Sigh...sounds like you have someone who isn't willing to jack out 1200sf of tile (back breaking but do able) and then grind down the thinset and then fill the low areas (aka 'subfloor prep). Of course the COST is something most homeowners don't like to see on a 'job cost' proposal. Many a contractor has lost a job because s/he quoted the cost of the BEST PRACTICES option. So the installers have gotten smart and started quoting 'low ball' work. This is just to get them the job (so they can feed their families). But what that means is they are forced into the 'not great' practices. I always recommend the homeowners get a full quote for the job. That includes flooring REMOVAL and SUBFLOOR PREP (two different costs) and then the installation costs (a third cost). If they are purchasing the materials then material costs are another cost to be added. To jack out tile = $2-$3/sf. The subfloor prep can be another $2-3/sf (these quotes will always be a 'range' of cost because the installer won't know the amount of TIME it takes to do the work...some tile is SUPER STUBBORN and other tile pops off like Pezz candies. With a situation like yours, that would have added as much as $5/sf = $6,000 MORE than what you have already been quoted (I'm assuming some things here). My question to you is: would you have hired the person if they had quoted you $6K more than what you were offered? Now onto what is usually the best option: Remove the tile and prepare the subfloor for the new porcelain tile. Please ask your installer to draw up a NEW quote for those two jobs to be ADDED to your job and ask for a new time line estimate (could be 2 days or it could be 5 days...we don't know). And ask him/her if s/he has the ability (in their schedule) to revamp your job to suit the new requirements = remove tile, prep subfloor, install new porcelain tile. In other words ask for a new quote using 'Best practices' which include removing old tile and subfloor prep. You will want to see their reaction to this. They will either jump at the chance to earn another $5-$6K or they will scowl at all the 'work' ahead of them.

You know, to me "fake" is not that big of a deal in some things where cleaning or lifespan can be an issue. Yes, like you, I would love authentic everything including hardwood floors. But I have cats. I always have and I always will. They bring absolute joy to my life. I have lost all three in the last couple of years, Amara my most recent loss left us last week, but more will come. I also want beautiful things around me. My description of my home is "comfortable elegance." Neither word has any more emphasis than the other; both are essential to creating a home I love and love to share. But cleaning and damage is a big deal too. I have no intention of spending a lot of time that would require high maintenance. I look at my faux Christmas tree as gorgeous even without the scent. (I buy real wreaths to hang high enough so the cats cannot get to them just so I can get the scent.) I look at my LVP flooring as incredibly beautiful because I got a color I like and any accidents including hairballs are easy to wipe up and I never have to worry about it. (Ditto if the washer ever fails.) If you compare one to the other you may find yourself adding regret and judgmental attitudes to your perspective. But if you acknowledge their differences and choose one, based upon the advantages you prefer, then I think you might find you will have few if any regrets. You won't mourn what you can't have (both easy care and real hardwood) but instead you will embrace and celebrate what you did choose because it makes you happy. And that is all that matters.

@louislinus I can easily envision it on a "big picture" level what I want to do, and how I want it flow and function. Regarding flooring, I had several contractors come out. In my house, the majority of the main floor is oak strip hardwood. It's a bi-level house, so come in, go up a half-flight of stairs, and then you are facing the current dining room, the hallway to the bedrooms, and the current living room - all in 1970's oak hardwood. Since I'm combining the existing kitchen (old vinyl tile in a discontinued pattern) with the dining room (oak hardwood), my options were: 1. Leave the flooring as-is in both rooms (which would look stupid) 2. Find the some of the discontinued vinyl tile, rip out the hardwood in the dining room and extend the vinyl into the dining room (also stupid) 3. Rip out both floors and put in an entirely different floor (such as a ceramic/porcelain tile or LVT that looks like that). While possible, I didn't want to go that route - I could easily see the tile getting cracked/broken if someone dropped something heavy on it, it would make the house flooring seem more "patchwork-like" because as a person comes up the stairs, ALL the flooring choices can be seen at once (it's not a huge house), and then I felt adding a ceramic/porcelain tile would just create even more possible-clashing patterns, as I knew I wanted a natural stone countertop. 4. Find a hardwood flooring specialist who believes he can either match, or do a near-match, with putting a new hardwood floor into the existing kitchen space and go from there. I'm choosing option #4. My issue is trying to make sure that the layout is maximizing functional storage, while still allowing proper flow in the room. My kitchen and dining room are currently identical in size - 10'x13'. The wall that divides the two rooms is a 7' length on the 10' aspect. Removing the 7' length of wall will make the new room 20'x13'. I want an island, to include storage and seating, running lengthwise. The problem is that a 13' deep kitchen is pretty much the bare minimum space for an island, and whether I have an island that is 33", 42", or 51" wide (including countertop overhang) really is going to depend on how much aisle space we can live with around the sides of the island.

I'm shopping now for new flooring. I have 'Mirage real hardwood' in my kitchen that's held up unbelievably well (looks brand new) however now putting new flooring throughout house. The opinions from flooring guys I'm getting are all over the board- from you should only do onsite finished hardwood, to engineered only belongs in a basement, to why waste your $ on hardwood with so many beautiful alternatives, to the high end flooring store where I will most likely end up purchasing telling me to go with the brand new line of Mirage engineered floors that came out this year vs. their hardwood for a fraction of the cost of their hardwood and yes, they say it can be refinished but to the points above- I have never known anyone to refinish their floors unless they were buying a house with 50 year old floors and it needed to be done. I am not considering vinyl at all but am just as confused as the author. Lots of opinions on this topic. I'm in the northeast and asked no less than 8 friends that puchased new, built new or renovated in the past two years what they did and all have said they have engineered wood.