Realistically, the rest of the world just doesn’t see architecture as being as important as architects do. People who do think architecture is really important all become architects. To the rest of the world, architecture is interesting, but they would rather have an extra 800 sqft on their house or just save the money than pay for the typical architects definition of “good architecture”. You are going to have to come up with a better way to sell architecture to these folks than to just keep calling them stupid and uneducated, it just causes them to stop taking you seriously.
As far as architects becoming developers, any architect that does this will quickly learn that the profit margins aren’t nearly as large as you think they are, and to stay in the green and get sales, you have to build buildings that people want, not the buildings architects think they should want.
My point here is that the although the current business model may not work well for a lot of architects, it actually works pretty well for the rest of the world. It’s structured to fit their priorities, not ours. If you want it to change, you’re gonna have to come up with an idea non architects will buy into.
^ Bullshit. There are plenty of very, very rich developers. The ones I know won't touch a project if the most conservatively figured profit margin is below 30%.
Have you seen their books? It’s competitive out there, and if you want a 30% profit margin, then you are going to be up againts people who are happy with a 5 or 10% margin. That’s still a shitload when you’re talking multi million dollar projects.
These guys get far more than 5% return just on rents with no risk. Actual development needs to be a windfall before they're even slightly interested. The people happy to get 5% (or less) are the architects and contractors building these projects.
I find it interesting how earlier in this thread it ran with the typical hating on capitalism for making architecture not valuable to people. I don’t really understand that thought process. Capitalism is really just a process of letting markets decide what goods and services are produced or invested in. Luxury items such as design have a harder sell because they are luxuries. They don’t really do much for people unless you really sell it and prove it. But what other time in history or other system of government has there been a design role for such a wide array of structures? Yes there were much grander forms of architecture in the past but they were limited to whoever held the power at the time, churches, institutions, monarchies. Never before have we seen the common man benefit so much. I’d say we have it pretty good and if you are frustrated by your client being wrapped up in numbers it’s just their way to quantify if the project is a correct allocation of resources. Learn the language and you can prove it to them why you are valuable.
"Capitalism is really just a process of letting markets decide what goods and services are produced or invested in."
Capitalism is in practice an economic system for returning the maximum profit by any means available. That means control and manipulation of markets and either the elimination of regulation or the establishment of favorable regulation.
The results of capitalism are best demonstrated by the massive accumulation of wealth by a tiny fraction of society at the expense of everyone else.
Nov 26, 17 11:02 pm ·
·
archi_dude
Hmm I’d say largest middle class ever. What system would you like Miles?
Nov 27, 17 12:41 am ·
·
Volunteer
The middle class has been shrinking with fewer high-paying jobs with benefits. Employment HAS gone up under Trump, whether you loathe him or not. The proposed tax plan does seem to be a disaster, though.
Proactive Practices has been interviewing some interesting studios creating an impact... sometimes without the initial client: http://proactivepractices.org/
Check out Housebrand.ca. Started by a canadian architect who became the builder and realtor . took the whole "master-builder-realtor" idea to the next level. Small scale but grabbed all the available percentage points as opposed to giving the profits away. Not unlike Jonathon Segal.
What other models for architectural practice might be workable?
Realistically, the rest of the world just doesn’t see architecture as being as important as architects do. People who do think architecture is really important all become architects. To the rest of the world, architecture is interesting, but they would rather have an extra 800 sqft on their house or just save the money than pay for the typical architects definition of “good architecture”. You are going to have to come up with a better way to sell architecture to these folks than to just keep calling them stupid and uneducated, it just causes them to stop taking you seriously.
As far as architects becoming developers, any architect that does this will quickly learn that the profit margins aren’t nearly as large as you think they are, and to stay in the green and get sales, you have to build buildings that people want, not the buildings architects think they should want.
My point here is that the although the current business model may not work well for a lot of architects, it actually works pretty well for the rest of the world. It’s structured to fit their priorities, not ours. If you want it to change, you’re gonna have to come up with an idea non architects will buy into.
^ Bullshit. There are plenty of very, very rich developers. The ones I know won't touch a project if the most conservatively figured profit margin is below 30%.
Have you seen their books? It’s competitive out there, and if you want a 30% profit margin, then you are going to be up againts people who are happy with a 5 or 10% margin. That’s still a shitload when you’re talking multi million dollar projects.
These guys get far more than 5% return just on rents with no risk. Actual development needs to be a windfall before they're even slightly interested. The people happy to get 5% (or less) are the architects and contractors building these projects.
just FYI
I did interview 2 architects on how and why they did transform their service business into real estate business:
http://blog.archisnapper.com/punch-list-app-iPhone-iPad-Android/from-architects-to-real-estate-developers-with-alex-and-esther-from-barcelona/
I find it interesting how earlier in this thread it ran with the typical hating on capitalism for making architecture not valuable to people. I don’t really understand that thought process. Capitalism is really just a process of letting markets decide what goods and services are produced or invested in. Luxury items such as design have a harder sell because they are luxuries. They don’t really do much for people unless you really sell it and prove it. But what other time in history or other system of government has there been a design role for such a wide array of structures? Yes there were much grander forms of architecture in the past but they were limited to whoever held the power at the time, churches, institutions, monarchies. Never before have we seen the common man benefit so much. I’d say we have it pretty good and if you are frustrated by your client being wrapped up in numbers it’s just their way to quantify if the project is a correct allocation of resources. Learn the language and you can prove it to them why you are valuable.
Excuse me, *common person
"Capitalism is really just a process of letting markets decide what goods and services are produced or invested in."
Capitalism is in practice an economic system for returning the maximum profit by any means available. That means control and manipulation of markets and either the elimination of regulation or the establishment of favorable regulation.
The results of capitalism are best demonstrated by the massive accumulation of wealth by a tiny fraction of society at the expense of everyone else.
Hmm I’d say largest middle class ever. What system would you like Miles?
The middle class has been shrinking with fewer high-paying jobs with benefits. Employment HAS gone up under Trump, whether you loathe him or not. The proposed tax plan does seem to be a disaster, though.
Proactive Practices has been interviewing some interesting studios creating an impact... sometimes without the initial client: http://proactivepractices.org/
Check out Housebrand.ca. Started by a canadian architect who became the builder and realtor . took the whole "master-builder-realtor" idea to the next level. Small scale but grabbed all the available percentage points as opposed to giving the profits away. Not unlike Jonathon Segal.
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.