Offering 10% below asking on a serviced apartment in Tokyo — sensible or too aggressive?

N

new_cedar

Seller
I would like to buy this apartment without overpaying, but the lack of solid completed-sale evidence makes the right opening figure difficult to judge. It is a Tokyo serviced apartment listed at ¥88,740,000, has been on the market for 94 days and appears to require updating.

I am considering an offer 10% under the asking price, backed by evidence of financing and some flexibility over completion. Is that likely to be seen as a serious package rather than an arbitrary reduction? I can walk away if the price is not accepted, but I do not want to surrender inspection or other protections merely to make the discount more appealing. Which conditions would you regard as essential, particularly given the management arrangements attached to a serviced apartment?
 
Ten percent below is defensible as an opening, particularly after 94 days, but present it as a complete package rather than a criticism of the property. State the price, financing position, flexible completion window and a short list of objective reasons: uncertain completed comparables and updating costs. Keep inspection and financing protection. A low price plus waived protections would be the wrong trade.
 
The missing fact is seller motivation. Ninety-four days could mean they are ready to negotiate, or simply that they are prepared to wait. Has the asking price changed, and has the agent indicated whether timing matters more than price?

For a serviced apartment, I would also want the operating or management arrangements, recurring charges and any restrictions understood before deciding what the updates are really worth.
 
I’m not convinced the 94 days alone supports 10% when the comparable asking prices are close. Asking prices are weak evidence, but they still suggest how nearby sellers view the market. If you genuinely want this unit, a smaller opening reduction with a clear ceiling may produce a more useful negotiation. If you are genuinely indifferent, 10% is fine—just expect a rejection rather than a counter.
 
Luis is right about the likely reaction, but I would not soften the offer merely to encourage a counter. The buyer’s uncertainty is real. I’d also avoid a long written justification; itemising every dated finish can sound adversarial. Give two or three reasons, attach financing proof, specify the proposed completion flexibility and set a reasonable response deadline. Then let the number stand.
 
On protections, separate defects from cosmetic work. Updating décor is already reflected in your offer; inspection should deal with conditions you could not reasonably price beforehand. If something material appears, you can seek a repair credit or reconsider, depending on the contract terms. Also clarify what happens if the lender’s valuation is below the agreed price. An appraisal gap can turn “clean financing” into unexpected cash exposure.
 
I’d structure it in stages: offer 10% below, provide financing evidence, give the seller a defined response period, and keep the completion date flexible. Before paying a deposit, have the written terms checked for when it becomes at risk and whether financing or inspection failure permits recovery. Those details depend on the actual contract and jurisdiction, so assumptions are dangerous.
 
One more practical point: decide your walk-away price before the first offer. Otherwise a counter can pull you upward while the unresolved inspection, serviced-apartment obligations and valuation risk remain unchanged. If the seller counters near asking, ask whether they would instead accept a credit for identified work. Price and credits are not always equivalent, especially where financing or appraisal limits are involved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top