So after some long, hard thought, I don't think I want to pursue a license. In fact, I've settled on going into the dark, evil world of the developer. I wish more of us would make the move. There need to be more developers putting up academic-leaning architecture. I think the era of developers putting up magazine architecture needs to come to its long-overdue end.
I'm sick of people in school (and occasionally on Archinect) griping and moaning about developers building ugly buildings and horrible developments. I'm taking steps to put an end to it buy getting my MBA in Real Estate Finance and pursuing a different career path.
I'm in the process of getting my certificate in Real Estate Development while getting licensed as an architect. One stop shop, master builder.
We in the architect profession can gripe about the evil of pro forma based buildings & communities that developers have left as their legacy, but until architects are willing to pony up $ to develop and put themselves at financial risk, the architect profession will be continually be at the beck and call of developers begging for our next commission.
rfuller, god bless. that's a fantastic idea. a little cross-pollination will do both fields a ton of good, I think.
I already have a BS in Finance & I think it will be invaluable in actually getting stuff built - finance/economics seems to be the one constraint architects don't really give it's due, but it will pull a project down as sure as gravity
good eye TK! completely unintentional, but very ironic indeed.
Vado, thanks for the Minnelli video.
cono, I think cross-pollination will yield phenomenal results/returns. I agree that too many (esp. students) ignore the finance/eco side of things like 1st year students ignore gravity/physics.
ryanj, You probably won't be seeing much of me in the building any more. I dropped everything but product design with Martin (whom I have been getting along with quite well these days.)
Meta, I'd be interested in that sort of combo one day. tack raw land on there and we would really have a winning combination.
Gabriel, I'm still considering obtaining a community design & development certificate here at TTU. I'm not sure if I want to stick it out that long or not...
Well, off to all my wild, drunken hot tub parties and yacht club meetings...
I don't think it's a sell out at all. In fact I'm thinking about those kinds of options for when I graduate next year. However, I think the problem is that there are not enough truly knowledgeable designers working with developers that can counter their "bottom-line" mentality. This is why I'm getting my degree in building science. I want to be the smartest person in a room when we're talking about a building we're designing so that we can make smart decisions about it and end up with a building that everyone can be proud of.
I'm with DubK, don't call it "selling out". You're taking a non-traditional and broader approach to your interest in the built world.
And I'm serious - if you keep telling yourself you're "a sell-out" you're going to eventually get bitter about it, or it will affect your attitude in subtle psychological ways. Don't put yourself through that. Keep doing what you consider to be good work, in all aspects of your life and career, and it won't be anything you won't be proud of.
vado doesn't that include the people who shout down progress & antagonize those that step away from the beaten path? so it's kind of a moot point... but the business world is a real constraint, and whether we like it or not we need to take it into account...
not to jump off the deep end on this, but I think it's high time we examine who controls the building of our worlds, and what their goals are... the stated goal of many corporations is to just make $$; for-profit development has a lot of benefits but also a lot of detriments...
I'm sure I'll post some windbag blog on that soon for no one to read.
anyway, something more relevant is architect-turned-developer Johnathan Segal
I'm one year out of university and am looking to develop my own projects in the future. I'm currently looking at post-graduate courses that will help supplement my architectural knowledge with some project management and finance training. What type of course do you guys think would be most appropriate?
and the abiltiy to understand income statement, balance sheets, etc. All of which are far more straightforward than many architectural design processes
I've always found it interesting, the designer/developer dichotomy .. .. and fantasize about applying the 'analysis and creative rigor' of architecture to developering .. Naive perhaps , but i think there could be a lot more creativity from the developer's end , - as architects , ( or rather , as architecture students) we're often envisioning new types of buildings - not just new forms , but new building-types .... the way an airport emerged as a new building type . Often architects come late to the game , the building type has allready emerged , its form sort of entrenched, and any real possibility to 're-imagine' lies between the unlikely and impossible.
So what are the new building-types to come ? And should it be the 'visionary designer' who gets lucky with a client who will be shaping them ? why not the developitect ( I know ,that sounds as assinine as jackalope) who can percieve , propose and realize them .. you could almost argue for it being a responsibility that the discipline has always shirked .
I'm looking forward to mixing it up.
I agree with liberty bell, WonderK and metamechanic. I think there is a greater need for arcitects and designers within the development sector to "promote" our necessity within the building industry.
In my opinion, every architect working for a firm that produces sub-standard, strip-mall, mcmansionesque, ordinary architecture is a sell out.
Perpetuating the fantasy of the comtemporary architecture profession as being universally valuable and equal doesnt help anyone.
For every architect doing genuinely good and interesting work, there are 50 firms producing crap. This is for a variety of reasons, but one of them is because they are working for clients/developers with a very limited vision of what buildings and developments could be.
I myself have moved into development and I am finding that I am immensely enjoying my work. Mainly because the decisions over what gets built and how are up to me.
No, I am not designing what gets built. Nor am I responsible for the other 90% of architectural work that does not involve design. I am learning a hell of alot about development, costing, scheduling, marketing, finance and management - all of which will benefit me when I make my next move.
I have immense respect for those architects out there running their own practices which is an achievement in its own right. It is hard, stressful, rewarding and disappointing.
Now, imagine if I could set up a development company where I could take some of these young practices on - allow them to design for a client that understands architecture and development. That focuses on value, not cost. And, I might add, there are plenty of development companies that are set up like this.
every architect working for a firm that produces sub-standard, strip-mall, mcmansionesque, ordinary architecture is a sell out
diabase - while I think I know where you're coming from, that is an outrageous and insulting statement. if everybody held out for the 10% of positions that meet your criteria for a responsible job in architecture, 90% of the people who studied architecture would be waiting tables.
the vast majority of buildings always have been - and always will be - ordinary. to suggest that every building should be - or ever could be - designed and built up to your standards is, IMHO, beyond comprehension.
to suggest further that architects who work on "ordinary' buildings are "sellouts" warrants an apology to the huge number of competent, well meaning and professional architects who go to work every day, trying to make the projects on which they work pleasant for their users, successful for their owners and a little better than they would have been if the work had been abandoned totally to designers who simply don't give a damn.
Skip school and head to the Urban Land Institute meet ups. As one of my profs said, the only qualification for a developer is money or the ability to raise money.
Now get to work, the world will be better for it.
j
Accepted. Remove ordinary. Ordinary is acceptable. Perhaps 'default' might be a more appropriate adjective.
I stand by what I said however about architects being sell-outs, but perhaps I should requalify this statement with my original intent:
Every architect out there who works for a firm or operates a firm where the work produced is not up to their own standards is a sell out - never mind my own standards.
What one chooses to do about that is up to the individual. Pointing out that there is widespread dissatisfaction in the architecture profession is not news.
The fact that an architect can come on this thread and feel guilty about entering into development, and is either seriously or cheekily called a sell out is a disgrace.
Every architect ... who works for a firm or operates a firm where the work produced is not up to their own standards is a sell out ...
I can come closer to accepting that statement and appreciate you taking the time to clarify. But, the fact remains that setting the bar this high still would leave a lot of graduates without any work in the profession at all ... especially in the near term.
There are those who can work for starchitects at little or no pay because they don't do architecture to make a living. But the vast majority of us need to work and there simply aren't enough jobs -- especially decent paying jobs -- available at the kinds of firms you describe.
I am not setting the bar. I am asking each individual to set their own bar. You seem to be suggesting that on pragmatic grounds, low standards are acceptable - is'nt this dangerous? Would you prefer that your doctor operated with lower medical standards to save time, money or hassle?
When I talk about good architects and architecture I am not talking about starchitects. We work with good architects who even inside my own locale are relatively unknown, but they produce good work.
Have you looked at the news section on the 3 UK Architecture practices that have been included in the top 100 places to work? No starchitects there - just good practices.
What I am suggesting that architects getting into development is good for the profession and may help to improve architecture.
I am also suggesting that the profession itself often labours under the illusion that there is something inherently noble about architecture - this is often a last attempt by a dying profession.
And of course, very few architects know about development, and very few developers know about architecture. That has to change.
My dad and my father-in-law are both extremely happy with my decision. Especially when we start talking $$$alarie$$$. However my mom is a little bummed. She still has dreams of me becoming the world's greatest architect. I think I may forward this thread to her. I really appreciate all the positive feedback. I think it will be a great help.
Deviant, I agree that you don't need an MBA to become a developer. Most developers in my area don't have one. BUT, to me it makes more sense. For one, it's a lot easier for me to gain the required knowledge. I'd rather read it in a book than learn it the hard way. Also, it provides a lot more connections to starting capital. (Not that I'm hurting for connections, but it never hurts to get a few more...)
Diabase and quiz, I'm straddling the fence. I completely see both sides of your discussion.
mdlerweed, I think development would be a much better option that managing an In-N-Out or Carl's Jr.
****BTW****
When I said I was selling it, I meant it as a joke. I don't really see development as a sellout. It's been my plan since the end of Studio 1.
rfuller I don't think it is selling out. Both me and my coworker (both architects as well) are into real estate. Whilst I am looking at being a developer he and his wife buy properties for rental. Go on do it, architecture is a wide open field and this is one sure way to make a little moola.
After practicing for 15 years, The last 3 1/2 of which were on my own, I find it rather amusing that so many architects want to be developers. I personally have considered other professions as I have reached different crossroads in my career so I don't fault anyone for doing so.
To be a successful developer you have to be willing to lose everything you own and everything you have ever earned with each deal that you make.
Back in the 1980's many of the developers in the US lost everything. I was in architecture undergrad in the late 80's and watched as my father and our family's multi-million dollar fortune evaporated due to his development deals. I remember when the bank came and took all of our cars, and my father was suddenly driving my old mazda that I drove in high school. My father was a CPA with an MBA. It did not help and we lost every penny. When the market turned, and the tide went out, it was amazing how many people were swimming naked...
An architect who is developing his own projects is the height of folly. The staggering risk of being an architect combined with the high risk of development pre-supposes an impossible reward, considering the standards of risk-reward that I adhere to. Don't do it. If you choose to be a developer, hire an architect to take that part of the risk.
Most people under 35 have not experienced a serious real estate recession. When it comes the next time, many of the small to medium developers will be drowning in debt and will be out of business just like in all previous real estate recessions.
One last story, I have a friend from school who works for Brinker, (Chili's, On the border, etc.). Two weeks ago they fired the entire 125 person real estate and development team. These were mostly archtitects and MBA types. The culprit? Too much debt and too much overbuilding (Not to mention bad hamburgers). I have many other anecdotal stories of business acquaintances who are sitting on a lot of unsold or unleased inventory right now, sweating it out. I predict that many of them are not going to make it.
The moral of the story: Development is not the easy money you think it is. Architecture is no different. Do what you love, and the rest will take care of itself.
Buzzkill. I'm laughing outloud. I'll try to respond to the general flavor of the other posts.
I have two clients right now that are both ex-senior associates from Gensler, another client who attended architecture school, but never practiced, and yet another client that worked for 6 years, but never took the exam. All of these clients very aggressive in their desire for good design, and are probably some of my most enjoyable clients. They all work for development companies that don't have to go 'all-in' on every project, having passed that stage. They push my firm hard, and I'm grateful for their involvement in my projects.
My biggest disappointment over the years has been watching talented designers leave the profession to either development, or my personal favorite, a contemporary that became a database analyst. He was a great designer, and an incredibly talented 3-D artist.
The profession so badly needs good designers right now. I'm not talking about starchitects, but the designers in solid medium to large size firms nationwide. There are not that many really good designers out there and the built environment is finally waking up to good design, not just for museums, but for all walks of life. I hate to think that an otherwise talented designer would see this thread and take the easy (or hard) way out. Once you leave, its hard to come back.
I would also advise those of you reading this to at least work for 5-10 years for a solid commercial firm and get your license before you go to the dark side. Architectural education is not a substitute for the real world experience that you will need when you actually make the jump.
Wow - those are some excellent comments, mooontoaster. Your comment that "The profession so badly needs tood designers right now... in solid medium to large size firms..." gives me hope right now.
I'm in agreement with you that you should "Do what you love." Anyone who only sees dollar signs is in big trouble. I'm not sure your post, has much cred, however. It's the equivilent of saying my dad died in a car crash so don't drive your car. I think your point is well taken if it is about due diligence or perhaps one's comfort with risk. Anyone who is sweating it out right now probably only saw the $ signs.
Ever ask your Dad why his firm went down the tubes while others were able to manage the recession?
I'm trying to show the flip not-so-rosy side of being in development in an otherwise sunny skies thread. I learned a valuable lesson from my upbringing, but I see the downside of working as a developer every day working as an architect. That's the real source of my wariness.
It's extremely important to understand that that being a developer can whipsaw back on you no matter how smart you think you are. The rewards can be big, but with big reward comes big risk and big potential losses.
To answer your question, My father (passed away in 2000) bought or built a number of properties beginning in 1983-1984 when money was plentiful The real estate market crashed and burned in 1986 right as the projects were finished. Larger companies with deep amounts of cash reserves (Like Trammell Crow for instance) were able to absorb the losses and weather it out. My father had few reserves and all of the properties entered foreclosure. Many small to medium size spec developers at the time in Texas were wiped out. It was your basic case of bad luck, bad timing, and most importantly, not enough buffer for the risk undertaken (It was an 'all-in' bet). The projects themselves were the same strip centers and small office buildings that dot the American urban landscape. No, they weren't in bad locations or crime-ridden neighborhoods. Two years earlier, and he would probably have made money. He did not have deep pockets, however, and did not survive. Always remember that deep pockets will soften the blow of almost any bad financial situation, and those with deep pockets always seem to survive.
I can name a half a dozen people that I know TODAY that started residential or townhome projects 18 months- 2 yrs ago that were certain they were going to make their fortune selling $400,000-$700,000 townhomes, condos, and spec SF houses that are really hurting right now. One guy (ironically an architect who was also the developer) built a 30 unit project and is bleeding $35,000 A MONTH out of his own pocket right now. Another who is sitting on 17 houses with no buyers in sight. One more who has dropped the price of his 6 townhomes from $375,000 to $275,000 and has not sold a one. Did his proforma anticipate that ($600,000 less profit, lucky to break even)? How many of you reading this can support any of these situations for very long? Does that make you squirm in your seat?
I predict that that more than half of these six will lose everything, as they gambled big and will lose big. I have other clients right now that have the reserves necessary to sit on their non-performing assets and will do very well in the long run. It's the law of the jungle.
It is about acknowledging your tolerance for the risk inherent in any situation (Driving a car, for instance). Trust me, starting a firm presents its own set of risks and is by far the hardest thing I have ever done. Compared to what I'm witnessing with my developer friends, though, I'm pleased with my decision. Perhaps my financial reward may not be as great, but so be it.
rfuller's selling out. Anyone wanna' buy in?
So after some long, hard thought, I don't think I want to pursue a license. In fact, I've settled on going into the dark, evil world of the developer. I wish more of us would make the move. There need to be more developers putting up academic-leaning architecture. I think the era of developers putting up magazine architecture needs to come to its long-overdue end.
I'm sick of people in school (and occasionally on Archinect) griping and moaning about developers building ugly buildings and horrible developments. I'm taking steps to put an end to it buy getting my MBA in Real Estate Finance and pursuing a different career path.
Who else is with me?
BTW the pay is SOOOOOOOOOOO much better...mdler.
I'm in the process of getting my certificate in Real Estate Development while getting licensed as an architect. One stop shop, master builder.
We in the architect profession can gripe about the evil of pro forma based buildings & communities that developers have left as their legacy, but until architects are willing to pony up $ to develop and put themselves at financial risk, the architect profession will be continually be at the beck and call of developers begging for our next commission.
buy
ing your mba?
I'm sure that was not intentional, but very apropos!
rfuller, god bless. that's a fantastic idea. a little cross-pollination will do both fields a ton of good, I think.
I already have a BS in Finance & I think it will be invaluable in actually getting stuff built - finance/economics seems to be the one constraint architects don't really give it's due, but it will pull a project down as sure as gravity
you SeLlOuT!
congrats buddy, i wish you the best! i'd love to hear more about this new found freedom/liberation.
good eye TK! completely unintentional, but very ironic indeed.
Vado, thanks for the Minnelli video.
cono, I think cross-pollination will yield phenomenal results/returns. I agree that too many (esp. students) ignore the finance/eco side of things like 1st year students ignore gravity/physics.
ryanj, You probably won't be seeing much of me in the building any more. I dropped everything but product design with Martin (whom I have been getting along with quite well these days.)
Meta, I'd be interested in that sort of combo one day. tack raw land on there and we would really have a winning combination.
Gabriel, I'm still considering obtaining a community design & development certificate here at TTU. I'm not sure if I want to stick it out that long or not...
Well, off to all my wild, drunken hot tub parties and yacht club meetings...
I don't think it's a sell out at all. In fact I'm thinking about those kinds of options for when I graduate next year. However, I think the problem is that there are not enough truly knowledgeable designers working with developers that can counter their "bottom-line" mentality. This is why I'm getting my degree in building science. I want to be the smartest person in a room when we're talking about a building we're designing so that we can make smart decisions about it and end up with a building that everyone can be proud of.
I'm with DubK, don't call it "selling out". You're taking a non-traditional and broader approach to your interest in the built world.
And I'm serious - if you keep telling yourself you're "a sell-out" you're going to eventually get bitter about it, or it will affect your attitude in subtle psychological ways. Don't put yourself through that. Keep doing what you consider to be good work, in all aspects of your life and career, and it won't be anything you won't be proud of.
most of the horrible events of the world were carried out by people who thought they were doing "good work"...
the idea of an architect "selling out" to developers is amusing...like what'd you get on that deal? a dollar fifty?
maybe just post to ebay to get highest bid
vado doesn't that include the people who shout down progress & antagonize those that step away from the beaten path? so it's kind of a moot point... but the business world is a real constraint, and whether we like it or not we need to take it into account...
not to jump off the deep end on this, but I think it's high time we examine who controls the building of our worlds, and what their goals are... the stated goal of many corporations is to just make $$; for-profit development has a lot of benefits but also a lot of detriments...
I'm sure I'll post some windbag blog on that soon for no one to read.
anyway, something more relevant is architect-turned-developer Johnathan Segal
ps the postedon is my favorite dinosaur, next to the iguanadon.
I'm one year out of university and am looking to develop my own projects in the future. I'm currently looking at post-graduate courses that will help supplement my architectural knowledge with some project management and finance training. What type of course do you guys think would be most appropriate?
no need to go to school for an MBA to become a developer..What you will need:
1. a financial calculator (HP 17b), and the ability to use the time value of money function
2. some working capital, a $100K is a good start
3. common sense
4. and a good pulse on local market conditions
take it from someone who is supplementing their development career with an M.arch...development is about experience and patience...
BTW, 2008-09 is the time to buy here in L.A. rates are back down and prices are too
and the abiltiy to understand income statement, balance sheets, etc. All of which are far more straightforward than many architectural design processes
I've always found it interesting, the designer/developer dichotomy .. .. and fantasize about applying the 'analysis and creative rigor' of architecture to developering .. Naive perhaps , but i think there could be a lot more creativity from the developer's end , - as architects , ( or rather , as architecture students) we're often envisioning new types of buildings - not just new forms , but new building-types .... the way an airport emerged as a new building type . Often architects come late to the game , the building type has allready emerged , its form sort of entrenched, and any real possibility to 're-imagine' lies between the unlikely and impossible.
So what are the new building-types to come ? And should it be the 'visionary designer' who gets lucky with a client who will be shaping them ? why not the developitect ( I know ,that sounds as assinine as jackalope) who can percieve , propose and realize them .. you could almost argue for it being a responsibility that the discipline has always shirked .
I'm looking forward to mixing it up.
i want to sell out, too. but i don't have enough money.
I agree with liberty bell, WonderK and metamechanic. I think there is a greater need for arcitects and designers within the development sector to "promote" our necessity within the building industry.
rfuller ... good luck and best wishes. Just be cautious of the "dark side".
I thought Architecture was the "dark side"?
In my opinion, every architect working for a firm that produces sub-standard, strip-mall, mcmansionesque, ordinary architecture is a sell out.
Perpetuating the fantasy of the comtemporary architecture profession as being universally valuable and equal doesnt help anyone.
For every architect doing genuinely good and interesting work, there are 50 firms producing crap. This is for a variety of reasons, but one of them is because they are working for clients/developers with a very limited vision of what buildings and developments could be.
I myself have moved into development and I am finding that I am immensely enjoying my work. Mainly because the decisions over what gets built and how are up to me.
No, I am not designing what gets built. Nor am I responsible for the other 90% of architectural work that does not involve design. I am learning a hell of alot about development, costing, scheduling, marketing, finance and management - all of which will benefit me when I make my next move.
I have immense respect for those architects out there running their own practices which is an achievement in its own right. It is hard, stressful, rewarding and disappointing.
Now, imagine if I could set up a development company where I could take some of these young practices on - allow them to design for a client that understands architecture and development. That focuses on value, not cost. And, I might add, there are plenty of development companies that are set up like this.
Thats a worthy mission from my POV.
Good luck rfuller
diabase - while I think I know where you're coming from, that is an outrageous and insulting statement. if everybody held out for the 10% of positions that meet your criteria for a responsible job in architecture, 90% of the people who studied architecture would be waiting tables.
the vast majority of buildings always have been - and always will be - ordinary. to suggest that every building should be - or ever could be - designed and built up to your standards is, IMHO, beyond comprehension.
to suggest further that architects who work on "ordinary' buildings are "sellouts" warrants an apology to the huge number of competent, well meaning and professional architects who go to work every day, trying to make the projects on which they work pleasant for their users, successful for their owners and a little better than they would have been if the work had been abandoned totally to designers who simply don't give a damn.
even someone putting an addition on thier house is a developer of sorts
Skip school and head to the Urban Land Institute meet ups. As one of my profs said, the only qualification for a developer is money or the ability to raise money.
Now get to work, the world will be better for it.
j
quizzical,
Accepted. Remove ordinary. Ordinary is acceptable. Perhaps 'default' might be a more appropriate adjective.
I stand by what I said however about architects being sell-outs, but perhaps I should requalify this statement with my original intent:
Every architect out there who works for a firm or operates a firm where the work produced is not up to their own standards is a sell out - never mind my own standards.
What one chooses to do about that is up to the individual. Pointing out that there is widespread dissatisfaction in the architecture profession is not news.
The fact that an architect can come on this thread and feel guilty about entering into development, and is either seriously or cheekily called a sell out is a disgrace.
I can come closer to accepting that statement and appreciate you taking the time to clarify. But, the fact remains that setting the bar this high still would leave a lot of graduates without any work in the profession at all ... especially in the near term.
There are those who can work for starchitects at little or no pay because they don't do architecture to make a living. But the vast majority of us need to work and there simply aren't enough jobs -- especially decent paying jobs -- available at the kinds of firms you describe.
I am not setting the bar. I am asking each individual to set their own bar. You seem to be suggesting that on pragmatic grounds, low standards are acceptable - is'nt this dangerous? Would you prefer that your doctor operated with lower medical standards to save time, money or hassle?
When I talk about good architects and architecture I am not talking about starchitects. We work with good architects who even inside my own locale are relatively unknown, but they produce good work.
Have you looked at the news section on the 3 UK Architecture practices that have been included in the top 100 places to work? No starchitects there - just good practices.
What I am suggesting that architects getting into development is good for the profession and may help to improve architecture.
I am also suggesting that the profession itself often labours under the illusion that there is something inherently noble about architecture - this is often a last attempt by a dying profession.
And of course, very few architects know about development, and very few developers know about architecture. That has to change.
My dad and my father-in-law are both extremely happy with my decision. Especially when we start talking $$$alarie$$$. However my mom is a little bummed. She still has dreams of me becoming the world's greatest architect. I think I may forward this thread to her. I really appreciate all the positive feedback. I think it will be a great help.
Deviant, I agree that you don't need an MBA to become a developer. Most developers in my area don't have one. BUT, to me it makes more sense. For one, it's a lot easier for me to gain the required knowledge. I'd rather read it in a book than learn it the hard way. Also, it provides a lot more connections to starting capital. (Not that I'm hurting for connections, but it never hurts to get a few more...)
Diabase and quiz, I'm straddling the fence. I completely see both sides of your discussion.
mdlerweed, I think development would be a much better option that managing an In-N-Out or Carl's Jr.
****BTW****
When I said I was selling it, I meant it as a joke. I don't really see development as a sellout. It's been my plan since the end of Studio 1.
rfuller I don't think it is selling out. Both me and my coworker (both architects as well) are into real estate. Whilst I am looking at being a developer he and his wife buy properties for rental. Go on do it, architecture is a wide open field and this is one sure way to make a little moola.
After practicing for 15 years, The last 3 1/2 of which were on my own, I find it rather amusing that so many architects want to be developers. I personally have considered other professions as I have reached different crossroads in my career so I don't fault anyone for doing so.
To be a successful developer you have to be willing to lose everything you own and everything you have ever earned with each deal that you make.
Back in the 1980's many of the developers in the US lost everything. I was in architecture undergrad in the late 80's and watched as my father and our family's multi-million dollar fortune evaporated due to his development deals. I remember when the bank came and took all of our cars, and my father was suddenly driving my old mazda that I drove in high school. My father was a CPA with an MBA. It did not help and we lost every penny. When the market turned, and the tide went out, it was amazing how many people were swimming naked...
An architect who is developing his own projects is the height of folly. The staggering risk of being an architect combined with the high risk of development pre-supposes an impossible reward, considering the standards of risk-reward that I adhere to. Don't do it. If you choose to be a developer, hire an architect to take that part of the risk.
Most people under 35 have not experienced a serious real estate recession. When it comes the next time, many of the small to medium developers will be drowning in debt and will be out of business just like in all previous real estate recessions.
One last story, I have a friend from school who works for Brinker, (Chili's, On the border, etc.). Two weeks ago they fired the entire 125 person real estate and development team. These were mostly archtitects and MBA types. The culprit? Too much debt and too much overbuilding (Not to mention bad hamburgers). I have many other anecdotal stories of business acquaintances who are sitting on a lot of unsold or unleased inventory right now, sweating it out. I predict that many of them are not going to make it.
The moral of the story: Development is not the easy money you think it is. Architecture is no different. Do what you love, and the rest will take care of itself.
way to be a buzzkill toaster!
Buzzkill. I'm laughing outloud. I'll try to respond to the general flavor of the other posts.
I have two clients right now that are both ex-senior associates from Gensler, another client who attended architecture school, but never practiced, and yet another client that worked for 6 years, but never took the exam. All of these clients very aggressive in their desire for good design, and are probably some of my most enjoyable clients. They all work for development companies that don't have to go 'all-in' on every project, having passed that stage. They push my firm hard, and I'm grateful for their involvement in my projects.
My biggest disappointment over the years has been watching talented designers leave the profession to either development, or my personal favorite, a contemporary that became a database analyst. He was a great designer, and an incredibly talented 3-D artist.
The profession so badly needs good designers right now. I'm not talking about starchitects, but the designers in solid medium to large size firms nationwide. There are not that many really good designers out there and the built environment is finally waking up to good design, not just for museums, but for all walks of life. I hate to think that an otherwise talented designer would see this thread and take the easy (or hard) way out. Once you leave, its hard to come back.
I would also advise those of you reading this to at least work for 5-10 years for a solid commercial firm and get your license before you go to the dark side. Architectural education is not a substitute for the real world experience that you will need when you actually make the jump.
Wow - those are some excellent comments, mooontoaster. Your comment that "The profession so badly needs tood designers right now... in solid medium to large size firms..." gives me hope right now.
Hey toast,
I'm in agreement with you that you should "Do what you love." Anyone who only sees dollar signs is in big trouble. I'm not sure your post, has much cred, however. It's the equivilent of saying my dad died in a car crash so don't drive your car. I think your point is well taken if it is about due diligence or perhaps one's comfort with risk. Anyone who is sweating it out right now probably only saw the $ signs.
Ever ask your Dad why his firm went down the tubes while others were able to manage the recession?
Point taken.
I'm trying to show the flip not-so-rosy side of being in development in an otherwise sunny skies thread. I learned a valuable lesson from my upbringing, but I see the downside of working as a developer every day working as an architect. That's the real source of my wariness.
It's extremely important to understand that that being a developer can whipsaw back on you no matter how smart you think you are. The rewards can be big, but with big reward comes big risk and big potential losses.
To answer your question, My father (passed away in 2000) bought or built a number of properties beginning in 1983-1984 when money was plentiful The real estate market crashed and burned in 1986 right as the projects were finished. Larger companies with deep amounts of cash reserves (Like Trammell Crow for instance) were able to absorb the losses and weather it out. My father had few reserves and all of the properties entered foreclosure. Many small to medium size spec developers at the time in Texas were wiped out. It was your basic case of bad luck, bad timing, and most importantly, not enough buffer for the risk undertaken (It was an 'all-in' bet). The projects themselves were the same strip centers and small office buildings that dot the American urban landscape. No, they weren't in bad locations or crime-ridden neighborhoods. Two years earlier, and he would probably have made money. He did not have deep pockets, however, and did not survive. Always remember that deep pockets will soften the blow of almost any bad financial situation, and those with deep pockets always seem to survive.
I can name a half a dozen people that I know TODAY that started residential or townhome projects 18 months- 2 yrs ago that were certain they were going to make their fortune selling $400,000-$700,000 townhomes, condos, and spec SF houses that are really hurting right now. One guy (ironically an architect who was also the developer) built a 30 unit project and is bleeding $35,000 A MONTH out of his own pocket right now. Another who is sitting on 17 houses with no buyers in sight. One more who has dropped the price of his 6 townhomes from $375,000 to $275,000 and has not sold a one. Did his proforma anticipate that ($600,000 less profit, lucky to break even)? How many of you reading this can support any of these situations for very long? Does that make you squirm in your seat?
I predict that that more than half of these six will lose everything, as they gambled big and will lose big. I have other clients right now that have the reserves necessary to sit on their non-performing assets and will do very well in the long run. It's the law of the jungle.
It is about acknowledging your tolerance for the risk inherent in any situation (Driving a car, for instance). Trust me, starting a firm presents its own set of risks and is by far the hardest thing I have ever done. Compared to what I'm witnessing with my developer friends, though, I'm pleased with my decision. Perhaps my financial reward may not be as great, but so be it.
Thanks for sharing Toast.
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.