Lay My Hat

Hello everyone,
I have Sykes coming to assess my property in a couple of weeks. My problem is this It is a 4 bed detached property with 2 doubles and 2 singles. I has a good sized kitchen, lounge and dining room.Should I have the dining room as family/extra bedroom with sofa bed( extra tv, games console etc), or keep it as a traditional dining room. The kitchen is big enough to take a table and chairs for 6 but not 8, it would be too cramped. I could put an 8 seater in the dining room with a sofa bed and tv, but it would be a tight.
So it is better to go for extra occupancy or not?
Many thanks in advance for your help.

Our experience is that big groups need more than one 'living' room (different generations with different leisure requirements particularly in a UK climate where they do not spend a great deal of time outside). I doubt that you would get much more money for the extra people but you would probably get more comments about how spacious everything is if you keep it as two living areas.

Is it possible to get in a dining table PLUS a small seating area with a second TV?

I agree. I heard an architect state that kitchen and dining spaces should remain proportionate to the number of bedrooms they serve. Converting the dining room to an additional bedroom might tip the balance in the wrong direction.

Here are a few more ideas for creating a secondary seating area, as suggested by pepsipuss:
1) Add a small table with four very comfortable chairs to the kitchen.
2) Add a cabinet with TV, games console, etc. to the dining room. Place it in a location where there is room for chairs to be moved in front.

If you want to stretch to occupancy about 6, I would look to your single rooms rather than the dining room. Could they fit a double in rather than a single? Or what about bunks?

How many bathrooms are there Dizza?

Hello, there is one downstairs loo, one separate upstairs loo and a bathroom with bath and shower. In reply to a previous answer, the 2 rooms are definitely only singles, I am not sure about bunk beds, lots of people on LMH seem to think they are a bad idea. I am posing the question just because it is a 4 bed house but would only sleep 6, otherwise the dimensions are roomy, kitchen is about 15 feet by 12, dining room around the same and the living room 12feet by 20 but ierregular in shape.

Depending on the area, bunk beds are often seen as down market. They are only useable for a restricted niche and adults very rarely like them. Children over the age of 14 tend to dislike them, families without two children aged between 4 and 13 of the same sex tend not use them. They do have a place, but they are not that attractive and the owners we have with bunks see surprisingly little use.

Sofa beds are infrequently used because adults tend not to like them, preferring children to use them. But the sofa bed is usually in the lounge so if it is to be used this will put an end to the evening for the adults at children's bed time.

Sofa beds can increase occupancy... a little, but they do not increase rental. Bunk beds are often better replaced by single beds or a cramped double... if possible. If you make this compromise and find you have to dispense with one bedside table is a good idea to try to provide personal lighting on both sides of the bed.

Niches are such that sleep four is strong, sleep six is weaker necessitating frequently to price a sleep six at a sleep four rate benefiting from the larger niche with extra occupancy when the weaker sleep six bookings are made. Sleep eight is a stronger niche which does not suffer so much from this. A similar pricing pattern exists between the strong sleep two niche and the much weaker sleep three niche. If you make the mistake of pricing for a weaker higher occupancy niche you tend to lose occupany by cutting out bookings from the higher demand lower occupancy niche below.

The best bet is to ensure you have good quality bed clothes and good looking sofas with quality bedside tables and lights etc: rather than go overboard on bunk beds and sofa beds.

Certain areas, especially costal, do benefit more from pushing occupancy, but the majority of guests will see this as reducing quality.

I'll second Charles' opinions on bunks. My neighbour has a two-bedroom property with a double bed and two sets of bunks in the other room (plenty of room for another double or two nice singles (zip-link?). I suppose the bed layout probably reflects their family unit, although I think their children are young adults.
My apartment manager markets both apartments, and finds 2 couples prefer our double bedroom and double sofabed in our lounge than one couple having to sleep in the bunk room. I suppose it would still appeal to a family with 4 children, but there's not too many of those around.

Thinking laterally, would it be possible to turn one of the singles into a lovely big bathroom and make one of the doubles into a twin/zipped double? That would leave you with a house which is a sleeps 4/5 with a good ratio of bathrooms and it would rent to families with three children or two children who can have a room of their own or indeed to families bringing Granny with them.

The greater luxury of space would probably mean that you would not lose much in terms of bottom line.

I am entirely with Charles on the subject of sofa beds. We have one in our very large second sitting room (in a place where it is not in general use for watching tv etc) but we do not promote it - we sometimes offer it as an option if the ages of the children are such that they might prefer their own space instead of sharing a bedroom.

charles cawley wrote:Depending on the area, bunk beds are often seen as down market. They are only useable for a restricted niche and adults very rarely like them. Children over the age of 14 tend to dislike them, families without two children aged between 4 and 13 of the same sex tend not use them. They do have a place, but they are not that attractive and the owners we have with bunks see surprisingly little use.

I have bunkbeds and there is no problem with occupancy for families with children. The market is pretty big IMO.

charles cawley wrote:Niches are such that sleep four is strong, sleep six is weaker necessitating frequently to price a sleep six at a sleep four rate benefiting from the larger niche with extra occupancy when the weaker sleep six bookings are made. Sleep eight is a stronger niche which does not suffer so much from this. A similar pricing pattern exists between the strong sleep two niche and the much weaker sleep three niche. If you make the mistake of pricing for a weaker higher occupancy niche you tend to lose occupany by cutting out bookings from the higher demand lower occupancy niche below.

Interesting insight. However, in our set-up (with sleep4, sleep6 and sleep8 gites), sleep6 occupies an strong position. It appeals to those guests who could fit into sleep4 but fancy the extra space and luxury of the bigger detached property and to the budget-conscious who really ought to be renting sleep8, but wonder if they could shoehorn themselves into sleep6. We price our gites progressively based on their occupancy level and would only consider a price reduction if relocating guests into sleep6 from sleep4 was our decision and not a guest's request.

Sleep6 is currently ahead in the early booking stakes for the 2012 Dordogne Derby.

Jim

Sleep 6 is currently ahead in the early booking stakes for the 2012 Dordogne Derby

This is interesting. I suspected occupancy numbers worked differently depending on location.

Our area, being inland, is less family orientated than continental and coastal locations. This is one reason for our apparent antipathy to bunk beds.

Hi. I'm new to the forum and have been trawling for hours reading all the really helpful advice. I have a similar problem with a slightly different arrangement of rooms and would value your opinions.

We are just renovating a house which currently has 3 double bedrooms, kitchen with table to seat 4/6, dining room to seat 8 (at squeeze) and a decent sized living room.

My thoughts are that we should convert the dining room into a second sitting room with sofa bed. One bedroom can fit a double plus a single comfortably. We could then accommodate 4 couples or two families. My worry is that the dining table would need to go into the living room which could end up being squashed with enough seating for 8.

The house is in rural Dorset.

Sofa beds are rarely used in our area.

They are usually used by children who normally go to bed earlier than adults. This will mean any use of the second sitting room will be limited to bed time.

Most children do not share beds now days so extra occupancy would be one and not two.

The sleep 8 niche is quite strong compared to sleep 6 but you will be pushed to reach it. We reckon sofabeds are used once or twice a year in many of our holiday lets if that.

If the kitchen is big enough to seat 8 round the table, far better to go all the way and make the dining room a proper bedroom assuming it is not on the way to somewhere else.

Dining rooms are not a huge asset to holiday lets and popular habits have made them partly or totally redundant in modern living except for formal occasions such as dinner parties.

Go all the way if at all.

First question would be - how many bathrooms in the house? Any separate toilets?
Second - what's your target market, and are they looking for high end or mid range properties? Based on that, you need to consider whether to offer comfort and space at a premium rate, or a squeeze. Not always an easy decision, but renovating is the time to do it.

I'm sure others who know the location better will be able to give more useful advice.

ETA - I see Charles has already come in with advice based on valuable experience!