Lima listings after 85 days: stale stock or misleading averages?

N

neat_page

Seller
Trying to sense-check my Lima notes before deciding whether to wait or start viewing seriously. The bracket is PEN 2,220,000 to PEN 3,330,000, mostly country homes, and the typical listing in my sample has been visible for 85 days.

I wondered whether transaction fees explain the difference between quick sales and stale stock, but perhaps I am overthinking that. The citywide average seems useless for the two neighbourhoods we like. What would you compare at street level: completed sales, withdrawals, price cuts, condition, or seller motivation?
 
I would not put transaction fees first. They may affect a buyer’s total budget, but they do not by themselves explain why one home moves and another sits. At this price level, condition, exact location and an unrealistic seller are plausible differences.

Also, “visible for 85 days” is not necessarily 85 uninterrupted days on the market if listings are withdrawn or reposted.
 
One missing detail: how tightly have you drawn those two neighbourhoods? With country homes, crossing a road or including a different pocket can change the comparison because access, plot characteristics and property condition may not be comparable. I would separate genuine new listings from relisted stock, then note when the first price cut appeared rather than relying only on total days visible.
 
I agree on narrowing the map, but I would be cautious about treating listing history as proof of seller motivation. A withdrawal could mean a failed negotiation, a financing issue, a change of plans or simply poor listing management.

Before waiting, ask agents for recent completed sales that closely match the homes you would actually buy, including condition. Then compare those with current asking prices and new-listing volume. If completed-sale information is thin, viewing a few properties may reveal more than another month of citywide averages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top