Offering 5% below asking on a country home in Marrakech — sensible or too aggressive?

And do not confuse an expiry with pressure. The explanation can simply be that you need certainty while considering other options.
 
One trap is calling financing “clean” while retaining a financing condition. Better to be precise: proof is available, the application is progressing, and any condition is narrowly described rather than hidden.
 
Exactly. Certainty has value, but only if the seller understands what remains uncertain. Spell out valuation and financing separately because one can fail even when the other appears strong.
 
If the seller counters near asking, ask whether they would instead accept the lower figure with fewer cosmetic repair requests. Do not surrender inspection rights just to make that trade.
 
I’d separate “inspection right” from “automatic exit over anything.” A locally drafted condition can give you a response to significant findings without making every chipped tile a reopening.
 
The access and services deserve attention too, not only the building. For a country home, confirm that what you viewed and assumed is accurately covered by the legal and technical due diligence.
 
There is also a tone issue. Say the offer reflects the investment you expect to make after purchase, not that the seller failed to maintain the home.
 
At exactly 5% below, the number can look formulaic. That is fine if your rationale is genuine, but don’t pretend MAD 3,150,200 came from precise completed-sale analysis you do not have.
 
Good point. A rounded MAD 3,150,000 might read more naturally, although it is slightly more than 5% below. Whether that matters depends on Felix’s intended ceiling, not aesthetics.
 
I would still use MAD 3,150,200 if 5% is the deliberate limit. Precision is not offensive; false precision in the explanation would be.
 
Before choosing either number, request the information that could change it. If the seller supplies credible evidence or details of recent work, reassess rather than clinging to 5%.
 
Conversely, missing answers can justify keeping the discount and protections. Silence is not proof of a defect, but it should not be rewarded by taking more risk.
 
On repair credits, establish how they interact with the agreed price and financing. A promised credit is not useful if the transaction structure or lender will not accommodate it.
 
Could a delayed completion increase Felix’s carrying or financing costs? Flexibility should mean offering dates that work for both sides, not giving the seller an unlimited timetable.
 
That belongs in the private calculation of the maximum. Price, updating, delay costs and possible valuation shortfall all compete for the same budget.
 
I’d add one practical step: prepare two versions of your numbers before offering—expected case and expensive-repair case. If the second makes the purchase uncomfortable, the inspection condition must have real teeth.
 
And decide the appraisal-gap cap, if any, in advance. Negotiating against yourself after a low valuation is how a supposedly disciplined offer becomes the asking price by another route.
 
Some sellers may prefer a buyer willing to bridge a modest valuation gap. That can strengthen an offer, but only use a fixed amount you could comfortably fund, never an open promise.
 
I’d resist offering any gap coverage at the outset. Financing proof plus schedule flexibility already gives the seller reasons to engage. Keep that concession available for a counteroffer.
 
Agreed. Concessions are more useful when exchanged. If Felix moves on price or valuation risk, the seller should move on something meaningful too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top