Are buyers negotiating more in Seoul after 93 days for mixed-use buildings?

[pebble.nimble]

I’m deciding whether to negotiate now or wait for more stock in Seoul. Mixed-use buildings around ₩701,000,000–₩1,052,000,000 appear to be sitting for roughly 93 days, but the market feels split rather than uniformly slow.

Listings with a clear answer on the remaining lease length seem to move differently from those with vague tenancy details. Has anyone tracked recent completed sales against their public asking-price history? I’m particularly interested in when reductions occurred and whether withdrawn listings are making the visible supply look tighter than it is.

 

[holdTheEcho]

At 93 days I would negotiate, but not simply apply a standard discount. A seller who cut early and then held may react differently from one who has kept the original ask throughout. Also watch for withdrawn and relisted properties, since the displayed time on market may understate the full marketing period. The completed price is useful only alongside that sequence.

 

[knitsAndAtlas]

Which Seoul neighbourhoods are you including, and what counts as mixed-use here? A building with occupied commercial space and residential units is not directly comparable with one needing work or facing near-term lease expiries. The ₩701,000,000–₩1,052,000,000 band is broad enough that neighbourhood boundaries, condition and tenancy could explain more than the 93-day figure.

 

[AwakeBench]

I agree that the lease details matter, but I’m not convinced a longer marketing period automatically gives the buyer leverage. Some sellers may have little urgency and simply wait. Before choosing an offer, I’d want to know whether new-listing volume is rising, whether similar buildings are being withdrawn rather than sold, and whether the seller has already rejected lower bids.

 

[knitsAndLane]

Financing can also change the apparent negotiation. A lower offer with a straightforward funding timetable may be more attractive than a higher one carrying uncertainty. I’d prepare two numbers: an opening offer supported by the building’s condition and listing history, and a firm ceiling based on the leases and any required work. Then ask directly what timing the seller values before increasing the price.

 

[AwakeBench]

That distinction between price and certainty is useful. I’d build a small comparison table rather than rely on the 93-day average: same micro-neighbourhood, similar use mix, condition, original ask, each reduction date, withdrawal or completion, and known lease duration. If the comparable completed sales are scarce, that scarcity is itself a reason not to treat the visible asking history as proof of market value.