Valuation check: 35 m² duplex in Paris at €717,600

[AmaraCole]

I need to decide whether to keep pursuing this duplex, and the trade-off is between a strong Paris location and a layout that may be difficult to value. It is advertised at €717,600, with 3 bedrooms in approximately 35 m² and average overall condition. The light is attractive, but the finishes are dated and the property-tax cost still needs confirming.

I have three active listings to compare with it, though only one relevant sale price. Rather than choosing a blanket discount, which facts would you establish first to make those comparisons usable? I’m particularly unsure how much value may be lost to stairs and cramped rooms within the 35 m², and whether outdoor space, ownership or lease details, and condition grading would alter the outcome more than the headline price per square metre. I’ll have the figure checked locally before relying on it.

 

[pine.still]

With only one completed sale, I’d treat the three listings as evidence of seller expectations rather than value. For dated but usable finishes, I would initially test scenarios around 5–10% below a genuinely comparable renovated property, then replace that rough adjustment with an actual works estimate.

The biggest missing fact is the exact micro-location. In Paris, even nearby streets, outlook and floor position can make broad price-per-m² comparisons misleading. Also, is the 35 m² measured on the same basis as the comparables?

 

[cooksAndWire]

I wouldn’t apply a blanket condition percentage yet. A 3-bed layout within 35 m² is unusual enough that usability may matter more than the finishes, especially with space lost to the duplex arrangement.

Before adjusting anything, compare the completed sale room by room: floor, lift access, light, outdoor space, parking and immediate surroundings. Then obtain the annual service charges, property tax figure and any ownership or lease details that apply. Those recurring costs could explain part of the asking-price difference—or make the apparent discount insufficient.