London townhouses: does 119 days reflect the market or stale stock?

[jade_details]

I’m comparing London townhouses listed between £433,700 and £650,500. The current sample suggests roughly 119 days to find a buyer, with many of the longest-running outliers apparently connected to rental regulation issues.

There is more stock coming up, but not much I would actually buy. Before deciding whether to wait for better options, I’m wondering if recent completed sales support that 119-day picture. Am I putting too much weight on listings that remain online precisely because they have not sold?

 

[far_reed]

Yes, active listings alone can exaggerate the typical selling time because the attractive or correctly priced homes disappear from that group. I’d compare them with recent completions and separately count withdrawn properties. A withdrawal is not a sale, but excluding it can make an unsuccessful listing campaign look invisible.

 

[calm_chart]

The practical problem is finding enough genuinely comparable sales. London neighbourhoods can change character over a short distance, and the £433,700–£650,500 range may be combining separate markets.

It is tempting to read 119 days as a demand signal, but I would first divide the sample by exact area and condition. A renovated townhouse and one requiring major work should not share the same benchmark. Once that is done, completed and withdrawn listings will show whether the long marketing periods are widespread or concentrated among weaker properties.

 

[makeTheCanvas]

I wouldn’t rely entirely on completed deals either. They describe properties agreed earlier, while today’s active stock reflects current seller expectations and buyer financing. The useful comparison is both sets together.

Also track the original listing date rather than any refreshed date, then note when price cuts happened. A house sitting for 119 days without a reduction tells a different story from one that found interest shortly after a cut.

 

[jade_details]

That’s fair. I’ve been treating the still-online listings as the main sample, so there is an obvious survivor bias. I’ll split it into completed, withdrawn and still active, then narrow the neighbourhoods and condition more carefully. I also need to distinguish first-listing dates from later refreshes before treating 119 days as meaningful.

 

[GreenPost]

Seller motivation may explain some of the spread too. One seller can wait indefinitely for a preferred figure; another needs certainty and adjusts sooner. Buyer financing can create delays or failed agreements without indicating that the townhouse itself is undesirable. I’d be cautious about attributing the outliers mainly to rental regulation unless that connection is clear for each property.

 

[NimblePlan]

Given that few of the new listings appeal to you, I wouldn’t turn the headline number into a reason to wait automatically. Build a small matched group: same micro-area, similar condition and size, then record asking-price changes, whether each went under offer, completed or disappeared. The 119 days can still help in negotiations, but only after you know whether a particular house resembles the stale stock or the homes buyers actually chose.