Page 1 of 1

NADA & MH

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2003 2:21 pm
by wendy
We have been very undecided on stickbuilt vs. MH. We even went so far and had plans drawn up for our house. Decided to go with Fuqua and we are looking at/around 115-120K minus the garage. Considering it's 2100 SF, didn't have a problem until I went into the NADA and found in a year this same house would be worth 50,000. So, how do you convince me that MH hold any value. I just don't see it! Maybe this is part of the MH problem, having a "blue book " for a home.
Stickbuilts don't fall into this catagory. So I'm back to where I started , unsure of what to do! So why are MH in a NADA guide when they are considered homes?

Re: NADA & MH

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2003 4:38 pm
by rmurray
You said..."Stickbuilts don't fall into this catagory"..actually your are right they do not....they do NOT do nearly as well...

NADA is a national compliation of the price of homes to be moved and independent of the site....True manufactured homes do depreciate when resold with out the property...BUT STICK BUILTS DEPRECIATE MUCH WORSE in this same senario...

Resale value is location dependent...Stick builts in the right place will appreciate...so will manufactured homes...in the wrong place they will not...

Did you look up the exact model and add in all the features of the home...then a full NADA appraisal also involes location adjustments..Did you do these as well..What book did you use to determine the value of a stick home that must be moved??

Re: NADA & MH

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2003 5:49 am
by Pete
I agree with what Wendy is saying. I've also looked at site built vs. manufactured and the price is about the same when you add in a garage and landscaping. If I was to buy a new manufactured home it would run about $90,000 with land but I could buy that same home used only a few years old for $65,000 w / land. A site built home wouldn't do that. Unless your looking to put a manufactured home into a park, I just don't see them as good investments.
Pete

Re: NADA & MH

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2003 5:54 am
by rmurray
If this is true..why not buy the few year old same home for 65K???

Re: NADA & MH

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2003 2:50 pm
by wendy
Pete and Mr. Murray,

Thanks for the input and help. The only thing that I am trying to convey is that the price was cut by more than half in less than a year. Yes I looked up "quality workmanship" for NADA, SF and pressed enter. Spit out 50,000 that's it end of story. I do agree with location, it has alot to do with. But I have a hard time believing someone would be willing to pay the same amount if it were placed next to stick built. We will still opt for the Fuqua, because I can't afford $200 (going rate) a SF. That is why we are going with the Fuqua. I believe they have a quality product and are one of the few that offers 120# snow load.
Thanks again
Wendy

Re: NADA & MH

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2003 5:25 pm
by Dan F
I whole heartedly agree with Murray. You are in the valley correct? If you came over to the bay area wher I am MFD homes are increasing in value even in parks. I saw last week a 1984 double wide go for 90,000 in a park. I know for a fact that home sold new for a fraction of that. A new home in a park 1500 square foot Karsten just sold for 160,000 and I know that was only around 70,000 new if that. The location drives the market period. If you live in an area where stick built is not increasing in value why would you theink MFD would. Once on a permanent foundation MFD and stick appreciate at the same rate. They are both classified as real property. Do yourself a favor plug in this zip 94558 on realtor.com and look up MH in parks and land tell me if you think that figure you got is correct for my location.

Re: NADA & MH

Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2003 7:06 pm
by Art Rigsby
Wendy,

NADA figures are not correct for California. I purchased a MH last year that I placed on property in Lake County. I looked up the NADA figure for my home and, according to NADA, it was only worth 70% of what I paid for it. What a bunch of crock! A DW MH about a quarter of the mile from me was on the market for $130,000. It appears to be from the 80's and wasn't as nice as mine. The NADA price appears to be for the home only as if you were buying it as a used unit sitting on a dealers lot.

A friend of mine that lives in Antioch paid $77,000 for a 1977 DW MH in a park.I assume in 1977 it cost no more than $20,000, if that.


Art

Re: NADA & MH

Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:42 am
by rmurray
And NADA would show it worth about $8000...Nobody in the industry accept a few home only lenders use this guide book..