They run episodes about the house and get revenue from commercials. It also brings exposure to their channel and website in a way that a cash giveaway wouldn't. Many people (myself included) would return to their website to look at info on the houses even after the contest is over, whereas a simple cash prize would draw people there just once (in order to sign up).

I'm sure they get a lot of the materials and furnishings donated or at reduced cost (advertising for the manufacturer), so giving away a million dollar home doesn't actually cost them anywhere near a million dollars.

why not give them a house that they could easily afford the upkeep on their salary

Because the "Nice but Not Particularly Extravagant Home Contest" doesn't really draw the same sort of interest, does it.

babigm said:Not to get in the way of everyone wagging their finger at this family, but does anyone else find it fundamentally stupid for HGTV to be giving away a customized prize that almost by definition the people that receive it can't keep?

I mean here they are going through all the trouble of holding a contest and making a house that is built and customized exclusively for the needs and wants of the family that wins, and then (if the family is smart about it) they have to turn around and sell it to someone else immediately. Why not just pick a random person and give them one or two million dollars?

Given that they are Home and Garden Television, they probably still want to give away a home just for marketing reasons, but why not be more reasonable? Obviously the family has some spending issues and they could have saved money better in a few different ways, but why not give them a house that they could easily afford the upkeep on their salary, instead of having to FW their way through the rest of their life despite this gift? I don't think they would spit on a 300k or a 400k home built just for them.

It is not customized for the family that wins. The home is built, then a family wins.

Why would anyone want to buy a house ( or even win a house) that doesn't come with the land? Do they have to rent the land?

BTW, that guy's website barely worked for me, and I have high speed cable.

sloth911 said:gregcjaxson said:Why would anyone want to buy a house ( or even win a house) that doesn't come with the land? Do they have to rent the land?

BTW, that guy's website barely worked for me, and I have high speed cable.

People buy them (in droves)everyday. They are called condos, trailers, timeshares, coops, etc.

There's all sorts of ground leases for single family homes around. Check Baltimore, MD and Honolulu, Hawaii for high concentrations of such.

It is incorrect that condo and co-op owners do not have an ownership interest in the land their building sits on, unless the building itself sits on leased land.