Offering 7% below asking on an Austin condo after 99 days

[SimpleWall]

I’ve worked out that 7% below the asking price would be about $404,550, which raises a more useful question than whether the percentage sounds polite: what evidence would justify that number?

The five-bedroom Austin condo is listed at $435,000 and has sat for 99 days. It is dated, but I have not found enough relevant completed sales to separate a genuine discount from an optimistic list price. Similar active listings do not settle that.

I can show solid financing and offer some flexibility on completion. I would not want those strengths cancelled out by waiving inspection, financing or appraisal protection, especially if the appraisal comes in below the contract price. Would a short explanation plus a reasonable response deadline be credible, or should I first find out whether there has been a previous reduction and what is driving the seller’s timing?

 

[GoodSignal]

After 99 days, 7% below does not sound insulting by itself. Keep the explanation short: condition, updating costs and limited evidence from completed comparables. Include financing proof and flexibility on timing so the seller sees more than the headline number. I would not waive inspection or financing merely to make a lower offer look cleaner.

 

[wren_tools]

What do the closest completed sales show for size, condition and condo fees? Asking prices can all be optimistic together. I’d also want to know whether the seller has already reduced the price and whether the updates are cosmetic or potentially expensive. Those answers matter more than whether 7% sounds polite.

 

[SimpleLane]

I’d be careful about reading too much into 99 days. A five-bedroom condo may have a narrower buyer pool, so time available does not automatically prove the seller will discount. Submit the number you can support, but use a reasonable response deadline rather than creating artificial pressure. The seller may counter, reject it, or value your flexible date enough to engage.

 

[GoodSignal]

Agreed that “clean” should not mean unprotected. You can avoid loading the initial offer with speculative repair demands while still keeping an inspection contingency. If the inspection identifies material issues, then decide whether to request repair credits, renegotiate or walk under the agreed terms. That is different from budgeting twice for every dated finish.

 

[avery_asks]

I’ll disagree slightly with focusing on how the seller might feel. The bigger risk is offering $404,550 without enough completed comparables and then promising an appraisal gap to compensate. That could turn a cautious offer into extra cash exposure. Also understand exactly when the deposit becomes vulnerable under the contract; the wording and local practice matter.

 

[RealHorizon]

A practical sequence would be: obtain the best completed comparables available, separate cosmetic updates from inspection issues, confirm financing proof, and ask what completion timing the seller prefers. Then offer around your supported value with a clear response deadline. Keep inspection, financing and appraisal protection unless you fully understand the downside of changing them. If the seller counters, compare the new price with likely repair credits and any appraisal gap rather than negotiating on price alone.