In article . com, "shinypenny" wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
In a successful negotiation, both parties feel that they have a good
deal (or, if not a good deal, at least the best deal they're likely to get in
the circumstances). If you buy this house at anything over the 195 that
was your last offer, I suspect that you will not feel that you've gotten a
good deal.

The only way to win the game is not to play.

Except then he loses out on the house, and as he said in his OP, there
are few properties of this size and in this range available.

"Few", perhaps, but not "none". Others may be available with less hassle, and
may be even more attractive in other respects as well. I see a buyer in danger
of becoming obsessed with "winning" the negotiations for this house, and
missing out on the possibility of a more suitable deal somewhere else.

His original bid was $192.

Yes, but he said he *wanted* to pay 188. So he already bid 4k over what he
wanted to pay.

Seller came back and asked for $202,
probably hoping the buyer would meet him in the middle at $197. He
didn't. Seems to me the seller is prompting him to meet him in the
middle at $197.

I don't read it that way at all. If that's what the seller wanted to do, why
did the seller *ignore* his bid of 195? If the seller wants to meet in the
middle at 197, there is no clearer way of signalling that than to respond to
an offer of 195 with a counteroffer at 199. Instead, the seller ignored that
offer completely. (Yes, I know there was an oral response, but oral =
meaningless. Lack of written response = ignored completely.)

I think the seller wants 200 at a minimum. And that's why the home's been on
the market for over three months: the seller won't sell for less than what he
*thinks* it's worth, and what he thinks it's worth doesn't conform to reality.

IMO, it's too late to go back and regret his opening
bid. If he'd wanted only to pay $195, then he should've started with an
opening bid of $190.

He *wanted* to pay 188k at the outset.

And your math doesn't add up, either. The seller was asking 205 initially; if
the buyer wanted to settle at 195, he should have offered 185.

They are quibbling now over $2K.

No, they're not. The seller's "offer" of 197 is *not* in writing, and
therefore it does not exist in reality. They're still $7K apart (the
difference between the buyer's most recent *written* offer of 195, and the
seller's most recent *written* counteroffer of 202). Oral statements have
exactly *no* value whatever in real estate transactions. Only what's in
writing has any dependable meaning. And I'm betting that the seller will
*refuse* a written offer of 197.

If it were me, and I REALLY wanted
this house, I wouldn't get all bent out of shape over $2K.

As noted, nobody's getting "all bent out of shape over $2K", because they're
*seven* thousand apart, not two.

If I were the seller, I also wouldn't get all bent out of shape over $2K!

Again, it's 7K, not 2K, and IMO this seller is not the reasonable individual
that you seem to be. From what the buyer has posted so far, ISTM that the
seller is playing mind games, trying to squeeze every last nickel.

Six
months from now, once settled in the house, that $2K is going to be a
distant memory for them both.

Agreed, if in fact the difference were only 2K. But until the seller puts 197
in writing, they're still _at_least_7K apart. ("At least" because both the
buyer's offer of 195, and the seller's counter at 202, have expired. The
seller may now be looking for his full asking price of 205, and the buyer may
be thinking of going back to his original offer of 192.)

Perhaps there is a way to save the deal that would be win-win for both:
go with the $197, but ask the seller to throw in $2K's worth of
something. Fixtures, window treatments, furniture, fireplace irons,
needed repairs, more favorable closing date, kick-back to help with
downpayment. Get creative and find a way to eek out your $2K worth of
perceived value. Ask both agents to put their heads together to find a
way to help save the deal - it's in their interest to close this, too.
Seller gets his price, buyer gets something of value in return. Deal
goes through, everyone is happy!

Right, that's the way that reasonable people arrive at successful
negotiations. I'm sure you and I could easily conclude a successful real
estate deal that would leave us both content. But I think, based on what the
buyer has described so far, that the seller does not fall into the category
of "reasonable people". And I also think that the buyer is in danger of
getting so wrapped up in the idea of winning the negotiation that he's
neglecting to consider that there may be other, better opportunities for him.

Don't misunderstand me: you've given very good advice here, about ways to
sweeten the deal. But I seriously doubt that the seller will accept the
proposal. I think the seller will reject an offer of 197 *without* the
additional concessions you suggest, let alone *with* them.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?