The gulf between asking and selling prices.

Kez100

mewbie wrote: »

Given that it's the most valuable thing most people own they're bound to try to get the highest they can for it.

I've just realised what a crass and simplistic sound bite that is. But having gone to the effort of typing it I'll press send anyway.

You want the highest but in doing so run the risk you'll get no interest at all or invite silly offers (like -20%). Catching it right isn't easy.

1echidna

Kez100 wrote: »

You need to get the people through the door mate. If your price does that then great. Overvaluing for a laugh in this market is madness if you ask me. Then what do I know - apart from the fact we didn't overvalue and had two offers in the first two viewings.

Yes indeed. My inclination was to ask at 15% below peak and hope to sell quickly for 20% below peak. However we are not in a hurry and he is the professional and presumably is trying to get the best price for us.

chewmylegoff

chewmylegoff wrote: »

rightmove also has all the houses on it that have been put on the market by

(a) loons who think they can sell for 2007 peak prices because their house is "worth it"

and

(b) people who cannot sell for less than X because of their mortgage and therefore are unable to reduce the asking price

all this stuff sitting on the market at unrealistic prices with no prospect of ever selling will skew prices upwards.

further to this: http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-22439984.html

only 6 houses on this street - i happen to know that one of them has just sold for exactly £100k less (plus that one has an extra bedroom). the kitchen is better in this one, but that aint worth £100k!

telfordwhite

skap7309 wrote: »

To get this figure i have taken Rightmove's asking price figures (£218k) and the average of the Land Registry, Halifax and Nationwide selling prices, which is £154k.

Does anyone else agree with me on this one?

I don't agree, i think your calculation is too simplistic. Agents are telling us that the lower value houses (sub 150k) in our area are selling far better than the higher value ones.

Therefore their is a higher weighting of lower priced properties affecting your calculation,

treliac

Doesn't matter what sellers think they should get. At the end of the day a sale is only going to go through, for anyone needing a mortgage, if the property is priced in accordance with the valuation.

chewmylegoff

telfordwhite wrote: »

I don't agree, i think your calculation is too simplistic. Agents are telling us that the lower value houses (sub 150k) in our area are selling far better than the higher value ones.

Therefore their is a higher weighting of lower priced properties affecting your calculation,

errr. that's how the property market works. there are lots of cheaper houses and fewer expensive ones. therefore more cheap houses sell than expensive ones.

System

I was always told that the small flats at the lowe end of the market see much smaller drops in value than the big mansion-esque places.

Really2

Joeskeppi wrote: »

I was always told that the small flats at the lowe end of the market see much smaller drops in value than the big mansion-esque places.

In nominal terms yes not as a %age. Who risks loosing there job and there house

Jo public Or James multi-millionaire.

telfordwhite

chewmylegoff wrote: »

errr. that's how the property market works. there are lots of cheaper houses and fewer expensive ones. therefore more cheap houses sell than expensive ones.

Hey, don't chew my ear off...:p

The OP is confusing a selling trend with a mathematical hypothesis which is inaccurately weighting down selling prices in his example.

for example:

if there are 20 houses for sale:

10 at 150k and 10 at 300k, the average asking price is 225k.


If all 10 of the 150k houses sell for asking price but only 5 of the 300k ones sell (even at asking price) the average sold price is 200k.

This example is how he has calculated the difference between asking/sold prices in the original post which in this example makes it look as though sold prices are 25k less than asking price when in fact they all sold for asking price.

If my agent is correct in saying less of the higher bracket properties than normal are selling (cos people can't afford them) then his calculation
is incorrectly weighted.

Thats all i'm saying

chewmylegoff

telfordwhite wrote: »

Hey, don't chew my ear off...:p

The OP is confusing a selling trend with a mathematical hypothesis which is inaccurately weighting down selling prices in his example.

for example:

if there are 20 houses for sale:

10 at 150k and 10 at 300k, the average asking price is 225k.


If all 10 of the 150k houses sell for asking price but only 5 of the 300k ones sell (even at asking price) the average sold price is 200k.

This example is how he has calculated the difference between asking/sold prices in the original post which in this example makes it look as though sold prices are 25k less than asking price when in fact they all sold for asking price.

If my agent is correct in saying less of the higher bracket properties than normal are selling (cos people can't afford them) then his calculation
is incorrectly weighted.

Thats all i'm saying

the only impediment to this theory is the fact that fewer lower bracket properties are selling as well, because people can't afford them.