Hacker News Reader

> it's common for unfurnished apartments in Zurich cost upwards of $2,000, so adding $400 on top of that for a really beautiful interior package is not that big of a jump, especially when compared to fully-furnished apartments which cost significant more.

I'd be mindful of that assumption across markets. I'm in London and while furnishing may have an impact on the list price for some properties, list price is almost always a product of the market and it's rarely possible to quantify the _cost of furnishing_. For example, apartments in my building are roughly the same price whether furnished or unfurnished. Furnishing is seen as a convenience here[1], not a financial benefit.

I do think this is a great proposition and that, once prices come down, you'll have a good opportunity in London -- just challenging the assumption that furnishing is universally reflected in price :)

[1] Typically, a furnished property is easier to tenant, so landlords can choose between furnishing (easier to find a tenant, risk of expensive damage) or unfurnished (harder to find a tenant, no risk of damage). Very common to see a furnished property offered "furnished or unfurnished" if someone wants to bring their own furniture, and that doesn't impact the price.

> For example, apartments in my building are roughly the same price whether furnished or unfurnished.

I would question that statement. :) That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense economically. The only two reasons that come to mind why this may be true are a) the furniture in the furnished apartments is super cheap or b) the furnished apartments are located subpar in one way or another. But I may be wrong.

At the top end of the market the amount of money involved means it's often more economical to focus on maximising occupation, rather than minimising initial costs. My apartment, for example, is worth around £1m and has around £10,000 worth of furniture in it provided by the landlord: if during the lifespan of the furniture the convenience of the apartment being furnished reduces tenancy voids by a total of 3 months then the furniture pays for itself.

I don't want to expose my address but you can browse "London" on the UK property website Rightmove and find comparable apartments (same building, same floorplan) with furnished/unfurnished prices that are no different.

Ah now I get it. Yeah you're absolutely right. I can imagine that we'll be working with landlords in markets like these instead of going directly B2C. While landlords may not care too much about the financial aspect of renting furniture they may care about the service aspect. We take care of the furniture, insure it, replace it ect. :)

Just a quick follow-up to provide an example, where furnished is cheaper than unfurnished, despite being identical: same building, same floorplan.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/110025968

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/110204747

That's fascinating! We'll look into this.

As someone who owns a 2 bedroom condo and plans to stay for awhile but is still mostly furnished with Ikea, I would absolutely be interested in a buyout option!

Yep, we've seen homeowners or long-term renters especially interested in the buyout option. Fast furniture is a big climate problem, and although IKEA tries to show itself as sustainable, it's really the other thing. This is we only offer high-quality furniture, the kind that you won't replace every few years. That, combined with full insurance, things last longer and can be refurbished when you want to move out.

>it's common for unfurnished apartments in Zurich cost upwards of $2,000

I'd say that's the lower end, actually. Zürich is indeed pretty pricey.

Oops, missed that last one.

> I wish you luck, there is certainly a market out there for something like this.

Thanks so much! We're looking forward to more feedback!