Offering 8% below asking on a Seoul warehouse — sensible or too aggressive?

L

lookTheRiver

Homeowner
Established
I have checked the nearby listings and my financing position, but the completed-sale evidence is still too thin to tell me what this Seoul warehouse is worth. The asking price is ₩724,500,000, it has been marketed for 23 days, and some updating is required.

An opening offer 8% lower would be ₩666,540,000. I could support it with financing proof and accommodate the seller’s preferred completion timing, while keeping the necessary inspection and other protections. Should I base the explanation on estimated works and the limited sales evidence, perhaps with a response deadline, or wait until I can price the repairs more accurately?
 
An 8% opening discount is not inherently insulting if the offer is clean and the explanation is brief. I would avoid criticising the warehouse. Say the figure reflects the updating required, limited evidence from completed sales, and your financing position. Attach credible proof of funds or financing, give a clear response deadline, and leave room for a counteroffer.
 
The missing piece is the scale of the updating. Is it cosmetic, or are there possible roof, structural, electrical or water-ingress costs? Without even a rough repair range, 8% looks arbitrary. If you can obtain estimates before offering, the seller may take the number more seriously.
 
I would not waive inspection protection just to make the financing look clean. Financing proof shows you can proceed; it does not require accepting unknown defects. I would also want the agreement to address what happens if the lender’s appraisal is below the contract price, rather than leaving you automatically responsible for the whole gap.
 
I think 23 days is too little information to assume the seller is ready for an 8% reduction, especially when the asking comparables are close. You can still offer it, but a long list of justifications may sound like an attempt to argue down every feature. Strong terms and a simple number may work better than a repair essay.
 
Naomi’s point matters: do not count the same issue twice. Either price the visible updating into the opening offer or offer nearer the seller’s figure while requesting a repair credit after inspection. Asking for both an 8% discount and full credits for already visible work could make the negotiation stall.
 
Also make the response deadline practical, not theatrical. It should be long enough for the seller to consider and counter, but not open-ended. An expiry protects you from having the offer held while the property is shown to other buyers. Flexibility on completion can be presented separately as something the seller may value.
 
Before calling the financing clean, confirm that the lender is assessing this as a warehouse rather than on assumptions suited to a home. The proof should match the property and proposed amount. I would ask how much appraisal shortfall you could cover, if any, and exactly when your deposit becomes exposed under the proposed contract terms.
 
I would be careful about stating your maximum appraisal-gap contribution in the first offer. A defined cap can strengthen certainty, but it also tells the seller how far you may stretch. An alternative is to retain a financing or appraisal condition and discuss any shortfall only if it actually appears.
 
Agreed. Financing proof is evidence of ability, not a promise to waive financing protection. I would also have the agent quietly ask what the seller values: price, speed, completion date or certainty. If motivation is timing rather than headline price, your flexible completion date may do more work than increasing the offer immediately.
 
I’d structure it in four parts: the ₩666,540,000 price; a short factual reason based on updating and uncertain completed comparables; evidence that financing is organised; and a clear list of conditions. Keep inspection, financing/appraisal protection and satisfactory ownership/use checks, with the precise wording reviewed for South Korea. State the deposit amount and release conditions clearly rather than treating them as boilerplate.
 
The sensible test is whether you can defend the offer to yourself, not whether the seller likes it. If inspection reveals a major unknown, renegotiate through a credit or walk away under the agreed protection. If the seller counters based only on asking prices, ask for completed-sale support. Given your willingness to lose the warehouse, preserving inspection and deposit protection seems more important than making the opening offer look unusually clean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top