I see so many articles or posts discussing property values but none base this on something we can actually use to compare with other prices. Take for example average house prices in a suburb. They are based on the total price, but as we know, higher density suburbs might have smaller properties which would affect values. Same goes for individual places... Headline reads "house sells for record in suburb" but fails to mention it's 5x the size of any other property in the area. If we all talked in $$$ per square metre, we would have a much better gauge on real prices.
I am using Wasatch Softrip for printing to an Epson f9200 (paper transfer).
I know Wasatch has a cost estimator add on but i don’t have this feature.
We just won a lucrative contract and we need to get an idea of ink cost per square metre. I was just wondering if anyone had an idea or can assist me.
Ive limited the ink on this printer to 250% and the icc profile is labelled as 720x720 resolution.
We’ve tried hoovering and treating them ourselves with stuff off the internet.
I am looking at buying a house and was trying to work out if it is good value based on the cost per square metre.
The house is in a relatively nice suburb outside Wigan and costs £170,000. The area is pretty nice by Wigan standards but nothing incredible. The house is of a decent livable standard but again not luxury.
According to the floorplan on Rightmove it is 67.9 metres squared. Based on that it works out at £2500 per sq m. According to ONS data, his seems really high based for places like Wigan, and even the nicest areas of the north west like Lytham and Manchester seem to be sub 2k.
There is a small garden and drive which must be less than 10m2 combined which still leaves it over 2k.
What am I missing that accounts for the inflated price? It isn't too far off the average prices I would expect on the street/area so I'm thinking I must have miscalculated or overlooked something.