Everyone told me to walk away from sandy loam acreage in the Hill Country. Conventional wisdom said heavy clay held water, held fertility, held value. My extension agent, two realtors, and a veteran rancher all steered me toward denser soils. I bought the sandy parcel anyway because the price was low and I could afford to be wrong.
Three years in, I'd argue sandy loam is actually superior for the dryland vegetable production I do. It drains fast enough that I almost never lose plants to root rot. It warms early. Compost incorporation takes one pass. My establishment costs for soil-building were real, but they were predictable and finite. The clay parcels I toured? Drainage problems that no amendment budget fixes easily.
I paid less per acre, built fertility intentionally, and now grow more variety per square foot than neighbors on 'better' soil. The market undervalued exactly what I needed.
Anyone else find that regional soil stigmas created a buying opportunity? Or did you get burned trusting your own instincts over established wisdom?