequacies.
Well… the exterior brickwork seems OK, as do some of the hardwood floors. Those might make the rest of the place worth cleaning up and repairing, depending on the neighborhood and just how deep the wear issues go.
In general… this post seems right at home on a Monday. :|
You gotta know it’s a bad idea when the photographer is running too fast to let the camera focus…
…and I doubt we have the excuse of older folks having aged in place here, either – at least, not recently. Can’t rule out the prospect that a couple of bachelor eejits took the gently declining place off their elders’ hands around 2000, partied while the party lasted, and are now hoping to sell it before both the structure and the mortgage fall on their heads…
Looking at this made me remember the one listing with the hoard of newspapers and trash. This place seems to me like it had a hoard situation and someone went in and shoveled out all the sh…stuff before trying to list it. They did the pics themselves with an old disposable camera they found in the hoard. May as well save every possible dollar.
Wait, what? Someone made an offer for this? And I came here to say that no amount of blurry and mal-rotated pictures can make this place look less disgusting.
Built in ’65? Whoa. This place looks like it’s been rode hard and put away wet. Just like the photographer. But I suppose that’s how long-term neglect happens… folks just keep piling instances of short-term neglect, like lackadaisical photo taking, one upon another.
I simply do not understand why anyone would purposefully take pictures of water and mold damage. Anyone interested is going to see it eventually. Better to show them the good stuff to draw them in, then let them get a feel for the place in person before they come face to face with the inadequacies.
Well… the exterior brickwork seems OK, as do some of the hardwood floors. Those might make the rest of the place worth cleaning up and repairing, depending on the neighborhood and just how deep the wear issues go.
In general… this post seems right at home on a Monday. :|
@Frodo: As the saying goes, it takes all kinds.
All kinds of what, I don’t know…
You gotta know it’s a bad idea when the photographer is running too fast to let the camera focus…
…and I doubt we have the excuse of older folks having aged in place here, either – at least, not recently. Can’t rule out the prospect that a couple of bachelor eejits took the gently declining place off their elders’ hands around 2000, partied while the party lasted, and are now hoping to sell it before both the structure and the mortgage fall on their heads…
Looking at this made me remember the one listing with the hoard of newspapers and trash. This place seems to me like it had a hoard situation and someone went in and shoveled out all the sh…stuff before trying to list it. They did the pics themselves with an old disposable camera they found in the hoard. May as well save every possible dollar.
@Samme: Sounds like a reasonable assumption, Samme. The problem for them is they forgot the axiom: “You have to spend money to make money.” Oops.
I am rendered speechless.
Even the bathroom sink appears to be attempting a getaway. Hold the door, fellas, I’m right behind ya!