[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

As to the 1st sentence.......I read that to mean that around the WHOLE US the selling price for equal houses that a retiree in a 55 plus would buy is 10% cheaper than that in an any age area. I am then thinking about all the differences between LOCATION like between upstate New York and The Villages. Then there is the size of the over-55 community where a small one golf course community would be worth less than one with as many as TV-Land. Then, differences of climate and state government and taxes. IMO those are too many variables to make a blanket statement like that 1st sentence. If I interpreted it wrong, I apologize in advance.

As to the 2nd sentence.....let's say it is GIVEN that it is true, Then I don't understand if that WOULD favor the SELLER / The Villages or favor the BUYER / new resident ?
........There is another confusing thing about that 1st part of the 2nd sentence. let us assume that the average in an over 55 community is SAY (?) age 70 and the average age in a non-age community.......the parents SAY (?) would be about age 35. So, you can't change the non-age community. So, you would HAVE to change the age-controlled community to say over age 45 in order to "NARROW the age demographic" as you quoted.
.......As I interpret that, it would make the 2 age groups more similar and would RAISE the cost of homes for the over-age 45 group - thus decreasing the price disparity between home costs for the 2 groups. Which is OPPOSITE to the conclusion of the 2nd sentence. I am sure that you seem to understand these home costs differences better than I do, but I am still confused despite trying hard to understand.

31% of the Population in FL is under 25 Years old ... unlikely home buyers.

61% are ages 25 - 74. Home buying age and potential buyers.

19% are ages 55 - 74.

Your available population (market) for age restricted housing, is 1/3 of all available buyers.

All things being equal, as you reduce your available market, prices decrease.

This is true in most areas, but I know of a specific example in Trinity, about 20 miles North of Tampa. Side by side, comparable sub-divisions. 1 age restricted, one not. The "premium" to buy in the non-age restricted sub-division is about 15%.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

31% of the Population in FL is under 25 Years old ... unlikely home buyers.

61% are ages 25 - 74. Home buying age and potential buyers.

19% are ages 55 - 74.

Your available population (market) for age restricted housing, is 1/3 of all available buyers.

All things being equal, as you reduce your available market, prices decrease.

This is true in most areas, but I know of a specific example in Trinity, about 20 miles North of Tampa. Side by side, comparable sub-divisions. 1 age restricted, one not. The "premium" to buy in the non-age restricted sub-division is about 15%.

Ok, you have made a good case and now I will explain how I see things differently. The main real estate principle everywhere is location, location, location. Tampa is a fast-growing large metropolitan area. A location ONLY 20 miles from DOWNTOWN Tampa would be a WONDERFUL LOCATION for a working family or singles that are about 30 years old. As a retirement LOCATION it is NOT too WONDERFUL - because of excess traffic and high crime. And probably ONLY one pool and maybe a pitch and putt golf course and many fewer clubs than The Villages and fewer card game activities. So the comparison of those 2 communities is UNEQUAL. So, no wonder they have to reduce the home prices by 15% in that situation of BAD location, location, etc for the retired types.

Now in The Villages, the situation is different for many reasons, but one is that it is located like a self-contained oasis from the hectic and crime-laden metro areas. That is its main selling CARD. We all know that retirees can get more HOME for their BUCK in nearby non-Village communities than inside the boundaries of The Villages. So, The Villagers are getting LESS home for MORE bucks. Yet, they do it for the (supposedly) crime-free environment and the more extensive activities and overall lifestyle.
.........Basically, all things are NOT equal in my 2 examples and I would further stipulate that they are RARELY or never EQUAL............there ate too many variables in various gated communities.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

31% of the Population in FL is under 25 Years old ... unlikely home buyers.

61% are ages 25 - 74. Home buying age and potential buyers.

19% are ages 55 - 74.

Your available population (market) for age restricted housing, is 1/3 of all available buyers.

All things being equal, as you reduce your available market, prices decrease.

This is true in most areas, but I know of a specific example in Trinity, about 20 miles North of Tampa. Side by side, comparable sub-divisions. 1 age restricted, one not. The "premium" to buy in the non-age restricted sub-division is about 15%.

Note......I still don't understand the 2 nd sentence in your post # 192 ?????

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Ok, you have made a good case and now I will explain how I see things differently. The main real estate principle everywhere is location, location, location. Tampa is a fast-growing large metropolitan area. A location ONLY 20 miles from DOWNTOWN Tampa would be a WONDERFUL LOCATION for a working family or singles that are about 30 years old. As a retirement LOCATION it is NOT too WONDERFUL - because of excess traffic and high crime. And probably ONLY one pool and maybe a pitch and putt golf course and many fewer clubs than The Villages and fewer card game activities. So the comparison of those 2 communities is UNEQUAL. So, no wonder they have to reduce the home prices by 15% in that situation of BAD location, location, etc for the retired types.

Now in The Villages, the situation is different for many reasons, but one is that it is located like a self-contained oasis from the hectic and crime-laden metro areas. That is its main selling CARD. We all know that retirees can get more HOME for their BUCK in nearby non-Village communities than inside the boundaries of The Villages. So, The Villagers are getting LESS home for MORE bucks. Yet, they do it for the (supposedly) crime-free environment and the more extensive activities and overall lifestyle.
.........Basically, all things are NOT equal in my 2 examples and I would further stipulate that they are RARELY or never EQUAL............there ate too many variables in various gated communities.

All valid points, until you consider the original question of increasing the age requirement in The Villages.

Witness the current buying demographic in TV ... the south. Younger, more active, different needs, wants and motivations.

All the amenities and other considerations you mention, are primarily of interest to active, younger "retirees". The average 80 year old, isn't playing golf every day, swimming in the pool and get cranked up at Happy Hour. The TV demographic target is really 55-70 (72?)? If TV raised the "age limitation", they would be looking at narrowing their potential buying demographic by at least 50%.

TV is already an anomaly, in that their age-restricted housing is more expensive than surrounding non-age restricted housing, primarily because of the amenities offered.

There's no big secret why the TV Developers have been on a mission for the last 5-10 years, with expansion to the South. They need more potential buyers, so they've created a new "suburb" to TV down South, with fewer amenities and less of what "makes TV, TV" ... with prices more consistent with neighboring areas. The 55-65 year old demographic, is a much larger and profitable target audience than the 66-70 year old bracket.

The South doesn't even look like TV, it looks like every other subdivision in Central Florida. Most of those folks have "bought a home, not a lifestyle". People buy homes, primarily for (3) reasons: investment, shelter or lifestyle. The folks down South are mostly buying shelter, some investment. In the more traditional area of TV, most folks bought for lifestyle. There are way more shelter/investment buyers, than there are lifestyle buyers.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

All valid points, until you consider the original question of increasing the age requirement in The Villages.

Witness the current buying demographic in TV ... the south. Younger, more active, different needs, wants and motivations.

All the amenities and other considerations you mention, are primarily of interest to active, younger "retirees". The average 80 year old, isn't playing golf every day, swimming in the pool and get cranked up at Happy Hour. The TV demographic target is really 55-70 (72?)? If TV raised the "age limitation", they would be looking at narrowing their potential buying demographic by at least 50%.

TV is already an anomaly, in that their age-restricted housing is more expensive than surrounding non-age restricted housing, primarily because of the amenities offered.

There's no big secret why the TV Developers have been on a mission for the last 5-10 years, with expansion to the South. They need more potential buyers, so they've created a new "suburb" to TV down South, with fewer amenities and less of what "makes TV, TV" ... with prices more consistent with neighboring areas. The 55-65 year old demographic, is a much larger and profitable target audience than the 66-70 year old bracket.

The South doesn't even look like TV, it looks like every other subdivision in Central Florida. Most of those folks have "bought a home, not a lifestyle". People buy homes, primarily for (3) reasons: investment, shelter or lifestyle. The folks down South are mostly buying shelter, some investment. In the more traditional area of TV, most folks bought for lifestyle. There are way more shelter/investment buyers, than there are lifestyle buyers.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

"My mileage may vary"---------That's very, VERY funny. Very impressive, and a good way to end a post. I would say that this IS a teachable moment. A moment where I am mostly the student. Your 1st post was about a complex subject - it was 2 sentences long. Which left some people confused (I assume that I was NOT the only one). Your last post was about 12 sentences long. It was much more clarifying to an average reader (me). What may be teachable (?) is what someone on video TV once said, "words, Sheldon, use your words".

However, there was one little idea in that post that I am still "hazy" about. I will re-read it a few times and then perhaps have some more questions?

[Fastskiguy]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

The South doesn't even look like TV, it looks like every other subdivision in Central Florida. Most of those folks have "bought a home, not a lifestyle". People buy homes, primarily for (3) reasons: investment, shelter or lifestyle. The folks down South are mostly buying shelter, some investment. In the more traditional area of TV, most folks bought for lifestyle. There are way more shelter/investment buyers, than there are lifestyle buyers.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

It looks different down here but I can assure you, people living down south most definitely bought into the lifestyle in a big way. It looks different than up north but it's social, it's fun, and there is plenty to do. Stuff is fresh and new and the population is younger and ready to party! We could use more services down here though.

Joe

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Fastskiguy

It looks different down here but I can assure you, people living down south most definitely bought into the lifestyle in a big way. It looks different than up north but it's social, it's fun, and there is plenty to do. Stuff is fresh and new and the population is younger and ready to party! We could use more services down here though.

Joe

I don't live in the South, but I agree with you 100%. It's a different "lifestyle" than the older, more traditional part of TV ... you young 'uns can stay up past 9 pm! If I bought in TV 10 years ago, I'd definitely be down south.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

"My mileage may vary"---------That's very, VERY funny. Very impressive, and a good way to end a post. I would say that this IS a teachable moment. A moment where I am mostly the student. Your 1st post was about a complex subject - it was 2 sentences long. Which left some people confused (I assume that I was NOT the only one). Your last post was about 12 sentences long. It was much more clarifying to an average reader (me). What may be teachable (?) is what someone on video TV once said, "words, Sheldon, use your words".

However, there was one little idea in that post that I am still "hazy" about. I will re-read it a few times and then perhaps have some more questions?

OK, my mileage is still varying, but my haze is lifting (like the weather). I NEVER asked the question, "why not raise the age limit." Even I am not that STUPID (hopefully)! I did ask, "why NOT keep the age limit at 55 and increase the PERCENTAGE of the over 55 and therefore DECREASED the numbers of the under age 55 from 20 % to SAY (?)
5 %. Your basic answer seems to be that The Villages organization saw the ABOUT age 75 type population as dying out and started marketing in south TV Land toward the next younger generation (you called them 1/3 of the available buyers)

OK, now everything is fine, my "haze" has started clearing up and I have CLOSURE on the concepts. I appreciate your "laying more words on me" to help. Thank you, have a GREAT holiday season, and to all a good night !!!!

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

The South doesn't even look like TV, it looks like every other subdivision in Central Florida. Most of those folks have "bought a home, not a lifestyle". People buy homes, primarily for (3) reasons: investment, shelter or lifestyle. The folks down South are mostly buying shelter, some investment. In the more traditional area of TV, most folks bought for lifestyle. There are way more shelter/investment buyers, than there are lifestyle buyers.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

Originally Posted by BrianL99

I don't live in the South, but I agree with you 100%. It's a different "lifestyle" than the older, more traditional part of TV ... you young 'uns can stay up past 9 pm! If I bought in TV 10 years ago, I'd definitely be down south.

Seems you are singing two different tunes.
The first is bashing the south as looking like every sub division in Florida.
The second is an appeasement to somebody calling you out.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

OK, my mileage is still varying, but my haze is lifting (like the weather). I NEVER asked the question, "why not raise the age limit." Even I am not that STUPID (hopefully)! I did ask, "why NOT keep the age limit at 55 and increase the PERCENTAGE of the over 55 and therefore DECREASED the numbers of the under age 55 from 20 % to SAY (?)
5 %. Your basic answer seems to be that The Villages organization saw the ABOUT age 75 type population as dying out and started marketing in south TV Land toward the next younger generation (you called them 1/3 of the available buyers)

OK, now everything is fine, my "haze" has started clearing up and I have CLOSURE on the concepts. I appreciate your "laying more words on me" to help. Thank you, have a GREAT holiday season, and to all a good night !!!!

If the people in the older sections are "dying out", whom do you think is going to buy their homes?

I'll give you a clue... Younger people, just like those who are buying in the southern areas...

There is a constant turnover throughout TV... To quote Mufasa, "It's the circle of life"...

Oh, and one more thing... Sometimes, "Less is more"...

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

If the people in the older sections are "dying out", whom do you think is going to buy their homes?

I'll give you a clue... Younger people, just like those who are buying in the southern areas...

There is a constant turnover throughout TV... To quote Mufasa, "It's the circle of life"...

Oh, and one more thing... Sometimes, "Less is more"...

Less is more…

[Altavia]

My neighbor got their trampoline off the yard...

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

If the people in the older sections are "dying out", whom do you think is going to buy their homes?

I'll give you a clue... Younger people, just like those who are buying in the southern areas...

There is a constant turnover throughout TV... To quote Mufasa, "It's the circle of life"...

Oh, and one more thing... Sometimes, "Less is more"...

And 1 additional thing - as a great, old philosopher once said, "sometimes more (paragraphs) are better than less (one-liners"). And concentrating on ALWAYS rebuking only ONE poster is borderline psychotic.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

Seems you are singing two different tunes.
The first is bashing the south as looking like every sub division in Florida.
The second is an appeasement to somebody calling you out.

I'm not bashing the "south", but it does look like every other subdivision in Florida ... that's no big secret.

& I said, "IF I was 10 years younger and BUYING IN TV, I would buy in the South.

When I was 15 years younger, I bought in Tampa. I just bought in TV last year, when I got old enough to have different needs and wants.

Quite honestly, I would never consider buying in the southern area of TV. No ocean, no golf, no Town Squares. It's just a subdivision like any other.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Fastskiguy

It looks different down here but I can assure you, people living down south most definitely bought into the lifestyle in a big way. It looks different than up north but it's social, it's fun, and there is plenty to do. Stuff is fresh and new and the population is younger and ready to party! We could use more services down here though.

Joe

The population is getting younger up north, what with all those people who moved in 20-30 years ago ready for assisted living, memory care, or - their final reward. You'd have to be a special kind of - not very bright - if you thought the people moving in must of course all be in their 80's.

We have a softball field, archery range, THREE pools (one of which has a hot tub) and a country club, two executive courses and one CC course, one lake and several retention ponds, easy access to - pretty much everything, mostly via golf-cart, dog park, our own church on-site for those who enjoy that sort of thing...

A lot of homes have been sold or rented to under-60's in the past year. Us younger folks in the north half can party too (and we do).