What's the offer 'Norm' these days

artbaron

Road_Hog wrote: »

I'd be quite offended at a cheeky offer of 20% off and I'd tell the EA not to pass any more offers on to me from said 'buyer'.

Same here. I'd blacklist anybody who offered that, regardless of subsequent offers from them, because I'd put them down as a timewaster. Of course, there's a chance a low offer might be met with success so it's up to the buyer if they want to take the risk.

Talc1234

Road_Hog wrote: »

I'd be quite offended at a cheeky offer of 20% off and I'd tell the EA not to pass any more offers on to me from said 'buyer'.

Why would you be 'offended'?

Its a transaction not a relationship

Road_Hog

Talc1234 wrote: »

Why would you be 'offended'?

Its a transaction not a relationship

I would be offended, because I'd think that someone was trying it on and thought I was stupid, gullible and somebody to be taken advantage of.

I'd think that they thought that I was someone who was desparate, didn't know the market and could easily have their leg lifted.

I'd think that they might believe, that they could go with a cheeky offer and then lower the offer after the survey and then gazunder just before exchange.

Is that enough to be offended or could I list some more. The selling price is usually directed by the EAs. There is usually a small amount of room for negotiation, but more like 5%, especially in a seller's market. If you were selling a secondhand car for £10,000 and I offered you £8,000, then you would probably be offended.

If you're not willing to offer a ball park price for something, then look elsewhere and don't waste people'stime.

becominganobsessivesaver

When we bought our house last year there were 3 identical houses for sale (some withbslightly better plots). One was up for 200k, one for 220k and one for 240k.

We viewed the one at 220 and the one at 200, and established we could get the 220 one for 200 (and probably less for the 200 one). I called to ask about viewing the 240 one, explaining it would only be worth us viewing if there was a chance of accepting 200, the agent said not a chance, so that was that. 12 months later its still sat there on the market! (the 200k one sold for 190k in the end).

Road_Hog

becominganobsessivesaver wrote: »

(the 200k one sold for 190k in the end).

Which is 5% off, exactly what I quoted in my post. But it didn't sell for £160K which is 20% off.

The chances are, if you get a buyer that starts that low (£160K) and you get them upto £190K, they are always going to try to get it back nearer to £160K. Firstly, when the survey comes through, because no survey ever says, house is fine, nothing to worry about and then they find something to complain about just before exchange and put in a reduced offer.

Wallhart

Need to do research and go in lower. Sellers will always try and get as much as possible so you should get it as low as possible. Depends how much you want that house. If you are not fussed then let the seller say no. Don't pay more than is acceptable to you. Blacklisting someone is quite funny. It's a negotiation. If you blacklist someone because the offend you In a transaction you have no commitment to then I have some bad news for you.

I think the 200 starting point is fair. You need to be confident and know that you have no chain which is a plus

becominganobsessivesaver

Road_Hog wrote: »

Which is 5% off, exactly what I quoted in my post. But it didn't sell for £160K which is 20% off.

The chances are, if you get a buyer that starts that low (£160K) and you get them upto £190K, they are always going to try to get it back nearer to £160K. Firstly, when the survey comes through, because no survey ever says, house is fine, nothing to worry about and then they find something to complain about just before exchange and put in a reduced offer.

I think my point was that 5 and 10% off are seen as acceptable, 20% is not, even when logic suggests it is overpriced by that amount.

Wallhart

What are you talking about. If it's overpriced by 20% then going 20% under is fine. So it's ok to overprice a property by 20% but not bid 20% less. Why are people so sensitive. It's a financial transaction. You bid what you want and if it's not accepted then you go higher or you walk away. As long as you know how much the house is roughly worth and not what it's listed at.

Negotiation involves understanding the buyer or seller. Just blankly blacklisting someone who puts in a bid too low to your liking shows arrogance. You need to try understand the buyer and portray your message better. If it did that in my day job I'd have real trouble

There's so many factors that go into what price is agreed. If someone bid 20% lower I would want to try and understand why. If it's a FTB then I would respect that they may be nervous about going to high. I would not agree if I wasn't happy but I would explain why I would not accept.

becominganobsessivesaver

I agree, just in the scenario above they wouldn't let us view the house as we would have offered much less based on the asking prices of other houses on the same street (6 year old houses, so identical apart from position and decor).

Wallhart wrote: »

What are you talking about. If it's overpriced by 20% then going 20% under is fine. So it's ok to overprice a property by 20% but not bid 20% less. Why are people so sensitive. It's a financial transaction. You bid what you want and if it's not accepted then you go higher or you walk away. As long as you know how much the house is roughly worth and not what it's listed at.

Negotiation involves understanding the buyer or seller. Just blankly blacklisting someone who puts in a bid too low to your liking shows arrogance. You need to try understand the buyer and portray your message better. If it did that in my day job I'd have real trouble

There's so many factors that go into what price is agreed. If someone bid 20% lower I would want to try and understand why. If it's a FTB then I would respect that they may be nervous about going to high. I would not agree if I wasn't happy but I would explain why I would not accept.

Road_Hog

Wallhart wrote: »

Blacklisting someone is quite funny. It's a negotiation. If you blacklist someone because the offend you In a transaction you have no commitment to then I have some bad news for you.

No bad news for me.There are plenty of posts on here over the years, where sellers (and buyers) have been dicked about by buyers trying it on.

If someone wants a property for a song, then they aren't worth wasting your time. Concentrate on the serious buyers, not the ones that are going to play it out and then dip out with a last minute gazunder. Especially if you market your property in Sping early Summer and then find you are having to put it back on the market during late Autumn early winter.