There seems to be a general consensus here that “good” architecture is also risky architecture. Why is that? Well, the problem is, way too many architects have wedded themselves to this ultramodern architectural style that almost nobody outside the architecture world actually likes.
Personally, I hate ultramodern architecture. It's ugly, and I always thought my job was to make the thing look good. But ultramodern will always be popular among architects because the style allows any hack to throw together a bunch of random lines and circles and then get kudos from other architects for how creative they are, so the style will always get pushed from this direction. But people out in the real world are not afraid to call ugly, unbalanced, sterile buildings for the eyesores they actually are.
So the question is, does “good” architecture have to be something most of the public would hate, and ergo no developer would risk their own money on?
"Really, people here are so insolent and ignorant."
"I don't want that stupid answer saying "Here we go again". "
yeah, that's a good way to keep a constructive discussion going. Listen, I posted pages of info on your first questions, way back when, and you chose to blatantly ignore what I offered and what others offered.
I was here when you were elementary school and I'll be here long after you've moved onto some fashion website and begin asking them why they don't publish magazines.
You come back after you've gone out in the real world and have something to offer besides your naive opinions and gain a little respect for what others offer on here, the time it takes to respond, etc., etc., etc.
xian - we must assume you are simply trolling here, yes?
Yes, trace, that's it. I think this is why there are (or seem to be) fewer postings--interesting ones, at least--here these days. Once in a while there's a real gem of a thread, packed with information and/or reasoned opinions, and each post builds on and advances or challenges the conversation.
Then there's all the other ones, like this. It takes time and thought to compose a response to the OP's query, and it's time wasted, as it turns out. I guess that's the price of admission to an online world. But it ends up keeping away the people interested in ideas.
good design is that not this. everyone knows it who knows anything.
funny thread. is it possible to be deaf on the internet?
pier, good luck with the business. who knows perhaps you can make it happen. why not. on other hand the defensive posturing and ignorant responses suggest you are not going to have an easy time. out of curiosity do you have your license? or are you coming to this process from the side of the people with money?
to twist things a wee bit off the tangent, have yall seen frank gehry's early work? in the 1960's he was doing commercial work with almost zero creative energy. it took him 20 years to work out what kind of architect he wanted to be and then another 20 to figure out how to do it. I believe he made money on the way and also snuck in some innovation. but it was in pursuit of something else as far as i can tell. probably that is the only way to do it properly and keep it real.
i guess the question is what kind of innovation will satisfy you perio? i live in tokyo and innovation is what architects do just to keep up with the lowest level expectations. it is hard to argue that is making any of us more wealthy, nor that it is making life better for anyone in a general sense. what do you have in mind?
Here, piero: two stories about architects who also worked as developers! Make sure to read the comments - a lot of people there are saying what people are saying here: you can do development, but there is always risk. Not a reason not to do it, of course.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned this. I believe I posted it in the last "architects as developer" thread.
There's a significant legal aspect here that varies pretty significant from country to country. Even within countries, real estate development practices can differ between states, counties, prefectures et cetera.
So, even if you find a successful strategy that works for you in your immediate environment, it may not be a strategy you can carry over to other places. So, any gains in "innovation" you made are instantly lost.
Ah, jump, I've long been a fan of Gehry's early work... some of it, anyway. To me, the best work he ever did was when he was working under stringent budget constraints. One of his best buildings (to me), a shopping center in Santa Monica from about 1980, was just altered beyond recognition. So it often goes with retail uses.
Now, it seems, the more money thrown at him, the worse the building. And what was once innovation now appears to be an assembly line.
I told you guys that I don’t want to continue with this discussion because I think differently to all of you, and you are the individuals which continue with this issue. I never said that real estate development is not a risk. Of course, it is. Everything in this world that we want to create or do is a risk. Even study architecture is a risk because we don’t know the future about it. I just have two sentences from Nike and Adidas. “Just do it”. “Nothing is impossible”. I’m different because I am an optimistic person. So whatever you say. I don’t care. That is your problem. That is your idea. That is your opinion, but it is not mine. I congratulate everyone for what they think. I know that all steps that you have to make to do real estate development, and it is not easy but I will have to make a sacrifice. That is my problem. Not yours.
Piero, good for you that you don't want to discuss the issue anymore. What baffles me, however, is that you don't bring any arguments yourself. You ask peoples' opinions, and when the disagree with you, all you say is "well, I understand your point, but I see thing differently and I'm not going to discuss the issue anymore." What's up with that?
Well, I do not pay much attention to your comments because most of them say the same, and I understand your points. But I think the architect is economically falling behind, and architects are not trying to innovate economically. I know many of you will say that most architects are not interested in that, and that the economy is currently in a very poor condition. I just wanted to see what some of the solutions that many architects think were. I have read many articles about economy on the Architect Magazine. I understand that maybe the ideology that I have is not the solution because it is not a new idea. As many of you told me that this website is not focused on architects’ economy. So I decided to don’t post anything again.
pity, he never did tell us the secret behind innovation in architecture...
@ citizen, yeah there was some nice stuff there by gehry in the early years. some really horrible stuff too, like stock buildings for track housing, FLW copies, and cetera. i just got a book done in the nineties that shows his complete works til that time and it included literally his first projects, the works that would not even make it into better homes and gardens because it was mostly content-free with the design side of things. amazing to see how he grew from that to what he is now.
I agree he was most interesting when the budget wasn't there, but also love his latest work. I find myself more impressed by him the more he does.
Jul 21, 11 8:19 pm ·
·
piero,
If you are not interested in our opinions why ask. How about ask the real estate developers. If their response is the same then MAYBE there is something about reality that you humanly can not possibly do. There are things that are impossible. Sure I would love to be able to walk through the sun and back and swim my way to the core of the earth - ALL IN MY SCUBA GEAR but it is obviously impossible. It is impossible and I don't swim. I would sure die in either cases. Why? Because it is impossible. There is not a single bank willing to invest in odd ball ideas because banks are even stipulating terms of right of final say over projects they are financing. So even if a client wants this and that. The bank can say NO to this and that. If clients want innovative but the bank doesn't then the bank wins because they can pull their money from the project and the client surely will never have any other source because there doesn't exist any. They dried up and are unbelievably competed. Stipulated terms is the name of the business. This is reality. Unless you can magically have all this money, it is a F***ing PIPE DREAM. You don't have the money, you won't be able to do it however you want it - if you want someone else's money invested. If it is someone else's money then that someone else is GOING to stipulate. That is the way it is done since 2008 and this is a permanent policy of EVERY major bank that was under the bail out because it was government rule by the Federal government and every bank now has incorporated this policy to make sure the project is something that they can resell if client defaults. Since EVERY bank wants to resell any property that it financed and has to foreclose on - they want it to be sellable not wierd crap.
When everyone who is in the business, experienced in it and been there and done that says something then maybe it is something you want to listen to because they are giving you advice free of charge that they make $250 an hour on. When someone that makes $250/hr. is wanting to give you free advice - LISTEN ! ! ! ! Otherwise, you are a friggin' fool and WILL FAIL. Not maybe. Will. You are going to fail because you lack the most important skill as a real estate agent and as an architect - LISTENING skill.
Welcome to failure dimwit. You simply don't want others opinion. How about DON'T ASK another question if you are not interested in other people's responses. So go screw yourself and we'll laugh at you when you are homeless with a multimillion dollar debt scraping soda cans in the trash cans. Welcome to your hobo future. I'll give you your survival line: "Do you want fries with that order?"
As you might note, he kind of looks like Mark Zuckerberg. The kid is clearly on to something. All you naysaying losers can suck it!
Jul 22, 11 1:18 am ·
·
Yeah, but he doesn't really have the skills to listen to the reasons given. How do you change the will of the people with money. If they don't want it, they aren't going to pay for it.
Impossible, maybe not. Improbable. Yes. Impossible for one measly person because there are people that are literally out to prevent the exact kind of stuff that he is aiming at.
I'm not against him being innovative but he needs to be prepared for the road. There are too many barriers at this time. When the economy gets better and people have money and people are willing to seek more riskier and innovative designs then maybe some might be interested. This is not the time. He doesn't really listen and therefore fails to ask a very important question like How do we deal with innovative design in real estate development when innovative design is considered risky and undesireable ? How do we make innovative designing not as risky if not a low risk?
He failed to ask these questions in order to be prepared to deal with and navigate these waters. He asked if architects would be innovative. Reasons are given. A better question might be to follow up with is - How do make more innovated designs low risk in real estate development and other developments. Or How do we take the risk out of innovative design and it still be innovative design?
The problem is he is rude and not really a listener to reason nor ask the right questions nor did he really want our opinions and spit in our face. That is his problem and that will get him into trouble in being successful in ANYTHING.
Jul 22, 11 2:05 am ·
·
Granted, he's still young and hasn't got the maturity yet to operate such a business venture without failing attempts. Ok. He can learn from them and become better but he needs to grow some maturity and general respect to others.
Piero, first off, the moment you spat off in any disrespect to the bank lenders, they are going to pull the plug on the financing. Especially from what they will consider a sniveling child (when alot of the lenders managing the loans are in their 50s and 60s. Old enough to be his parents. They aren't going to put up for one second. The response would be harsh as there is nothing in law that says they have to fund the project. They don't have to lend you money.
You need to listen. They are the money source. They aren't going to give you money if they find you a risk, Let me put it simple: You are young therefore you ARE a risk to the banks. You are inexperienced. You can't jump your first several projects being risky projects because they aren't going to lend you money for anything risky. Especially from someone without any history. Banks are willing to be listen to riskier projects only from someone whom they have successfully worked with for some time. Think of it as trial period. The same goes for any other lender.
They aren't going to be interested in some snively newcomer with no background. Considering there are all sorts of people competing and vieing for their money to invest in - How about this question -> Why should I invest my money in your project ? You need to sell the idea and you need to have a sense of what their concerns are. SERIOUSLY. Not just "I know". It won't cut it.
You need to be sensible and you need to be able to communicate to their concerns and address it. You need to really understand their concerns. They all are already going to be biased against risky financing. Considering just about everyone who was risky LOST lots of money in the last few years and those that were already low risks are ever more vigilant and already knows of friends and family that lost big time. At this point in time, NO ONE is interested in high risk.
Your young age and inexperience is already going to be held against you. They are already going to consider you too risky the second they see you or your profile. You aren't going to find anyone biased on your side with money.
People with money are not the ones that were overly risky. People with money don't throw their money at just anything. They are wise choosers of what and where they invest and how they invest. What is your plan when they aren't even going to consider you. If you are under the age of 35 years old, in general, they are not going to lend you large amounts of money unless you have a successful track record and LOTS of collateral. This isn't for kids.
There is LOTS of hurdles and barriers already in place to keep you from succeeding because they don't want you and are in general, not interested in what you want or your dreams or any of that. They want to know a sound and secure plan to make money. They want surety and certainty of being paid. What do you have to offer as collateral ?
Sure, there is always risks but do keep in mind that you need to be aware of them and ready for them and have solid plans on how to mitigate the risks and how to MANAGE risks. Like Project Management, if you are afraid of risks then you certainly don't belong in the business. Also, don't be stupid and add risks unnecessarily. Understand and Listen to what others say with a degree of respect because people are giving you the matters of advice do you don't end up F---ing yourself. I'm not asking or suggesting to be afraid of risk but do give risk its due respect and also learn how to manage and mitigate risks and how to properly navigate them.
Risks are deadly so be smart. There are the Brave and Smart captains and there are the Brave but Stupid captains. Which one do you want to be Piero?
So, bear in mind what you are up against and how you navigate the turbulent waters full of snares, traps, deathly whirlpools and evil sea monsters.
I'm going to tell you something. There are people here who say I cannot do these things, but I'll tell you what. I can do them because I can. President Obama said a very good thing. he said "yes, we can" and now he is president of the United States. These are the differences between you and those like me and President Obama.
You know what. You are right. Thank you very much for your advice.
Jul 24, 11 3:23 am ·
·
Yes, I know. I am simply saying to tread risks with care. Innovative designs can happen but it also depends on what is meant by "innovative design". Give some examples of what "innovative designs" means to you? Innovation is a tricky word but it depends on what the "problem" in which your "design solution" is for. (I'm being abstract here).
Just don't be stupid. Be smart about how you deal with it. Optimism is fine. Yes, we can. I am also a realist at the same time. I'm not walking this economy with blindfolds. I have doubts in someone's success when they don't consider the points of views seriously and build a sound plan to deal with the issues that will invariably happen because the issues are either required by law/regulation or is essentially standard among EVERY bank and lender there is like as standard as they want to know your name and address and other contact information.
Would architects innovate more if they also were developers?
Development is about marketing and maximum profit. Design is about creating solutions to problems. So unless innovation is focused on increasing profit, the answer to this question is "no". In a competitive market any other focus is a reciepe for failure.
The most innovtive architect-driven development I can think of is Habitat, which was built as part of EXPO 67. Funding was provided by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which is owned by the Canadian government. Private developers would never take the risks associated with this type of project.
Would architect innovate more if they also were developers?
There seems to be a general consensus here that “good” architecture is also risky architecture. Why is that? Well, the problem is, way too many architects have wedded themselves to this ultramodern architectural style that almost nobody outside the architecture world actually likes.
Personally, I hate ultramodern architecture. It's ugly, and I always thought my job was to make the thing look good. But ultramodern will always be popular among architects because the style allows any hack to throw together a bunch of random lines and circles and then get kudos from other architects for how creative they are, so the style will always get pushed from this direction. But people out in the real world are not afraid to call ugly, unbalanced, sterile buildings for the eyesores they actually are.
So the question is, does “good” architecture have to be something most of the public would hate, and ergo no developer would risk their own money on?
ultramodern will always be popular among architects because the style allows any hack to throw together a bunch of random lines and circles
Sheesh. You have no idea what Modern architecture is, or, I'm guessing, what good design is at all. Did you go to architecture school?
"Really, people here are so insolent and ignorant."
"I don't want that stupid answer saying "Here we go again". "
yeah, that's a good way to keep a constructive discussion going. Listen, I posted pages of info on your first questions, way back when, and you chose to blatantly ignore what I offered and what others offered.
I was here when you were elementary school and I'll be here long after you've moved onto some fashion website and begin asking them why they don't publish magazines.
You come back after you've gone out in the real world and have something to offer besides your naive opinions and gain a little respect for what others offer on here, the time it takes to respond, etc., etc., etc.
xian - we must assume you are simply trolling here, yes?
<Sheesh. You have no idea what Modern architecture is, or, I'm guessing, what good design is at all. Did you go to architecture school? >
Define good design, if you please.
Yes, trace, that's it. I think this is why there are (or seem to be) fewer postings--interesting ones, at least--here these days. Once in a while there's a real gem of a thread, packed with information and/or reasoned opinions, and each post builds on and advances or challenges the conversation.
Then there's all the other ones, like this. It takes time and thought to compose a response to the OP's query, and it's time wasted, as it turns out. I guess that's the price of admission to an online world. But it ends up keeping away the people interested in ideas.
good design is that not this. everyone knows it who knows anything.
funny thread. is it possible to be deaf on the internet?
pier, good luck with the business. who knows perhaps you can make it happen. why not. on other hand the defensive posturing and ignorant responses suggest you are not going to have an easy time. out of curiosity do you have your license? or are you coming to this process from the side of the people with money?
to twist things a wee bit off the tangent, have yall seen frank gehry's early work? in the 1960's he was doing commercial work with almost zero creative energy. it took him 20 years to work out what kind of architect he wanted to be and then another 20 to figure out how to do it. I believe he made money on the way and also snuck in some innovation. but it was in pursuit of something else as far as i can tell. probably that is the only way to do it properly and keep it real.
i guess the question is what kind of innovation will satisfy you perio? i live in tokyo and innovation is what architects do just to keep up with the lowest level expectations. it is hard to argue that is making any of us more wealthy, nor that it is making life better for anyone in a general sense. what do you have in mind?
citizen, I think we all enjoy reading each other comments, so nothing is wasted. Except Piero's mind of course.
Here, piero: two stories about architects who also worked as developers! Make sure to read the comments - a lot of people there are saying what people are saying here: you can do development, but there is always risk. Not a reason not to do it, of course.
Pb Elemental 1
Pb Elemental 2
I'm surprised no one has mentioned this. I believe I posted it in the last "architects as developer" thread.
There's a significant legal aspect here that varies pretty significant from country to country. Even within countries, real estate development practices can differ between states, counties, prefectures et cetera.
So, even if you find a successful strategy that works for you in your immediate environment, it may not be a strategy you can carry over to other places. So, any gains in "innovation" you made are instantly lost.
Ah, jump, I've long been a fan of Gehry's early work... some of it, anyway. To me, the best work he ever did was when he was working under stringent budget constraints. One of his best buildings (to me), a shopping center in Santa Monica from about 1980, was just altered beyond recognition. So it often goes with retail uses.
Now, it seems, the more money thrown at him, the worse the building. And what was once innovation now appears to be an assembly line.
I told you guys that I don’t want to continue with this discussion because I think differently to all of you, and you are the individuals which continue with this issue. I never said that real estate development is not a risk. Of course, it is. Everything in this world that we want to create or do is a risk. Even study architecture is a risk because we don’t know the future about it. I just have two sentences from Nike and Adidas. “Just do it”. “Nothing is impossible”. I’m different because I am an optimistic person. So whatever you say. I don’t care. That is your problem. That is your idea. That is your opinion, but it is not mine. I congratulate everyone for what they think. I know that all steps that you have to make to do real estate development, and it is not easy but I will have to make a sacrifice. That is my problem. Not yours.
you know the best way to stop a discussion is to not keep posting stuff right?
Piero, good for you that you don't want to discuss the issue anymore. What baffles me, however, is that you don't bring any arguments yourself. You ask peoples' opinions, and when the disagree with you, all you say is "well, I understand your point, but I see thing differently and I'm not going to discuss the issue anymore." What's up with that?
Well, I do not pay much attention to your comments because most of them say the same, and I understand your points. But I think the architect is economically falling behind, and architects are not trying to innovate economically. I know many of you will say that most architects are not interested in that, and that the economy is currently in a very poor condition. I just wanted to see what some of the solutions that many architects think were. I have read many articles about economy on the Architect Magazine. I understand that maybe the ideology that I have is not the solution because it is not a new idea. As many of you told me that this website is not focused on architects’ economy. So I decided to don’t post anything again.
pity, he never did tell us the secret behind innovation in architecture...
@ citizen, yeah there was some nice stuff there by gehry in the early years. some really horrible stuff too, like stock buildings for track housing, FLW copies, and cetera. i just got a book done in the nineties that shows his complete works til that time and it included literally his first projects, the works that would not even make it into better homes and gardens because it was mostly content-free with the design side of things. amazing to see how he grew from that to what he is now.
I agree he was most interesting when the budget wasn't there, but also love his latest work. I find myself more impressed by him the more he does.
piero,
If you are not interested in our opinions why ask. How about ask the real estate developers. If their response is the same then MAYBE there is something about reality that you humanly can not possibly do. There are things that are impossible. Sure I would love to be able to walk through the sun and back and swim my way to the core of the earth - ALL IN MY SCUBA GEAR but it is obviously impossible. It is impossible and I don't swim. I would sure die in either cases. Why? Because it is impossible. There is not a single bank willing to invest in odd ball ideas because banks are even stipulating terms of right of final say over projects they are financing. So even if a client wants this and that. The bank can say NO to this and that. If clients want innovative but the bank doesn't then the bank wins because they can pull their money from the project and the client surely will never have any other source because there doesn't exist any. They dried up and are unbelievably competed. Stipulated terms is the name of the business. This is reality. Unless you can magically have all this money, it is a F***ing PIPE DREAM. You don't have the money, you won't be able to do it however you want it - if you want someone else's money invested. If it is someone else's money then that someone else is GOING to stipulate. That is the way it is done since 2008 and this is a permanent policy of EVERY major bank that was under the bail out because it was government rule by the Federal government and every bank now has incorporated this policy to make sure the project is something that they can resell if client defaults. Since EVERY bank wants to resell any property that it financed and has to foreclose on - they want it to be sellable not wierd crap.
When everyone who is in the business, experienced in it and been there and done that says something then maybe it is something you want to listen to because they are giving you advice free of charge that they make $250 an hour on. When someone that makes $250/hr. is wanting to give you free advice - LISTEN ! ! ! ! Otherwise, you are a friggin' fool and WILL FAIL. Not maybe. Will. You are going to fail because you lack the most important skill as a real estate agent and as an architect - LISTENING skill.
Welcome to failure dimwit. You simply don't want others opinion. How about DON'T ASK another question if you are not interested in other people's responses. So go screw yourself and we'll laugh at you when you are homeless with a multimillion dollar debt scraping soda cans in the trash cans. Welcome to your hobo future. I'll give you your survival line: "Do you want fries with that order?"
That was harsh Ricky.
Anyways, here is Mr. Arguello's facebook page.
As you might note, he kind of looks like Mark Zuckerberg. The kid is clearly on to something. All you naysaying losers can suck it!
Yeah, but he doesn't really have the skills to listen to the reasons given. How do you change the will of the people with money. If they don't want it, they aren't going to pay for it.
Impossible, maybe not. Improbable. Yes. Impossible for one measly person because there are people that are literally out to prevent the exact kind of stuff that he is aiming at.
I'm not against him being innovative but he needs to be prepared for the road. There are too many barriers at this time. When the economy gets better and people have money and people are willing to seek more riskier and innovative designs then maybe some might be interested. This is not the time. He doesn't really listen and therefore fails to ask a very important question like How do we deal with innovative design in real estate development when innovative design is considered risky and undesireable ? How do we make innovative designing not as risky if not a low risk?
He failed to ask these questions in order to be prepared to deal with and navigate these waters. He asked if architects would be innovative. Reasons are given. A better question might be to follow up with is - How do make more innovated designs low risk in real estate development and other developments. Or How do we take the risk out of innovative design and it still be innovative design?
The problem is he is rude and not really a listener to reason nor ask the right questions nor did he really want our opinions and spit in our face. That is his problem and that will get him into trouble in being successful in ANYTHING.
Granted, he's still young and hasn't got the maturity yet to operate such a business venture without failing attempts. Ok. He can learn from them and become better but he needs to grow some maturity and general respect to others.
Piero, first off, the moment you spat off in any disrespect to the bank lenders, they are going to pull the plug on the financing. Especially from what they will consider a sniveling child (when alot of the lenders managing the loans are in their 50s and 60s. Old enough to be his parents. They aren't going to put up for one second. The response would be harsh as there is nothing in law that says they have to fund the project. They don't have to lend you money.
You need to listen. They are the money source. They aren't going to give you money if they find you a risk, Let me put it simple: You are young therefore you ARE a risk to the banks. You are inexperienced. You can't jump your first several projects being risky projects because they aren't going to lend you money for anything risky. Especially from someone without any history. Banks are willing to be listen to riskier projects only from someone whom they have successfully worked with for some time. Think of it as trial period. The same goes for any other lender.
They aren't going to be interested in some snively newcomer with no background. Considering there are all sorts of people competing and vieing for their money to invest in - How about this question -> Why should I invest my money in your project ? You need to sell the idea and you need to have a sense of what their concerns are. SERIOUSLY. Not just "I know". It won't cut it.
You need to be sensible and you need to be able to communicate to their concerns and address it. You need to really understand their concerns. They all are already going to be biased against risky financing. Considering just about everyone who was risky LOST lots of money in the last few years and those that were already low risks are ever more vigilant and already knows of friends and family that lost big time. At this point in time, NO ONE is interested in high risk.
Your young age and inexperience is already going to be held against you. They are already going to consider you too risky the second they see you or your profile. You aren't going to find anyone biased on your side with money.
People with money are not the ones that were overly risky. People with money don't throw their money at just anything. They are wise choosers of what and where they invest and how they invest. What is your plan when they aren't even going to consider you. If you are under the age of 35 years old, in general, they are not going to lend you large amounts of money unless you have a successful track record and LOTS of collateral. This isn't for kids.
There is LOTS of hurdles and barriers already in place to keep you from succeeding because they don't want you and are in general, not interested in what you want or your dreams or any of that. They want to know a sound and secure plan to make money. They want surety and certainty of being paid. What do you have to offer as collateral ?
This is what we you can face in the market.
Hey,
You should watch this video. I listen what he says about risk.
http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_libeskind_s_17_words_of_architectural_inspiration.html
this is a great video.
Sure, there is always risks but do keep in mind that you need to be aware of them and ready for them and have solid plans on how to mitigate the risks and how to MANAGE risks. Like Project Management, if you are afraid of risks then you certainly don't belong in the business. Also, don't be stupid and add risks unnecessarily. Understand and Listen to what others say with a degree of respect because people are giving you the matters of advice do you don't end up F---ing yourself. I'm not asking or suggesting to be afraid of risk but do give risk its due respect and also learn how to manage and mitigate risks and how to properly navigate them.
Risks are deadly so be smart. There are the Brave and Smart captains and there are the Brave but Stupid captains. Which one do you want to be Piero?
So, bear in mind what you are up against and how you navigate the turbulent waters full of snares, traps, deathly whirlpools and evil sea monsters.
I'm going to tell you something. There are people here who say I cannot do these things, but I'll tell you what. I can do them because I can. President Obama said a very good thing. he said "yes, we can" and now he is president of the United States. These are the differences between you and those like me and President Obama.
Rick,
You know what. You are right. Thank you very much for your advice.
Yes, I know. I am simply saying to tread risks with care. Innovative designs can happen but it also depends on what is meant by "innovative design". Give some examples of what "innovative designs" means to you? Innovation is a tricky word but it depends on what the "problem" in which your "design solution" is for. (I'm being abstract here).
Just don't be stupid. Be smart about how you deal with it. Optimism is fine. Yes, we can. I am also a realist at the same time. I'm not walking this economy with blindfolds. I have doubts in someone's success when they don't consider the points of views seriously and build a sound plan to deal with the issues that will invariably happen because the issues are either required by law/regulation or is essentially standard among EVERY bank and lender there is like as standard as they want to know your name and address and other contact information.
We have to persevere to become successful.
more like, you have to be perverse to become successful..
Would architects innovate more if they also were developers?
Development is about marketing and maximum profit. Design is about creating solutions to problems. So unless innovation is focused on increasing profit, the answer to this question is "no". In a competitive market any other focus is a reciepe for failure.
The most innovtive architect-driven development I can think of is Habitat, which was built as part of EXPO 67. Funding was provided by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which is owned by the Canadian government. Private developers would never take the risks associated with this type of project.
http://www.space1999.net/~sorellarium13/habitat-67.htm
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.