Some, not tons. We've looked at a substantial number of houses on paper and rejected them. We haven't looked at a lot in person -- but that's because we've been rejecting so many because they are *blatantly* inappropriate. This is only the fourth or fifth house we've looked at in person; the others were nice, but wrong for what we're looking for.
Having Susana on board has changed the terms of engagement a lot: instead of doing ad-hoc looking around the way we did last time, she's sending us reams of listings based on our criteria. Even within those criteria, precious few of the houses have any attraction at all.
Part of the problem is that our architectural tastes are effectively expensive: most inexpensive designs are laid out in exactly the ways we don't want, with lots of relatively little rooms. There are tons of houses that appeal to us, but they mostly cost $700k+...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2005-09-19 05:52 pm (UTC)Having Susana on board has changed the terms of engagement a lot: instead of doing ad-hoc looking around the way we did last time, she's sending us reams of listings based on our criteria. Even within those criteria, precious few of the houses have any attraction at all.
Part of the problem is that our architectural tastes are effectively expensive: most inexpensive designs are laid out in exactly the ways we don't want, with lots of relatively little rooms. There are tons of houses that appeal to us, but they mostly cost $700k+...