Negotiating on Montreal mixed-use properties after 118 days

F

FriendlyLens

Property investor
Established
The Montreal market seems split rather than uniformly fast or slow. I’m looking at mixed-use properties asking roughly C$712,800–C$1,069,000, and the examples I’m following are around 118 days on market.

Would you treat that as meaningful negotiating room, or is local supply still more important than time listed? Recent completed sales would be most useful, particularly where the final price can be compared with the full public asking history, including cuts or relisting.
 
I wouldn’t base an offer on 118 days alone. First separate continuous exposure from properties that were withdrawn and returned with a fresh listing. Then compare only buildings with a similar residential/commercial mix, condition and immediate area. A long listing with little direct competition may give the seller more patience than the number suggests.
 
That distinction helps. I had been treating a relisted property as new supply rather than part of its earlier exposure, which could make the market look fresher than it is. How tightly would you draw the area for comparison: the same neighbourhood name, or only nearby streets with similar commercial activity?
 
Start with nearby streets, then expand only when the closer group is too thin. Neighbourhood labels can hide substantial differences in foot traffic, building form and permitted or existing use. I’d also avoid comparing a mostly residential building with a property whose value depends heavily on the commercial portion, even if their asking prices are similar.
 
I partly disagree about keeping the boundary too tight. Mixed-use sales can be sparse, so a tiny area may leave one unusual building setting the apparent market. Use a close group and a wider Montreal group side by side. The wider group won’t set the price, but it can show whether 118 days is exceptional or simply normal for this type of property.
 
Condition may explain more than the neighbourhood boundary. Two buildings can look comparable publicly while one needs major work or has units that are difficult to assess from the listing. Before reading a discount as weak demand, note whether the property was renovated, partly vacant, or marketed with limited information. Those factors can reduce the pool of buyers.
 
The timing of price cuts is useful too. A reduction after a short test at an ambitious price means something different from a cut after months with no movement. I’d build one timeline per property: original ask, each reduction, any withdrawal, relisting price, conditional period if visible, and final sale price. That makes the completed examples comparable rather than anecdotal.
 
Withdrawn stock deserves its own count. It isn’t current competition, but it shows where sellers declined to meet buyers. A weekly snapshot of active, new, reduced, withdrawn and sold properties would be more informative than today’s active listings alone. Otherwise a quiet market can be mistaken for a tight one.
 
Buyer financing is another missing piece, especially for mixed-use buildings. The same price may not produce the same financing outcome when the income and commercial components differ. Details vary by lender and property, so a failed or delayed deal shouldn’t automatically be read as evidence that the seller accepted too much or too little.
 
What does “local supply” include here: every mixed-use listing in the area, or only properties a buyer could reasonably substitute for this one? I’d use three buckets—direct alternatives, imperfect alternatives and irrelevant listings. That prevents a large number of badly matched properties from creating the impression that buyers have more leverage than they really do.
 
Seller motivation can outweigh the listing count. Repeated reductions and quick responses may support a firmer negotiation, while a seller with stable income from the building may wait. I’d ask for price justification rather than simply applying a percentage discount to 118 days. Offer terms and the buyer’s ability to complete may also matter alongside price.
 
For a practical comparison sheet, I’d record address or micro-area, asking range, total visible exposure, relisting gaps, use mix, occupancy information shown publicly, condition, price-cut dates and final price. Keep unknowns marked unknown rather than filling them with assumptions. Once several completed sales are entered consistently, the outliers should become easier to spot.
 
One caution: public asking histories and completed-sale information may be incomplete or delayed, so apparent discounts need verification before driving an offer. I’d take the short list of closest completed comparables to a Montreal agent or other relevant local professional and ask for the missing history. Until then, 118 days is a reason to investigate leverage, not proof of a particular discount.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top