I’m trying to judge the current Mumbai market for new-build flats priced from ₹19,710,000 to ₹29,560,000. Active listings suggest roughly 72 days to find a buyer, with most apparent outliers somehow tied to insurance. Do recent completed sales support that figure, or is the sample distorted because it gives too much weight to properties still online?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Is 72 days a fair read on Mumbai new-build flats this month?
- Thread starter GoodPorch
- Start date
The active listings alone cannot answer it. They exclude homes that sold quickly and may include stale, withdrawn or repeatedly marketed stock, so 72 days could be misleading in either direction. I’d compare listings first advertised in the same period, then separate completed, still available and withdrawn properties.
I would like the 72-day figure to become a usable measure, but the insurance label is preventing that. It is unclear whether those cases involved an actual insurance delay or whether insurance was simply mentioned somewhere in the listing information. Those two interpretations should not be grouped together.
I would also narrow the neighbourhood boundaries before comparing flats between ₹19,710,000 and ₹29,560,000. A broad area may provide a larger sample, but it can combine locations with very different demand; a tighter area is more relevant, though it may leave fewer observations. Completion status, condition, and seller motivation should then be tracked separately rather than treated as part of the same outlier category.
I would also narrow the neighbourhood boundaries before comparing flats between ₹19,710,000 and ₹29,560,000. A broad area may provide a larger sample, but it can combine locations with very different demand; a tighter area is more relevant, though it may leave fewer observations. Completion status, condition, and seller motivation should then be tracked separately rather than treated as part of the same outlier category.
WorthyCompass
Homeowner
Completed sales have their own bias: this month’s completions may have been agreed earlier, while difficult listings remain visible. I’d track when the first price cut occurred as well as the final marketing period. A motivated seller cutting early is not comparable with one holding the original asking price for 72 days.
New-listing volume matters too. If many similar flats arrived recently, the active sample becomes younger even if buyer demand has not changed. A simple table could include first-listing date, neighbourhood, condition, price changes, current status and whether buyer financing appears to have delayed the deal. Keep unknowns marked as unknown rather than treating them as insurance cases.
I’d slightly disagree with making financing a major category unless the reason for delay is actually known. It can become a catch-all explanation. Start with the observable pieces: listing cohort, price-cut date, withdrawal and completion. Then compare the 72-day figure across tightly defined neighbourhoods; otherwise the citywide average may conceal more than it reveals.