The local paper has been keeping us up to date with exciting news about national TV doing a story in the City by the Sea. One of those real estate programs, where the host shows prospective buyers three houses they might like. The focus of this series was luxury houses in regional Australia. We had an article when it was being filmed and another when it was going to air. So I watched it, obviously, and it was awful.
I was talking about this with my grand-boss, who had seen a different, non-City by the Sea, episode, which he thought was all right, neither terribly great nor greatly terrible. But when it's local, when you're hyper-aware of the street it's filmed on, you can see the conceit behind it.
The couple in the City by the Sea episode were making a "sea-change", according to the presenter, relocating from Portland to the "seaside town" of the City by the Sea, and they didn't know the first thing about living in such a small place. There are a number of things wrong with that sentence: the City by the Sea is the largest city in the region and is three times larger than Portland; Portland, as it's name suggests, is also by the sea; it's only an hour away from the City by the Sea. So there's no way these people have never been here or think it's tiny. If anything, they will be overwhelmed by having more than one supermarket to go to.
So these cosmopolitan Portlandites were moving to our seaside town and had a budget of $1.35 million to buy a luxury house. The median house price in Portland is $250,000 and in the City by the Sea it's $460,000, so in either place, that budget would buy them pretty much any house they liked. The show was intent on showing them houses that matched the budget, not their needs, so instead of a house suitable for a working family with teenagers, one of the houses was a colonial villa with stables converted to six-suite B&B business and a fountain in the front garden. I mean, it was a nice enough house if you're into that sort of thing (I didn't care for it), but not remotely practical. I hope they saved their money and bought something more sensible.
Anyway, the reason for mentioning this is that, despite costing nearly $1.4 million and being completely renovated, the house had a really ugly bathroom.
(More photos of it
here. I didn't care for the colour scheme at all. And for all that space that's a tiny kitchen.)
This week's Friday Five questions: It figures
What are some figurines you own?
I bought this little guy on a family holiday to Sydney when I was 10. I remember the shop, an old building in The Rocks with dark timbered walls and ceiling-high glass cases of hand blown trinkets. The horse is tiny - it can fit on my little fingertip - and I keep it in my jewellery box so I see it every time I change my earrings.
What are you trying to figure out?
When would be the best time to take annual leave. I'm thinking two weeks in late March, pending further information.
Two circles or one continuous motion: how do you write the figure 8?
One continuous motion. So much more efficient than two circles as you don't need to lift the pen.
How do you feel about Fig Newtons?
Never heard of them, but having looked them up, they're a biscuit similar to what I would call a Spicy Fruit Roll. You don't often see them now. I think of them as an old person's biscuit, largely because my grandfather was the only person I've ever seen eat them.
What’s a good metaphor to describe your first week of 2021?
Giving it 110%. Or more, even, as three of the five accountants were on leave, so it was just me and my grand-boss doing the December financials (and talking about real estate programs).