Offering 4% below asking on a Vancouver retail unit — sensible or too aggressive?

[aisha_asks]

The unit has only been listed for 11 days, so my main concern is whether a 4% discount is premature rather than whether the figure is defensible. It is a Vancouver retail property asking C$1,904,000, with updating required and too little completed-sale evidence for me to pin down value confidently.

I am considering an opening figure of about C$1.828 million. I could support it with financing proof and accommodate the seller’s preferred completion date, while keeping inspection and financing conditions.

Would you submit that now, or first ask what timing or other term matters to the seller? I also need to decide on a reasonable response deadline, a maximum appraisal gap and deposit exposure. If the inspection identifies material work, I would prefer a specific credit based on the findings rather than arguing over cosmetic items at the outset.

 

[swimsAndPost]

Four percent below is not inherently aggressive, especially if the updating has a real cost. Keep the rationale short: limited completed-sale evidence, present condition and your ability to offer a convenient completion date. Don’t give the seller a long list of cosmetic complaints.

I would keep inspection and financing conditions. Proof that funds are available can strengthen the offer without pretending financing is unconditional.

 

[ellis.gray]

The missing fact is seller motivation. Eleven days is still early, so a seller who is testing the asking price may simply counter or wait. Is the unit vacant, owner-occupied or tenanted? That could affect both their preferred timing and the due diligence you need. I’d use a clear but reasonable response deadline, not an artificially short one designed to create pressure.

 

[hana.slate]

I disagree slightly on leading with updating costs. Sellers often see those as the buyer’s design choices. Completed comparables would be a better foundation, even if there are only a few and adjustments are imperfect. If inspection later identifies specific defects, ask for a repair credit then rather than subtracting a broad renovation estimate at the outset.

 

[miro_roofs]

Also separate financing approval from appraisal risk. A lender can be comfortable with the borrower but still value the unit below the agreed price. Before offering, decide how large an appraisal gap you could cover and whether you would walk away instead. The wording and consequences of that condition depend on the contract and jurisdiction, so have it reviewed properly.

 

[miro_roofs]

On the deposit, I would not make it larger merely to make a below-asking price look serious. The important points are when it becomes payable, when conditions are removed and what happens if a condition is not satisfied. Those details can create more exposure than the headline amount. A cleanly documented deposit arrangement is preferable to an unnecessarily risky one.

 

[JaeFlint]

Could the offer present two forms of value: C$1.828 million with the seller’s preferred completion date, or a somewhat different price if the seller wants another timeline? Not suggesting multiple complicated offers—just finding out which term matters before submitting. Flexibility only helps if it solves an actual seller problem.

 

[MinaGale]

I’d ask for the available completed-sale evidence before deciding the exact number. Similar asking prices only show what other sellers hope to receive. Compare condition, size, location within the retail area and whether occupancy circumstances differ. If the evidence remains thin, make the offer subject to the protections you need rather than using certainty you do not have.

 

[GreenPost]

The aim should be a credible offer without taking on an unknown valuation or repair bill. Those goals pull in different directions if a cleaner-looking bid requires you to weaken inspection or financing protection.

I would first ask about the seller’s timing, review whatever completed comparables can be found, and fix both a maximum purchase price and an appraisal-gap ceiling. Then the C$1.828 million offer can include a useful completion date and an ordinary response window, with the necessary conditions left intact.

For example, a documented electrical defect found during inspection can support a defined credit. A general promise to revisit updating costs later gives neither side much certainty.