Santiago listings: the headline and the street-level picture (service charges)

[bench.far]

Forty-six days is a useful starting point, but recurring charges may be receiving too much weight in this Santiago sample. The properties are mostly detached homes priced between CLP 485,000,000 and CLP 727,600,000, so some may have substantial shared costs while others have almost none.

I plan to separate those groups before comparing them with recent completed sales. After that, I want to track withdrawals and the timing of price reductions, then divide the homes by neighbourhood and condition. For example, a renovated house with a monthly charge may still sell sooner than a cheaper one needing major work. Has anyone found buyer financing to explain more of the difference?

 

[coffeeAndBlueprint]

Service charges may matter, especially when buyers compare total monthly outgoings, but I wouldn’t treat them as the main explanation yet. With detached homes, first separate properties that actually have meaningful shared charges from those that do not. Then compare condition, seller motivation and financing. A well-priced home needing little work can move faster even with an extra recurring cost.

 

[coffeeAndBlueprint]

Also, how are you counting the 46 days? If withdrawn properties return as new listings, the visible period could understate their real marketing time. New-listing volume matters too: a rise in competing stock can make an otherwise reasonable listing look stale without service charges being the cause.

 

[full_story]

I’m less convinced by the service-charge theory. That price bracket is wide enough that neighbourhood boundaries and property condition could distort the comparison before monthly costs enter the picture. I’d split the sample into narrower location and price groups, record disclosed charges, note any price cuts, and keep withdrawn stock separate. Completed sales would be the strongest comparison, but asking-price history can still show when sellers start becoming flexible.