Seoul condos: bid now or wait after +10.9% movement?

K

knitsAndAtlas

Homeowner
Established
I would prefer to wait for a price reduction, but a reported 17-day marketing period makes me wonder whether that means losing the better Seoul condos rather than gaining leverage. The listings I am comparing run from ₩1,573,000,000 to ₩2,360,000,000, with a quoted movement of 10.9%.

Before acting, I need to know what that percentage measures and over which period. I also want to compare new-listing volume, completed sales and the timing of reductions, particularly where condition affects renovation costs and buyer financing. For anyone seeing a similar pattern, which Seoul neighbourhood and condo type are you following?
 
Financing could explain where buyers hit their ceiling, but 17 days alone does not show how much leverage they have. I’d compare recent completed sales with the original and final asking prices. Condition matters most when the likely renovation cost is large enough to affect what a financed buyer can offer.
 
Also, what exactly does the +10.9% measure—asking prices, completed-sale prices, or listing volume, and over what period? Those would lead to very different conclusions. Without that definition, I wouldn’t use it as evidence to bid quickly.
 
The 17-day figure may also be skewed by withdrawals. A listing that disappears is not necessarily a completed sale, and repeated relisting can make the visible marketing period look shorter. I’d want the counts of completed, withdrawn and still-active condos separated.
 
That’s a good caveat. It would help to track each unit rather than each listing entry, especially if the same condo returns with new photos or a revised price. Luca, does your 17-day number end at contract, removal, or the date you collected the snapshot?
 
I’m not convinced financing is the main driver of the discount spread. Within such a wide price range, seller motivation and property condition can easily dominate. A well-presented condo priced near a recent completed sale may move quickly, while an optimistic seller can sit firm regardless of buyers’ borrowing costs.
 
“Seoul” is too broad for this comparison. Even before discussing financing, define the neighbourhood boundary consistently. Otherwise a change in the mix of condos entering the sample could produce the apparent +10.9% movement without the same units actually becoming more expensive.
 
A practical table would solve much of this: unit or building identifier, neighbourhood, property type, first asking price, each reduction date, final status, condition notes and days listed. Then compare condos within the ₩1,573,000,000–₩2,360,000,000 band rather than treating every listing as equivalent.
 
Price-cut timing would be especially useful. A reduction after only a few days suggests different seller expectations from one made after several weeks. If most completed sales follow a cut, waiting may be rational; if attractive condos complete before any cut, the 17-day average could conceal a much faster segment.
 
I’d also ask agents the same neutral question for every candidate: is the seller prioritising timing or price? The answer is not proof, but it helps frame an offer. Pair it with completed-sale evidence rather than assuming every conditioned unit or financed buyer creates the same negotiating room.
 
My takeaway is that there isn’t enough here yet to choose “bid now” over “wait.” First define the +10.9%, narrow the neighbourhood, distinguish completed sales from withdrawals, and compare condition-adjusted condos. If a target is still available after the usual 17-day window and has already had a price cut, that gives a stronger basis for negotiation than the Seoul-wide headline.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top