Re: marketing question
From: Elizabeth Stevenson (
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:45:19 -0700 (MST)
All the more reason to lose the term. If people are ready to buy, they know
what the price will bring.

I've never heard of anyone who is happy living in cohousing saying that the
price or the size of the house, or the granite countertops or lack thereof,
was the reason they bought in.


> From: "Jim Rebman" <seamus [at]>
> Reply-To: Jim Rebman <seamus [at]>, Developing cohousing - 
> collaborative
> housing communities <cohousing-l [at]>
> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:30:31 -0700
> To: <cohousing-l [at]>
> Subject: Re: [C-L]_ marketing question
> I tend to agree with most of your points, but the fact is that in
> Boulder, with the *average* price of a home being $400k, it doesn't
> look all that upscale relative to the local market.  Actually, for the
> square footage and quality of construction, these homes are really
> kind of a bargain in this market, as absurd as it may sound.
> -- Jim
> (soon to be moving into Wild Sage -- mid March)
>> FWIW, I say even the most "cohousing" of the ads is not "cohousing"
> enough.
>> Drop the icky "upscale" pseudo-word (at nearly half a mil, I think
> just
>> about everyone *gets* that it's pricey)...
> _______________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list
> Cohousing-L [at]  Unsubscribe  and other info:

Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at]  Unsubscribe  and other info:

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.