I’ve mentioned elsewhere the current market for Utah county is absolutely incomprehensible. Houses are going for unheard of prices, without seeming thought. It really seems like there is not only a short supply, but also banks are willing to loan stupid amounts to people.
So as we sell our house, I wonder what our obligations are. We have 5 offers that are above asking price.
They range from $5,000 above asking to $20,000 above asking. In a purely capitalist world, the initial answer is very simple: take the highest price and pad your bank account.
However. We’ve taken an approach that money isn’t/shouldn’t be the only factor in our move. Yes, we need to make the money work out, but we also knew it would when we listed for $40k higher than we ever expected to. So really the money is taken care of.
An extra $10k may be nice, but what does that do to
- The neighborhood
- The buyer
- The church congregation?
To start: selling high usually makes neighbors happy: “wow, they sold for what? My house is worth more.”
In a normal market, the impact on the buyer would never be a consideration. In the current market at least half of buyers appear to be sending letters of introduction, explaining who they are and why they want the house. We did this in the past (successfully), and it’s kind of nice to have some idea who may be coming in.
But the tug on the heartstrings may conceal other problems–or explain them.
In the same way a cover letter for a job (an increasingly pointless practice, IMO) explains some resume deficiencies, a letter of introduction can do the same. Or it can expose them.
Can a couple with children who love the house “for the future of the children” actually afford the payments? (Grandpa is putting down the down payment, and the loan is in his name.)
Can the highest offer actually make the offer they did? The lender only preapproved them to $30k less than they offered. Strong move, but with a bunch of other offers were we really going to go greedy and then discover you may not be able to cover that?
Will the couple that didn’t send a letter of introduction actually have the best situation?
By choosing the couple that has chronic illnesses, am I potentially dooming them to earlier expiration? Or by choosing them, am I giving them extra life and opportunity to enjoy it?
(I expect at some point for the market to reverse for a while, and any buyer to be house poor.)
And although religiosity (and affiliation) is not stated (nor should it be) in any letter, what potential benefits/detriments am I introducing to my church congregation as I leave?
We like to think we were benefits to it while we lived there. Is selling to someone who would join that congregation a net positive? Or would it be better for all to have a non-member move in? (Because the local area is heavily one denomination, there is a decently strong possibility a non-member or a not active member may feel unloved by their neighbors.)
By selling to someone who can (barely) afford a payment, are we asking the congregation to (potentially) provide some level of financial support to that family? Will the congregation react poorly? Or will they embrace them?
By selecting different buyers we are potentially revealing some of the following:
- How greedy we are
- Our trust in those who remain
- Our interest (or lack) in who remains
- Our willingness to allow certain people to engage in debt they actually can’t afford
Will I lose sleep over who we choose? Probably not. People are their own agents. They reap the consequences of their choices.
But.
If I can impact who gets to choose, could that be beneficial? I expect so.