On the Not So Cheap?
Hmmm ... The latest installment in the NYT's "On the Cheap" series features a 550-square-foot studio that is furnished for $10,000.
Is that really considered cheap? I know he's starting from scratch ... but still. It doesn't strike me as a small budget for a space of that size.
UPDATE: OK, I just finished reading the article. And he already owned the antique Biedermeier dining table and chairs, as well as the wood armchair. And he spent $500 on painters. If this was really done on the cheap, that would be a total DIY.
Also: This is the most contentious "On the Cheap" yet. Serious drama!
Comments
Ten grand is NOT CHEAP. No matter where you live.
Posted by: Liz | January 7, 2010 12:48 PM
It looks like a lot of the new stuff came from West Elm. Just based on that, it should not have cost $10,000 to furnish this apartment!
Posted by: Sylvia | January 7, 2010 02:07 PM
I love these articles! Even though that is really not cheap. Someone needs to make this into a tv show.
Posted by: jennifer in sf | January 7, 2010 02:12 PM
Liz - I could understand $10,000 if the place was really big and he needed to fill up most of the space. But 550 sq ft? I can think of a lot of bloggers out there who could have done a fantastic job for much less!
Sylvia - When I saw how much he purchased from WE, I wondered how hands-on the designer was in the process ... or if his flakey assistant chose a lot of the pieces.
jennifer in sf - These are some of my favorite NYT Home articles. This particular one would have made an excellent TV show! I can't believe how bad it got between the client and designer. (And, yes, I'll let you know about the CB2 console.)
Posted by: anh-minh | January 7, 2010 02:31 PM
There WAS a lot of drama in today's NYT piece, wasn't there? The space looked hard to work with.
I kept trying to figure out who was more at fault. The designer certainly seemed flaky, but the client seemed also seemed like the kind of person who thinks he's easy-going and flexible but isn't.
Like your blog, by the way.
Posted by: Clare Chatfield | January 7, 2010 05:13 PM
check out decorno's take on this.
Posted by: priscilla | January 7, 2010 06:58 PM
Clare - Thanks! It does seem like the designer and client both made mistakes in this situation. BUT, I think the designer should have been able to avoid a lot of his -- since he has more experience with this sort of thing. (I realize he probably offered his services gratis in return for free press in the NYT, but I don't think he came out looking so great!)
priscilla - I was reading that thread as well. I love Decorno discussions about these articles. (And the Habitat piece from the other day.)
Posted by: anh-minh | January 8, 2010 07:09 AM
Although I'm admittedly not a fan of that style of decor, the finished result of this has none of the polish of the inspiration photo from his book.
I also agree with Sylvia, if all the furniture is from West Elm or stuff he already owns, what exactly was that money spent on?
Posted by: Shilo | January 12, 2010 01:27 AM