Also show every point if practical. With a modest property set, a dot plot reveals more than a polished average.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Seoul small multifamily: is 32 days real, or a live-listing illusion?
- Thread starter ada.heath
- Start date
The rejection log could use the same dots, coloured by lease/price combination, condition, location, or financing concern. That links Elena’s buying view to the market view.
Financing concern may be hard to observe from a listing. I’d reserve that label for documented deal friction, otherwise mark it unknown.
Agreed. It was raised as a plausible explanation, not something to infer automatically. The table should distinguish observed facts from interpretations.
Maybe use two note columns: “listing states” and “possible explanation.” That prevents an agent description or our own inference from becoming hard data.
Keep free-text notes short. The structured fields should carry the comparison; notes are for anomalies such as uncertain relisting or ambiguous lease wording.
One unresolved point is property condition. If descriptions are inconsistent, broad categories such as apparent work needed, apparently usable, and unknown are safer than detailed ratings.
Yes, provided “apparent” stays in the label. Listing presentation is not the same as an inspection.
The same caution applies to occupancy and leases. Use what is stated, note the observation date, and treat anything unclear as unknown pending proper verification.
This also explains why completed deals can differ from listings: buyers may learn facts during due diligence that were not visible in the advertisement. Public data alone cannot capture every decision.
Which means the goal should be identifying associations, not proving that lease length caused the marketing time. That is still useful for deciding what to examine first.
Exactly. If lease-related cases repeatedly remain active after comparable alternatives resolve, that is a lead worth investigating, not a causal verdict.
Could seasonality matter when comparing this month with earlier periods? Even without assuming a direction, different listing dates may make cohorts less comparable.
It could, but there isn’t enough supplied here to quantify it. Use matching calendar windows when possible and avoid attributing every monthly change to leases.
pebble.nimble
Seller
Likewise, a surge in new listings changes the competitive set. A property’s 32 days occurred alongside whatever alternatives buyers saw during those same days.
That supports recording weekly new-listing counts without treating volume as quality. Elena already observed the distinction: more appeared, but few met the buying criteria.
Yes, but keep personal screening results separate from general liquidity. A property can be unattractive to Elena and still appeal to another buyer with different plans.
Label the actual conflict instead: delayed availability, uncertain information, price not compensating for the term, or no conflict. That is more informative.