Land is cheap for a reason, and that reason is usually utilities

Raw land shows up on owner-finance lists constantly, and I get the appeal. Low entry price, seller financing is common, nobody's calling you about a broken water heater. But here's my opinion: most buyers chasing cheap lots are buying a picture, not a property. The lot price is rarely the real cost. Water, septic or sewer, power to the lot, a legal driveway, a perc test that actually passes, zoning that allows what you're imagining \u2014 any one of those can cost more than the dirt did. And if the lot is landlocked or the access is a handshake instead of a recorded easement, you own a very expensive view. Where I think land does make sense: when you already know exactly what you're putting on it, you've priced the improvements with real local quotes, and you've had a title company confirm the access and a pro confirm the zoning. Then the cheap entry is a genuine advantage, not a trap. I'd be wary of any land deal where the seller gets to keep the deed for years while you pay for improvements \u2014 that's a lot of your money sitting on someone else's title. Get an attorney to look at how the title is held before you spend a dime on clearing. So tell me I'm wrong: has anyone here bought a lot that penciled out better than they expected?