I’m choosing between two agents for a Montreal villa, and their valuations are far apart. The higher proposal is appealing, but comparable listings that launched ambitiously have been sitting for roughly 104 days before reducing. Did starting high protect anyone’s final result, or mainly waste the strongest first-week interest? I want to compare recent completed sales, not pitch promises. Please also keep Canadian legal requirements separate from what is simply a seller’s tolerance for risk.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Two valuations for a Montreal villa: start high or near the likely sale price?
- Thread starter small_quill
- Start date
Ask each agent for the completed sales supporting the proposed launch price, with the original list price, any reductions, time on market and final sale price. Then ask them to explain why each property is genuinely comparable. If the higher estimate rests mostly on active listings, it shows what other sellers hope to receive—not what buyers have accepted.
The 104-day examples may be informative, but they could also be the wrong comparison group. Were they in the same neighbourhood boundaries, similar condition and competing at the same time? A renovated villa on one street can attract a different buyer pool from a dated property nearby. The lower valuation also needs evidence rather than winning by default because it sounds cautious.
I wouldn’t assume the first week is always the only strong window. Starting somewhat high can make sense for an unusual property when the seller has time and there are few substitutes. The danger is not merely extra days; it is crossing the point where buyers interpret repeated cuts as weakness. Ask the higher-price agent what event or deadline would trigger a reduction.
clever_sparrow
Seller
How tightly are the agents drawing the neighbourhood? In Montreal, a comparison can look close on a map while appealing to a different set of buyers. I’d also want an adjustment for condition: roof, kitchen, bathrooms, exterior work and anything buyers may see as an early expense. A large valuation gap usually has assumptions hiding inside it.
That is the key follow-up. I’d make both agents put those assumptions into a simple table rather than discuss them generally. Include sold properties, current competition, recently withdrawn listings and condition differences. Withdrawn stock matters because an ambitious listing that disappears without a sale should not be treated as evidence that the asking price was achievable.
clever_sparrow
Seller
I agree on withdrawn listings, but setting a rigid cut date before seeing buyer reaction can be counterproductive. Ten serious visits with the same price objection tells you more than a quiet period with poor presentation or low new-listing traffic. Decide in advance what evidence prompts a change, not just how many calendar days pass.
Fair caveat, although sellers can rationalize weak feedback indefinitely. I’d set both: a review date and clear signals such as viewing volume, repeat visits and written interest. Any repricing should be meaningful enough to reach a different buyer group; a token reduction may only advertise that the first price failed without changing affordability.
testThePlan
Homeowner
Buyer financing belongs in the discussion too. A price that stretches beyond where likely buyers can comfortably finance may shrink the audience even when the property is attractive. That does not prove the lower agent is right, but the higher agent should identify who the expected buyer is and why recent completed sales support that buyer paying the proposed amount.
Be careful with the 104-day figure if it excludes listings that were withdrawn and relaunched. A fresh-looking listing may actually have a longer history, while a completed sale can hide earlier failed attempts. Ask for the full sequence for each comparable where available: first launch, cancellations or withdrawals, relisting, reductions and eventual outcome.
Seller motivation should decide how much pricing risk is acceptable. Someone with a firm move date may value a defensible launch price and early competition more than the small chance of finding an outlier buyer. Someone able to wait may test higher, provided carrying costs and a reduction plan are understood. Separately, contractual, disclosure and other legal obligations should be confirmed with the appropriate Quebec professionals; they are not reasons for one pricing appetite or another.
My next step would be to give both agents the same request: three to five recent completed comparisons within agreed neighbourhood boundaries, their condition differences, full listing histories, current competing supply and any relevant withdrawn stock. Then have each propose a launch price plus a written response plan for the first few weeks. The better proposal is the one whose assumptions remain convincing after that comparison, not automatically the highest or lowest number.