Cash Buyer - How Much Off Asking Price

Young_Turk

eve824 said:

I would rather have a non cash buyer. I’ve always had trouble with cash buyers so would opt for someone with a small chain. They have much more investment in the process and so less likely to pull out. Both aborted sales I’ve had were cash buyers. 

That seems like you have had bad luck. Did your cash buyers pay for a survey? They might have more invested in the process than those obtaining a mortgage. Often the fees aren't up front when applying for a mortgage, so if a purchase falls through, the applicant moves on to the next one without paying for the first survey. A cash buyer obviously pays for everything. So if a cash buyer pays for a survey that's a significant investment. If a cash buyer doesn't have a survey, then surely offer to exchange could be very quick. So if they do pull out presumably it should be very quick.

happy_2008 said:

Why would you expect a discount just because you're a cash buyer is beyond me??

A cash buyer can buy your property. Someone who has an agreement in principle from a lender might be able to. 
A cash buyer is able to buy your property quicker and with less hassle.
In my first purchase the bank reduced the amount they would lend to me by around 10-15k, so I had to find another lender. There was also a shortage of surveyors at the time, so I had to wait a few weeks longer than normal. I was able to complete the transaction, but maybe the vendor would have accepted a bit less from a cash buyer to sell quicker and with less stress of it falling through.

My previous sale had a hold-up due to an issue with the mortgage. It was very annoying. I had started making offers on the next place, then wasn't sure where I stood. It was resolved, but I didn't know if I would have to find another buyer. Then, once I had an offer accepted on a flat, they revealed that the lease was short. This is yet another thing which is a bigger problem for mortgagors than cash buyers.

My current sale to a couple fell through as one of them lost their job, so the amount they can borrow is significantly reduced. If they were cash buyers they could have proceeded. Instead almost a year after listing initially I am still on the market.

Most people want their transaction to go through quickly. Once you have agreed a sale (even more if you are purchasing at the same time) you are probably looking forward to moving, so that might be enough reason to sell at a slightly lower price to achieve this. You may also lose the house you thought you would buy. If you break the chain, maybe it's easier for them to find someone else - maybe even a cash buyer!!! But there may be financial implications as well. For example, if you are upsizing and prices rise then you will be worse off:
e.g. you agree to sell for £500k and buy for £1m. This falls through and prices are now 10% higher - you agree to sell for £550k and buy for £1.1m, so you are 50k worse off (actually more than 50k worse off as you'll pay higher EA fees and SDLT). Maybe in that hypothetical example it would have been worth accepting slightly less than £500k from a cash buyer.

eidand

Young_Turk said:

eve824 said:

I would rather have a non cash buyer. I’ve always had trouble with cash buyers so would opt for someone with a small chain. They have much more investment in the process and so less likely to pull out. Both aborted sales I’ve had were cash buyers. 

That seems like you have had bad luck. Did your cash buyers pay for a survey? They might have more invested in the process than those obtaining a mortgage. Often the fees aren't up front when applying for a mortgage, so if a purchase falls through, the applicant moves on to the next one without paying for the first survey. A cash buyer obviously pays for everything. So if a cash buyer pays for a survey that's a significant investment. If a cash buyer doesn't have a survey, then surely offer to exchange could be very quick. So if they do pull out presumably it should be very quick.

happy_2008 said:

Why would you expect a discount just because you're a cash buyer is beyond me??

A cash buyer can buy your property. Someone who has an agreement in principle from a lender might be able to. 
A cash buyer is able to buy your property quicker and with less hassle.
In my first purchase the bank reduced the amount they would lend to me by around 10-15k, so I had to find another lender. There was also a shortage of surveyors at the time, so I had to wait a few weeks longer than normal. I was able to complete the transaction, but maybe the vendor would have accepted a bit less from a cash buyer to sell quicker and with less stress of it falling through.

My previous sale had a hold-up due to an issue with the mortgage. It was very annoying. I had started making offers on the next place, then wasn't sure where I stood. It was resolved, but I didn't know if I would have to find another buyer. Then, once I had an offer accepted on a flat, they revealed that the lease was short. This is yet another thing which is a bigger problem for mortgagors than cash buyers.

My current sale to a couple fell through as one of them lost their job, so the amount they can borrow is significantly reduced. If they were cash buyers they could have proceeded. Instead almost a year after listing initially I am still on the market.

Most people want their transaction to go through quickly. Once you have agreed a sale (even more if you are purchasing at the same time) you are probably looking forward to moving, so that might be enough reason to sell at a slightly lower price to achieve this. You may also lose the house you thought you would buy. If you break the chain, maybe it's easier for them to find someone else - maybe even a cash buyer!!! But there may be financial implications as well. For example, if you are upsizing and prices rise then you will be worse off:
e.g. you agree to sell for £500k and buy for £1m. This falls through and prices are now 10% higher - you agree to sell for £550k and buy for £1.1m, so you are 50k worse off (actually more than 50k worse off as you'll pay higher EA fees and SDLT). Maybe in that hypothetical example it would have been worth accepting slightly less than £500k from a cash buyer.

I think you'll find a lot of people would be quite happy if the transaction took a bit longer to complete, but for a higher price. For example, the move quick thing is irrelevant to me. I'l happily wait an extra 2, 3 weeks for 10-15k more. Speed is far from everything.

Young_Turk

eddddy said:

blue_max_3 said:

Mortgage valuations sometimes come back with lower valuations and reduced offers, so a cash buyer should avoid this issue. And with mortgages getting harder to find (especially lower LTV), it's just another stumbling block.
I'm a cash buyer and certainly expect to be taken very seriously. We'll see.

It sounds like you're saying that as a cash buyer, you would pay more than a potential mortgage lender's valuation.

i.e. If you offer £200k, you will pay £200k - whereas somebody needing a a mortgage might offer £200k then have to reduce it to £180k following a mortgage valuation.

I think the OP's goal is to pay less than somebody who needs a mortgage, not more.

That's not the only potential hiccup for mortgage applicants. Lenders often don't lend the amount they state in the AIP. Also borrowers circumstances may change (e.g. lose their job and so pull out of purchase). Aren't these much more common than low valuations?
If the valuation is £180k after sale agreed at £200k, either there is an issue which will reduce the price paid by cash buyers and mortgagors, or the surveyor is being cautious, in which case he may agree to buy at £200k.

Young_Turk

eidand said:

Young_Turk said:

eve824 said:

I would rather have a non cash buyer. I’ve always had trouble with cash buyers so would opt for someone with a small chain. They have much more investment in the process and so less likely to pull out. Both aborted sales I’ve had were cash buyers. 

That seems like you have had bad luck. Did your cash buyers pay for a survey? They might have more invested in the process than those obtaining a mortgage. Often the fees aren't up front when applying for a mortgage, so if a purchase falls through, the applicant moves on to the next one without paying for the first survey. A cash buyer obviously pays for everything. So if a cash buyer pays for a survey that's a significant investment. If a cash buyer doesn't have a survey, then surely offer to exchange could be very quick. So if they do pull out presumably it should be very quick.

happy_2008 said:

Why would you expect a discount just because you're a cash buyer is beyond me??

A cash buyer can buy your property. Someone who has an agreement in principle from a lender might be able to. 
A cash buyer is able to buy your property quicker and with less hassle.
In my first purchase the bank reduced the amount they would lend to me by around 10-15k, so I had to find another lender. There was also a shortage of surveyors at the time, so I had to wait a few weeks longer than normal. I was able to complete the transaction, but maybe the vendor would have accepted a bit less from a cash buyer to sell quicker and with less stress of it falling through.

My previous sale had a hold-up due to an issue with the mortgage. It was very annoying. I had started making offers on the next place, then wasn't sure where I stood. It was resolved, but I didn't know if I would have to find another buyer. Then, once I had an offer accepted on a flat, they revealed that the lease was short. This is yet another thing which is a bigger problem for mortgagors than cash buyers.

My current sale to a couple fell through as one of them lost their job, so the amount they can borrow is significantly reduced. If they were cash buyers they could have proceeded. Instead almost a year after listing initially I am still on the market.

Most people want their transaction to go through quickly. Once you have agreed a sale (even more if you are purchasing at the same time) you are probably looking forward to moving, so that might be enough reason to sell at a slightly lower price to achieve this. You may also lose the house you thought you would buy. If you break the chain, maybe it's easier for them to find someone else - maybe even a cash buyer!!! But there may be financial implications as well. For example, if you are upsizing and prices rise then you will be worse off:
e.g. you agree to sell for £500k and buy for £1m. This falls through and prices are now 10% higher - you agree to sell for £550k and buy for £1.1m, so you are 50k worse off (actually more than 50k worse off as you'll pay higher EA fees and SDLT). Maybe in that hypothetical example it would have been worth accepting slightly less than £500k from a cash buyer.

I think you'll find a lot of people would be quite happy if the transaction took a bit longer to complete, but for a higher price. For example, the move quick thing is irrelevant to me. I'l happily wait an extra 2, 3 weeks for 10-15k more. Speed is far from everything.

Speed isn't everything, but it's related to many things. If you are in a chain, you might lose the house you bought. You might have to relist and have a lot more viewings at your house and go to a lot of viewings. If you are buying for a particular purpose (extra bedroom for children, catchment area for school, to make commute for new job reasonable etc.) you might not want that to delayed months or years. I think most people would agree with you they would take an 10-15k to wait 2-3 weeks. It's more the risk that it falls through completely, causing a delay of at least several months and you risk losing the property wanted to buy.
I think it's a hypothetical question in most cases. How often does a vendor receive multiple offers in quick succession? I realise this used to happen quite a lot when the market was busy and there were dozens of viewings at an open day. But most of the time vendors have fewer viewings and might only receive one offer, or maybe they reject an offer and get another one in a few weeks. Surely a minority of vendors will be in a position to compare not just offer prices but didn't offer statuses. So it's very difficult to quantify what is usually hypothetical.
It's not as if you ask for £500k, receive an offer from a mortgagor for £480k, and reveal this to a cash buyer viewer, in order for him to make an appropriate offer (e.g. "OK in that case I'll offer £475k, a 5k discount on the mortgagor!"). A more likely scenario would be the cash buyer offers £475k, but you reject, reasoning it's worth waiting 2-3 weeks to get £480k.

eidand

Young_Turk said:

eidand said:

Young_Turk said:

eve824 said:

I would rather have a non cash buyer. I’ve always had trouble with cash buyers so would opt for someone with a small chain. They have much more investment in the process and so less likely to pull out. Both aborted sales I’ve had were cash buyers. 

That seems like you have had bad luck. Did your cash buyers pay for a survey? They might have more invested in the process than those obtaining a mortgage. Often the fees aren't up front when applying for a mortgage, so if a purchase falls through, the applicant moves on to the next one without paying for the first survey. A cash buyer obviously pays for everything. So if a cash buyer pays for a survey that's a significant investment. If a cash buyer doesn't have a survey, then surely offer to exchange could be very quick. So if they do pull out presumably it should be very quick.

happy_2008 said:

Why would you expect a discount just because you're a cash buyer is beyond me??

A cash buyer can buy your property. Someone who has an agreement in principle from a lender might be able to. 
A cash buyer is able to buy your property quicker and with less hassle.
In my first purchase the bank reduced the amount they would lend to me by around 10-15k, so I had to find another lender. There was also a shortage of surveyors at the time, so I had to wait a few weeks longer than normal. I was able to complete the transaction, but maybe the vendor would have accepted a bit less from a cash buyer to sell quicker and with less stress of it falling through.

My previous sale had a hold-up due to an issue with the mortgage. It was very annoying. I had started making offers on the next place, then wasn't sure where I stood. It was resolved, but I didn't know if I would have to find another buyer. Then, once I had an offer accepted on a flat, they revealed that the lease was short. This is yet another thing which is a bigger problem for mortgagors than cash buyers.

My current sale to a couple fell through as one of them lost their job, so the amount they can borrow is significantly reduced. If they were cash buyers they could have proceeded. Instead almost a year after listing initially I am still on the market.

Most people want their transaction to go through quickly. Once you have agreed a sale (even more if you are purchasing at the same time) you are probably looking forward to moving, so that might be enough reason to sell at a slightly lower price to achieve this. You may also lose the house you thought you would buy. If you break the chain, maybe it's easier for them to find someone else - maybe even a cash buyer!!! But there may be financial implications as well. For example, if you are upsizing and prices rise then you will be worse off:
e.g. you agree to sell for £500k and buy for £1m. This falls through and prices are now 10% higher - you agree to sell for £550k and buy for £1.1m, so you are 50k worse off (actually more than 50k worse off as you'll pay higher EA fees and SDLT). Maybe in that hypothetical example it would have been worth accepting slightly less than £500k from a cash buyer.

I think you'll find a lot of people would be quite happy if the transaction took a bit longer to complete, but for a higher price. For example, the move quick thing is irrelevant to me. I'l happily wait an extra 2, 3 weeks for 10-15k more. Speed is far from everything.

Speed isn't everything, but it's related to many things. If you are in a chain, you might lose the house you bought. You might have to relist and have a lot more viewings at your house and go to a lot of viewings. If you are buying for a particular purpose (extra bedroom for children, catchment area for school, to make commute for new job reasonable etc.) you might not want that to delayed months or years. I think most people would agree with you they would take an 10-15k to wait 2-3 weeks. It's more the risk that it falls through completely, causing a delay of at least several months and you risk losing the property wanted to buy.
I think it's a hypothetical question in most cases. How often does a vendor receive multiple offers in quick succession? I realise this used to happen quite a lot when the market was busy and there were dozens of viewings at an open day. But most of the time vendors have fewer viewings and might only receive one offer, or maybe they reject an offer and get another one in a few weeks. Surely a minority of vendors will be in a position to compare not just offer prices but didn't offer statuses. So it's very difficult to quantify what is usually hypothetical.
It's not as if you ask for £500k, receive an offer from a mortgagor for £480k, and reveal this to a cash buyer viewer, in order for him to make an appropriate offer (e.g. "OK in that case I'll offer £475k, a 5k discount on the mortgagor!"). A more likely scenario would be the cash buyer offers £475k, but you reject, reasoning it's worth waiting 2-3 weeks to get £480k.

That's not what i meant.
The 2, 3 weeks was the extra time to arrange a mortgage as opposed to having the cash ready.
So, between a cash buyer who offers less and a proceedable buyer who needs a mortgage I'll go with the mortgage person all the time. 

blue_max_3

eidand said:

That's not what i meant.
The 2, 3 weeks was the extra time to arrange a mortgage as opposed to having the cash ready.
So, between a cash buyer who offers less and a proceedable buyer who needs a mortgage I'll go with the mortgage person all the time. 

Perhaps it depends on where you are in the chain. Those 2-3 weeks may be unacceptable to others in that chain.

Young_Turk

eidand said:

Young_Turk said:

eidand said:

Young_Turk said:

eve824 said:

I would rather have a non cash buyer. I’ve always had trouble with cash buyers so would opt for someone with a small chain. They have much more investment in the process and so less likely to pull out. Both aborted sales I’ve had were cash buyers. 

That seems like you have had bad luck. Did your cash buyers pay for a survey? They might have more invested in the process than those obtaining a mortgage. Often the fees aren't up front when applying for a mortgage, so if a purchase falls through, the applicant moves on to the next one without paying for the first survey. A cash buyer obviously pays for everything. So if a cash buyer pays for a survey that's a significant investment. If a cash buyer doesn't have a survey, then surely offer to exchange could be very quick. So if they do pull out presumably it should be very quick.

happy_2008 said:

Why would you expect a discount just because you're a cash buyer is beyond me??

A cash buyer can buy your property. Someone who has an agreement in principle from a lender might be able to. 
A cash buyer is able to buy your property quicker and with less hassle.
In my first purchase the bank reduced the amount they would lend to me by around 10-15k, so I had to find another lender. There was also a shortage of surveyors at the time, so I had to wait a few weeks longer than normal. I was able to complete the transaction, but maybe the vendor would have accepted a bit less from a cash buyer to sell quicker and with less stress of it falling through.

My previous sale had a hold-up due to an issue with the mortgage. It was very annoying. I had started making offers on the next place, then wasn't sure where I stood. It was resolved, but I didn't know if I would have to find another buyer. Then, once I had an offer accepted on a flat, they revealed that the lease was short. This is yet another thing which is a bigger problem for mortgagors than cash buyers.

My current sale to a couple fell through as one of them lost their job, so the amount they can borrow is significantly reduced. If they were cash buyers they could have proceeded. Instead almost a year after listing initially I am still on the market.

Most people want their transaction to go through quickly. Once you have agreed a sale (even more if you are purchasing at the same time) you are probably looking forward to moving, so that might be enough reason to sell at a slightly lower price to achieve this. You may also lose the house you thought you would buy. If you break the chain, maybe it's easier for them to find someone else - maybe even a cash buyer!!! But there may be financial implications as well. For example, if you are upsizing and prices rise then you will be worse off:
e.g. you agree to sell for £500k and buy for £1m. This falls through and prices are now 10% higher - you agree to sell for £550k and buy for £1.1m, so you are 50k worse off (actually more than 50k worse off as you'll pay higher EA fees and SDLT). Maybe in that hypothetical example it would have been worth accepting slightly less than £500k from a cash buyer.

I think you'll find a lot of people would be quite happy if the transaction took a bit longer to complete, but for a higher price. For example, the move quick thing is irrelevant to me. I'l happily wait an extra 2, 3 weeks for 10-15k more. Speed is far from everything.

Speed isn't everything, but it's related to many things. If you are in a chain, you might lose the house you bought. You might have to relist and have a lot more viewings at your house and go to a lot of viewings. If you are buying for a particular purpose (extra bedroom for children, catchment area for school, to make commute for new job reasonable etc.) you might not want that to delayed months or years. I think most people would agree with you they would take an 10-15k to wait 2-3 weeks. It's more the risk that it falls through completely, causing a delay of at least several months and you risk losing the property wanted to buy.
I think it's a hypothetical question in most cases. How often does a vendor receive multiple offers in quick succession? I realise this used to happen quite a lot when the market was busy and there were dozens of viewings at an open day. But most of the time vendors have fewer viewings and might only receive one offer, or maybe they reject an offer and get another one in a few weeks. Surely a minority of vendors will be in a position to compare not just offer prices but didn't offer statuses. So it's very difficult to quantify what is usually hypothetical.
It's not as if you ask for £500k, receive an offer from a mortgagor for £480k, and reveal this to a cash buyer viewer, in order for him to make an appropriate offer (e.g. "OK in that case I'll offer £475k, a 5k discount on the mortgagor!"). A more likely scenario would be the cash buyer offers £475k, but you reject, reasoning it's worth waiting 2-3 weeks to get £480k.

That's not what i meant.
The 2, 3 weeks was the extra time to arrange a mortgage as opposed to having the cash ready.
So, between a cash buyer who offers less and a proceedable buyer who needs a mortgage I'll go with the mortgage person all the time. 

But don't you accept there is a risk the mortgage falls through, delaying you months on top of the 2-3 weeks?
I accepted an offer last year. We were close to exchanging in March, then the buying couple informed me they wouldn't proceed, as one of them lost their job.
Yes, a cash buyer would very likely have been quicker anyway. But this couple were slow (because they had a mortgage) and eventually they had to withdraw. If they could have proceeded we could have moved in April/May. I'm negotiating an offer now and if we agree a sale I could probably move in November/December. If not, probably next year. Maybe buyers being unable to proceed (due to issues like job loss) is very low probability and it's not even worth accepting a slightly lower price (e.g. 5k or 1%). To try to make a rational judgement, someone would need data on the probability of withdrawal (e.g. how risky are mortgagors and how risky are cash buyers) and a consideration of various scenarios and a subjective judgement on how satisfied/disappointed you would be under each scenario.
As I said, it's hypothetical for most vendors (most vendors won't get two offers at once, one from a cash buyer) and certainly has been for me in my two previous sales and current attempted sale. I didn't have a cash offer at the same time. But I think I'd be tempted to accept a slightly lower cash offer now, especially to be confident of selling before normal stamp duty resumes.

Young_Turk

blue_max_3 said:

eidand said:

That's not what i meant.
The 2, 3 weeks was the extra time to arrange a mortgage as opposed to having the cash ready.
So, between a cash buyer who offers less and a proceedable buyer who needs a mortgage I'll go with the mortgage person all the time. 

Perhaps it depends on where you are in the chain. Those 2-3 weeks may be unacceptable to others in that chain.

I think this is important. Even when buying and selling simultaneously, but with no further chain either side, I've felt under pressure to offer quickly and get moving. If there were several other transactions involved I think I'd rather feel in a strong position (i.e. I'm selling to someone who is ready to go. If you are buying from someone who isn't ready, maybe you should consider buying from someone who is!). But alternatively, perhaps people in long chains tend to reason that as they are risky and have a higher probability of not proceeding, it's worth putting yourself in a risky position. If everyone else in the chain is, then why should you accept to lower price, which benefits everyone? So consequently everyone takes a risk. That probably makes sense if it's a sideways move, as there's minimal financial impact. But if you're upsizing and prices rise, you're worse off if the chain breaks down and you start from scratch. It seems a bit odd that people generally expect prices to rise, but wouldn't accept a slightly lower offer (if views on this thread are anything to go by) to prevent against the risk of having to pay considerably more on their onward property.

Crashy_Time

eidand said:

Young_Turk said:

eve824 said:

I would rather have a non cash buyer. I’ve always had trouble with cash buyers so would opt for someone with a small chain. They have much more investment in the process and so less likely to pull out. Both aborted sales I’ve had were cash buyers. 

That seems like you have had bad luck. Did your cash buyers pay for a survey? They might have more invested in the process than those obtaining a mortgage. Often the fees aren't up front when applying for a mortgage, so if a purchase falls through, the applicant moves on to the next one without paying for the first survey. A cash buyer obviously pays for everything. So if a cash buyer pays for a survey that's a significant investment. If a cash buyer doesn't have a survey, then surely offer to exchange could be very quick. So if they do pull out presumably it should be very quick.

happy_2008 said:

Why would you expect a discount just because you're a cash buyer is beyond me??

A cash buyer can buy your property. Someone who has an agreement in principle from a lender might be able to. 
A cash buyer is able to buy your property quicker and with less hassle.
In my first purchase the bank reduced the amount they would lend to me by around 10-15k, so I had to find another lender. There was also a shortage of surveyors at the time, so I had to wait a few weeks longer than normal. I was able to complete the transaction, but maybe the vendor would have accepted a bit less from a cash buyer to sell quicker and with less stress of it falling through.

My previous sale had a hold-up due to an issue with the mortgage. It was very annoying. I had started making offers on the next place, then wasn't sure where I stood. It was resolved, but I didn't know if I would have to find another buyer. Then, once I had an offer accepted on a flat, they revealed that the lease was short. This is yet another thing which is a bigger problem for mortgagors than cash buyers.

My current sale to a couple fell through as one of them lost their job, so the amount they can borrow is significantly reduced. If they were cash buyers they could have proceeded. Instead almost a year after listing initially I am still on the market.

Most people want their transaction to go through quickly. Once you have agreed a sale (even more if you are purchasing at the same time) you are probably looking forward to moving, so that might be enough reason to sell at a slightly lower price to achieve this. You may also lose the house you thought you would buy. If you break the chain, maybe it's easier for them to find someone else - maybe even a cash buyer!!! But there may be financial implications as well. For example, if you are upsizing and prices rise then you will be worse off:
e.g. you agree to sell for £500k and buy for £1m. This falls through and prices are now 10% higher - you agree to sell for £550k and buy for £1.1m, so you are 50k worse off (actually more than 50k worse off as you'll pay higher EA fees and SDLT). Maybe in that hypothetical example it would have been worth accepting slightly less than £500k from a cash buyer.

I think you'll find a lot of people would be quite happy if the transaction took a bit longer to complete, but for a higher price. For example, the move quick thing is irrelevant to me. I'l happily wait an extra 2, 3 weeks for 10-15k more. Speed is far from everything.

Some sellers will be waiting years if they don`t price realistically, cash buyer lets them get on with their lives, 20% off most of the over-priced stuff should be a good starting point.

Young_Turk

Crashy_Time said:

eidand said:

Young_Turk said:

eve824 said:

I would rather have a non cash buyer. I’ve always had trouble with cash buyers so would opt for someone with a small chain. They have much more investment in the process and so less likely to pull out. Both aborted sales I’ve had were cash buyers. 

That seems like you have had bad luck. Did your cash buyers pay for a survey? They might have more invested in the process than those obtaining a mortgage. Often the fees aren't up front when applying for a mortgage, so if a purchase falls through, the applicant moves on to the next one without paying for the first survey. A cash buyer obviously pays for everything. So if a cash buyer pays for a survey that's a significant investment. If a cash buyer doesn't have a survey, then surely offer to exchange could be very quick. So if they do pull out presumably it should be very quick.

happy_2008 said:

Why would you expect a discount just because you're a cash buyer is beyond me??

A cash buyer can buy your property. Someone who has an agreement in principle from a lender might be able to. 
A cash buyer is able to buy your property quicker and with less hassle.
In my first purchase the bank reduced the amount they would lend to me by around 10-15k, so I had to find another lender. There was also a shortage of surveyors at the time, so I had to wait a few weeks longer than normal. I was able to complete the transaction, but maybe the vendor would have accepted a bit less from a cash buyer to sell quicker and with less stress of it falling through.

My previous sale had a hold-up due to an issue with the mortgage. It was very annoying. I had started making offers on the next place, then wasn't sure where I stood. It was resolved, but I didn't know if I would have to find another buyer. Then, once I had an offer accepted on a flat, they revealed that the lease was short. This is yet another thing which is a bigger problem for mortgagors than cash buyers.

My current sale to a couple fell through as one of them lost their job, so the amount they can borrow is significantly reduced. If they were cash buyers they could have proceeded. Instead almost a year after listing initially I am still on the market.

Most people want their transaction to go through quickly. Once you have agreed a sale (even more if you are purchasing at the same time) you are probably looking forward to moving, so that might be enough reason to sell at a slightly lower price to achieve this. You may also lose the house you thought you would buy. If you break the chain, maybe it's easier for them to find someone else - maybe even a cash buyer!!! But there may be financial implications as well. For example, if you are upsizing and prices rise then you will be worse off:
e.g. you agree to sell for £500k and buy for £1m. This falls through and prices are now 10% higher - you agree to sell for £550k and buy for £1.1m, so you are 50k worse off (actually more than 50k worse off as you'll pay higher EA fees and SDLT). Maybe in that hypothetical example it would have been worth accepting slightly less than £500k from a cash buyer.

I think you'll find a lot of people would be quite happy if the transaction took a bit longer to complete, but for a higher price. For example, the move quick thing is irrelevant to me. I'l happily wait an extra 2, 3 weeks for 10-15k more. Speed is far from everything.

Some sellers will be waiting years if they don`t price realistically, cash buyer lets them get on with their lives, 20% off most of the over-priced stuff should be a good starting point.

Yes, though ironically many will be better off waiting if prices fall. If they are upsizing and prices crash, they will gain more on the purchase than they lose on the sale.
Landlords should definitely price realistically and accept low offers. Downsizers and STRs should think about pricing realistically, or accepting seemingly low offers. But you never know whether your accepting a low offer or if the market price is just a little lower than you thought.