Bogotá apartments: is vacancy behind the pricing spread?

F

field.full

Buyer
Established
I’m tracking Bogotá apartments listed from COP 1,558,000,000 to COP 2,337,000,000. The snapshot shows 3.3% movement and roughly 113 days on market, but negotiated discounts seem to vary sharply with condition. Renovated units move quickly; others sit and receive cuts.

I’m deciding whether vacancy is the main reason for that spread, rather than headline demand. Does that interpretation hold up? Please include the neighbourhood, apartment type and whether your evidence comes from completed sales or current listings.
 
Vacancy may matter, but this doesn’t establish it yet. That price range could combine very different neighbourhoods and apartment formats. Is the 3.3% movement up or down, and over what period? Also, is 113 days calculated from completed sales, active listings, or both? Withdrawn listings would materially change the picture.
 
I’d follow each listing as a cohort rather than rely on the portal-wide days figure: original asking price, first reduction, final advertised price, completed or withdrawn, and any relisting. Otherwise a withdrawn apartment can vanish without appearing as either a sale or a long-running listing. Keep neighbourhood boundaries fixed as well.
 
I’m not convinced vacancy is the leading explanation. In this bracket, buyer financing and seller motivation could produce a similar pattern. A renovated apartment may attract more buyers because it is easier to assess and occupy, not because the competing unrenovated units are vacant. Do you know the occupancy and financing status of any completed deals?
 
Condition also needs more than two categories. Separate recently renovated, habitable but dated, and requiring major work. Then compare recent completed sales within the same neighbourhood and apartment type. I’d also record when cuts happen—early, around the 113-day point, or only after a listing has been sitting much longer.
 
The 113 days could coexist with quick renovated sales if a smaller group of stale listings is pulling up the average. A median and a distribution would be more informative than one figure. I’d also distinguish a condition discount from a time-on-market discount; they can overlap, but they are not the same thing.
 
That distinction is useful. A compact table could have neighbourhood, apartment type, condition band, vacant/occupied/unknown, initial ask, latest ask, days listed, and outcome. Add weekly new-listing and withdrawal counts. If the vacant units still receive earlier or larger cuts after controlling for condition, the original theory becomes much stronger.
 
Agreed on the table, but seller motivation must be included where it can be established; vacancy may simply be a visible proxy for urgency. For now I’d describe this as a condition-and-duration pattern, not a vacancy-driven market. The next useful evidence is completed prices, because advertised cuts alone do not reveal the negotiated discount.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top