Valuation check: 110 m² condo in Johannesburg, asking ZAR 24,120,000

E

eli.gale

Property investor
Established
I keep arriving at two different values depending on the method. One completed sale seems the better anchor, while three active listings provide a broader picture of the competition for a 2-bed Johannesburg condo of roughly 110 m².

The asking price is ZAR 24,120,000. The unit is bright and well situated, but it needs updating and the service charges could be significant. I would not, for example, price an additional 10 m² at the building’s full average rate if that space is awkward or mostly external.

Before attempting a provisional range, I need to establish whether the quoted area is internal or total, along with the tenure or lease terms, parking and usable outdoor space. Should the updating cost be handled separately after those harder-to-change features are matched against the completed sale?
 
The ask works out at roughly ZAR 219,000 per m², but I would not apply that rate mechanically. Give the completed sale the most weight, provided it is genuinely comparable. For condition, use an estimate of the work required rather than an arbitrary percentage. For size, use the marginal value of extra space within the same building or immediate area, not the full average rate per square metre.
 
Johannesburg is too broad for the three comparisons to tell us much. Are they in the same building or at least the same immediate micro-location? I would also want to know whether the 110 m² is internal space only, plus whether the unit has parking or outdoor space. Any of those could materially distort a simple price-per-metre comparison.
 
Also, how close is the completed sale in layout and floor position? A 2-bed with similar area can still be a poor comparison if the light, outlook or usable room proportions differ. Since light is one of this unit's main selling points, I would not assume the sold unit deserves the same rate without checking that.
 
On the area adjustment, split the property into features rather than treating every square metre equally. Internal living space, balcony or terrace area, parking and storage should not be blended at one rate. First confirm exactly what the advertised 110 m² includes; otherwise the calculation may look precise while comparing different measurements.
 
The service charges may be the missing fact with the biggest effect. I would ask for the current amount, what it covers, its recent history and whether any substantial building expenditure is anticipated. A visually cheaper unit can become the worse deal if its ongoing building costs or near-term contributions are materially higher.
 
I would build three cases around the completed sale: comparable as-is, adjusted for clearly costed refurbishment, and adjusted again for meaningful differences such as parking, outdoor space and floor position. Keep the asking listings separate as evidence of seller expectations, not completed value. If all three cases remain far below ZAR 24,120,000, that is more informative than trying to force a single exact number.
 
Small disagreement on deducting refurbishment costs directly. Buyers do not always price dated finishes rand for rand: some will renovate regardless, while others demand an additional discount for inconvenience and uncertainty. I would use the renovation estimate as a starting point, then test whether renovated and unrenovated local listings show a consistent gap. With only one sale, the resulting range should stay wide.
 
Parking deserves its own line in the comparison rather than being buried in the floor-area rate. Confirm whether each property has the same number and type of spaces and whether those rights are included with the unit. Do the same for balconies, terraces and storage. A superficially similar 110 m² unit may come with a very different bundle.
 
What is the tenure arrangement? If a lease is involved, the remaining term and related obligations could matter; if not, remove that issue from the comparison rather than assuming all condos are structured alike. I would also confirm that the completed comparable transferred on ordinary terms and was not a transaction with unusual circumstances.
 
The date of the completed sale is another missing piece. If it is not recent, you need evidence for any time adjustment, and one transaction cannot provide that by itself. I would look for additional completed sales from the same building or closest competing buildings, even if their size differs, before leaning more heavily on the three current asking prices.
 
A simple comparison table should expose the weak spots. Use columns for sale or asking status, date, exact micro-location, internal area, what the stated area includes, condition, floor, light or outlook, parking, outdoor space, storage and service charges. Record each adjustment separately and show a range instead of hiding uncertainty inside one price-per-m² figure.
 
One addition to that table: do not average the three asking prices with the completed sale. Keep two outputs—an evidence-based range led by completed transactions, and a separate picture of current seller expectations. The gap between them may help frame negotiations, but it does not establish what discount will actually be achieved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top