Rick Hamilton
Freshman Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2006
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- Ohio
I recently completed an appraisal for a property that had been on the market for 734 days in a market that typical marketing time is 93 days. When digging into a days on market analysis, I found, naturally, that homes that sold under the 93 days (an average of 34) sold for 98% sale to list, opposed to 94% for the average. On the other side of the ball, I found that homes listed for over the 93 days (184 on average) sold for 91% of their list price.
Based on this information, it appears that the market penalizes for underpricing (in the form of not getting as much as you could have over the typical marketing time) and also penalizes for exceeding the marketing time in the same regards. Is this a safe assumption? I applied this to the sales comparison in the form of adjustments for marketing time and my adjusted sales prices came out very close to each other. So it seemed to have worked. Economically speaking, it makes sense to me that the product (the house) is priced to low then the seller missed out on a segment of the market that would have paid a little more for it, if it was priced a little higher. Anyone feedback would be appreciated.
Based on this information, it appears that the market penalizes for underpricing (in the form of not getting as much as you could have over the typical marketing time) and also penalizes for exceeding the marketing time in the same regards. Is this a safe assumption? I applied this to the sales comparison in the form of adjustments for marketing time and my adjusted sales prices came out very close to each other. So it seemed to have worked. Economically speaking, it makes sense to me that the product (the house) is priced to low then the seller missed out on a segment of the market that would have paid a little more for it, if it was priced a little higher. Anyone feedback would be appreciated.