Co-living in London: Friendship, fines and frustration
1–10 of 101 posts
Re: Co-living in London: Friendship, fines and frustration
#2My entire time in the UK I've lived in flatshares - out of sheer necessity due to the ridiculous rent prices. This "co-living" space is no exception in that respect. Only somehow they manage to spin it as "hip" to live in a shoebox for 1000£ a month. This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building.
It's probably fine for short term tennants who just need a place to sleep after work ("bedsits" that are being offered in the city are at least as expensive).
Now, mind you, having lived in flatshares for over 12 years, I've grown to hate it with a passion, so maybe I'm totally wrong here (doubt it).
Re: Co-living in London: Friendship, fines and frustration
#3My entire time in the UK I've lived in flatshares - out of sheer necessity due to the ridiculous rent prices. This "co-living" space is no exception in that respect. Only somehow they manage to spin it as "hip" to live in a shoebox for 1000£ a month. This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building. It's probably fine for short term tennants…
Having to share a flat in London was a good 50% of the reason for me moving to Madrid. Wanting to live in your own home is not so much to ask.
Sadly, this seems to be a trend in many other places too - even in Madrid itself it's not that realistic to live alone if you are young and on a local wage.
Re: Co-living in London: Friendship, fines and frustration
#4My entire time in the UK I've lived in flatshares - out of sheer necessity due to the ridiculous rent prices. This "co-living" space is no exception in that respect. Only somehow they manage to spin it as "hip" to live in a shoebox for 1000£ a month. This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building. It's probably fine for short term tennants…
>This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building.
Could you clarify? As opposed to landlords in other cities, who house people out of the kindness of their hearts? I’m just not sure what the argument you’re making really is.
Re: Co-living in London: Friendship, fines and frustration
#5My entire time in the UK I've lived in flatshares - out of sheer necessity due to the ridiculous rent prices. This "co-living" space is no exception in that respect. Only somehow they manage to spin it as "hip" to live in a shoebox for 1000£ a month. This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building. It's probably fine for short term tennants…
Having to share a flat in London was a good 50% of the reason for me moving to Madrid. Wanting to live in your own home is not so much to ask. Sadly, this seems to be a trend in many other places too - even in Madrid itself it's not that realistic to live alone if you are young and on a local wage.
It’s helpful to live with a significant other. Splitting rent for an outrageous 1-bedroom in a big city is basically the only option...
Re: Co-living in London: Friendship, fines and frustration
#6Alright, so Collective privatised what used to be a student dorm, decreasing affordable housing to students, and now offers a bed in crammed rooms with other people for at least 1000GBP/month. For some reason this is considered a good deal (for Collective I guess?)... Is this the prosperous future?
Re: Co-living in London: Friendship, fines and frustration
#7My entire time in the UK I've lived in flatshares - out of sheer necessity due to the ridiculous rent prices. This "co-living" space is no exception in that respect. Only somehow they manage to spin it as "hip" to live in a shoebox for 1000£ a month. This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building. It's probably fine for short term tennants…
> This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building. Could you clarify? As opposed to landlords in other cities, who house people out of the kindness of their hearts? I’m just not sure what the argument you’re making really is.
Germany seems to be doing way better.
Re: Co-living in London: Friendship, fines and frustration
#8£1,000 to nearly £3,000 a month
fuuuuuuuuuuuuckin ell
Re: Co-living in London: Friendship, fines and frustration
#9My entire time in the UK I've lived in flatshares - out of sheer necessity due to the ridiculous rent prices. This "co-living" space is no exception in that respect. Only somehow they manage to spin it as "hip" to live in a shoebox for 1000£ a month. This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building. It's probably fine for short term tennants…
> This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building. Could you clarify? As opposed to landlords in other cities, who house people out of the kindness of their hearts? I’m just not sure what the argument you’re making really is.
No, it's just that the market is more realistic elsewhere. No one is squeezing 12 people into a 3-bed flat in Newcastle, because there are no people who want to live in such conditions in Newcastle - £300 a month gets you a private room with all utilities and council tax included. But if in London people pay £1000+ for just one room or similar amounts to share, then suddenly it becomes a much more lucrative market.
Re: Co-living in London: Friendship, fines and frustration
#10My entire time in the UK I've lived in flatshares - out of sheer necessity due to the ridiculous rent prices. This "co-living" space is no exception in that respect. Only somehow they manage to spin it as "hip" to live in a shoebox for 1000£ a month. This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building. It's probably fine for short term tennants…
> This is just making money off of the dire housing situation, imho, by squeezing the maximum amount of people into a building. Could you clarify? As opposed to landlords in other cities, who house people out of the kindness of their hearts? I’m just not sure what the argument you’re making really is.
I realize that most landlords consider themselves as doing a service but sometimes they don't seem much different from domain squatters. It's not really a service, what would happen if they didn't exist? Everyone only buys homes for living in as needed, drastically lower prices, more innovation based businesses that actually contribute to making the world a better place?