I may be too close to this sample to judge it clearly. For Utrecht properties listed between €231,800 and €347,800, I’m seeing roughly 91 days before a buyer is found. Renovated places move quickly; those needing work tend to sit and receive price cuts. The main outliers also appear connected to property tax. Would recent completed sales confirm that split, or are the listings still online making the market look slower than it is?
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.
Utrecht listings averaging 91 days — is online stock distorting the picture?
- Thread starter yard.steady
- Start date
Active listings will usually exaggerate the waiting time because the quick sales disappear from view while the difficult stock remains. I’d compare recent completed deals by original asking price, final asking price after cuts, and property condition. Also separate anything withdrawn rather than sold; otherwise 91 days may be measuring seller persistence as much as buyer demand.
How tightly have you drawn the Utrecht neighbourhood boundaries, and are you counting new listings consistently? At this price range, a small change in area or condition could alter the mix substantially. I’d also look at when the first price cut happened. A property sitting for 70 days and then selling soon after a reduction tells a different story from one priced realistically on day one.
I wouldn’t put the outliers mainly down to property tax without more evidence. Financing and seller motivation could explain part of the same pattern: buyers may hesitate over renovation costs, while an unhurried seller can leave an ambitious price online for months. Completed sales help, but they can also hide failed listings that were withdrawn and later returned.
A useful next pass would be three groups: renovated, habitable but dated, and requiring substantial work. For each, track new-listing volume, completed sales, withdrawals, and days before the first reduction. If the 91-day figure is driven mostly by dated or relisted stock, the headline average is less informative than the condition split. I’d keep the property-tax observation as a possible explanation, not the conclusion.