Offering 4% below asking on a Helsinki apartment after 102 days

[kian_finance]

The surprising part is that 102 days on the market has not produced much usable evidence from completed sales. That has made me consider an offer 4% below the €625,600 asking price, although I am concerned that the listing period may say more about the seller’s patience than the apartment’s value.

The apartment needs updating, so I would support the offer with costed work where possible, proof of financing and flexibility on completion. I would keep the explanation brief and avoid treating the discount as a judgment on the seller.

Does it make sense to ask about motivation first and then submit a time-limited offer? I can adjust price or timing later, but inspection and financing conditions are harder to undo once waived. I also want the contract position on valuation and deposit exposure clear before making the offer more attractive in any irreversible way.

 

[SimpleWall]

Four per cent is not inherently aggressive after 102 days, but I would avoid presenting it as a verdict on the apartment. Offer €600,576, or a sensibly rounded figure, and briefly tie it to the updating required and limited evidence from completed comparables. Emphasise clean financing and flexibility.

I would not waive financing or inspection protection merely to make the price more acceptable.

 

[eli_west]

Do you know why it has sat for 102 days? A previous offer falling through, an awkward completion date and a seller simply holding out would each call for a different approach. I’d ask the agent about motivation before setting the response deadline. Also, have you costed the updating, or is 4% just the discount that feels comfortable?

 

[WideRoof]

I’m less convinced by using time on market as the main justification. If nearby asking prices are similar, the seller may hear “102 days” as pressure rather than evidence. The condition is the stronger argument, provided the work is real and visible.

Also consider whether you want a lower price or repair credits. Mixing both into the first offer can look like double counting.

 

[SimpleWall]

That’s fair. I’d keep the written rationale to three points: the offer reflects current condition, financing evidence is available, and the completion date can suit the seller. No long critique and no list of every defect.

Felix’s question about costs matters because an appraisal gap could leave the buyer funding more cash even if financing is approved. The financing condition should address the actual risk, not merely say a lender has shown interest.

 

[WideRoof]

Give the offer a clear but reasonable expiry rather than leaving it open indefinitely. Before signing, confirm in the actual offer wording when any deposit becomes exposed and what happens if financing, appraisal or inspection is unsatisfactory; those details can depend on the contract and local practice.

If the seller counters, decide in advance whether your next move is price, completion timing or narrower repair requests. Don’t concede all three at once.