Opening 13% below asking on a Los Angeles warehouse after 100 days

[rowan_birch]

If I misjudge this offer, I could either lose the warehouse over a gap the seller might have accepted or take on a property whose value and updating costs are not sufficiently supported.

It is a Los Angeles warehouse listed at $990,000 and still available after 100 days. Other listings provide some context, but the completed-sale evidence I have found is too thin to justify treating their prices as market value.

An opening figure of $861,300 would put me 13% under the asking price. I could support it with proof of financing and offer flexibility on closing, but I would keep inspection, financing and appraisal protection rather than make the bid superficially cleaner. Is it better to explain the amount through the limited sales evidence and specific updating work, or first ask what the seller values most—speed, certainty or price—before deciding whether that figure is worth submitting?

 

[NimbleInk]

Thirteen percent below is not automatically offensive, especially after 100 days. I’d keep the explanation short: limited completed comparables, the property’s updating needs, and uncertainty over the supported value. Don’t send a long list of faults.

Pair the price with financing proof and ask what closing timing suits the seller. I would retain inspection, financing and appraisal contingencies unless you can comfortably absorb the relevant risks. Give a clear response deadline, but enough time for a considered answer.

 

[direct_map]

I wouldn’t lean heavily on the 100 days. That shows the asking price has not produced a sale yet, but it doesn’t prove $861,300 is market value. Warehouses can vary significantly even when the asking prices look close.

What does “needs updating” cover, and do you know whether the seller values speed, certainty or price most? That motivation may determine whether a lower offer with flexible timing gets any traction.

 

[NimbleInk]

That’s fair—the days on market are a reason to try, not valuation evidence. With thin completed comparables, the appraisal contingency becomes more important, not less. I also wouldn’t let the deposit become non-refundable before the agreed inspection and financing periods have passed.

Rather than estimating every repair now, the buyer could preserve inspection rights and request a credit only if the findings justify it. That keeps unsupported repair assumptions out of the opening offer.

 

[liv.ash]

I’d submit the $861,300 offer with a simple comparison sheet based on completed sales rather than active listings, financing evidence, and two or three closing-date options. State any maximum appraisal gap in dollars instead of promising broadly to cover one.

Before signing, make sure the Los Angeles contract clearly sets out inspection access, financing and appraisal deadlines, the response deadline, and exactly when the deposit is at risk. For a warehouse, include any property-specific or environmental investigation recommended by the relevant inspectors or lender.