Monday morning I ordered the plans and specifications from the magazine. After they arrived, I quickly started looking at lots in several subdivisions where I could build this home and set the local market on fire. At a building cost of $52 a square foot I could sell this home at $80 or $90 a square foot and be below the going market rate. Because the cost efficiency of this home was so good, I could have a right- and a left-handed plan, vary the rooflines and siding details … and build this unit over and over and make some real money!
Then I began to estimate the construction costs. I solicited bids from all of my subcontractors and spent quite a bit of time doing take-offs and calculating the labor costs using my own framing and finish crews. After nearly a week, the subcontractor bids began to float in. Everything was tabulated. I could not believe the summary cost. I rechecked all of my numbers. I contacted all the subs and told them the cost goal I was seeking and asked them to go back over their quotes. Something must be askew. “We all must be reading too much into these plans and specs,” I reasoned. “Surely I should be able to build this home at a maximum of 20 to 25 percent above the magazine’s reported cost?”
I contacted the magazine and spoke to the article’s author. “Just like it said in the article, we here at the magazine paid $52 a square foot to build that house.” “Did you get any special deals?” I asked. “No. Again, as we said in the article, anyone should be able to build this home for $52 a square foot, plus some adjustments for the local lot conditions.” “Well, Mr. Author, I’m a general contractor, and I have done a very thorough cost estimate of the construction labor, materials, and overall cost, and I could not build that house in Flagstaff, Ariz., for under $150 per square foot!” I countered. “Mr. Dixon, you must have some pretty expensive conditions there in Arizona because the home can be built in the $52-a-foot range.”
I was befuddled but not defeated. This home really showed some potential, and I was not prepared to fold up my tent just yet. I contacted the project architect by mail and expressed some of my concerns, questions, and frustrations. I even included a line item cost breakdown so he could examine my estimate and critique it for omissions, excessive costs, etc.
After several weeks I received a written response from the architect. His letter explained that he had designed and been involved with the show house project from day one, but that he had a major falling out with the magazine management when the article was written. No one at the magazine had ever spoken to the architect about the finished production costs for the home. The architect was incredulous at the quoted price of $52 a square foot. He explained to me that the magazine stood behind its number because that’s what they had paid out to complete the project. However, the full explanation was that the home cost substantially more money to construct but many of the manufacturers, suppliers, and subcontractors had donated their products or services to the project, and those expenses were not included in the cost. The architect further stated that he thought the half-truth cost quote was very misleading and had caused him lots of stress. “Lots of people bought the plans, but were frustrated to find out that the home could not be built for the price quoted in the article,” he said.
Over the next several years I was contacted by three potential clients who wanted to build the home. Nothing ever came of my discussions with them after I delivered the reality of the construction costs. I did build a different home for one of the clients.
This experience re-enlightened me about being skeptical about everything you hear and read. The sad reality of this story is that it really was a great house.
Dennis A. Dixon is an author, contractor, and speaker with 20 years experience in the building industry. You can e-mail him at dixven@aol.com
