selling house

Nope. If you read the post carefully, the OP couldn't possibly have meant next tax year or any other type of year other than calender year. The reason we can be sure about this, is because he used 'springtime' and 'january' in exactly the same context (that is, they are both 'next year' as far as he is concerned).

No, the only reason we can be sure of it is because he said "ie 2008". Otherwise he could well have meant some other type of year.

Nice try with the argument that "january" and "springtime" should be taken to be part of the "next year" referred to, but this is not necessarily the case: He said he was thinking of going to market in 2008 and this could conceivably have meant late in 2008. He then said his friend had said to wait until springtime, and this could therefore have meant spring 2009.

:-)

LOL!

I've read what the bloke said. I know what he means. And, I image the rest of usenet users do as well.

By your argument, this geezer is asking for advice one year hence. You gotta be taking the michael.

Doesn't even make the grade of 'nice try'.

:-)

Agreed. We all know what he meant.

No, indeed he almost certainly isn't. But the discussion had moved on from what he *did* mean to what he *could have* meant.

Barring any anticipated imminent downward move in prices, the sale of a house tends to achieve a better result if it is well planned as a long term project. No point rushing things, and lots of Ann Maurice to watch first, and who's to say there isn't a year's worth of repairs and redecorating to do before it's worth even considering going to market.

I now see where you are coming from.

In your second post, you 'moved' the thread on from what the OP actually meant to what you construed he might have meant. My postings show that I never had any doubt, nor suggested any.

Thank you for clarifying the matter!

Not quite. You made an assertion that he *could not possibly* have meant anything else. Although I agree that he *probably did not* mean anything else, my issue was with your assertion that he *could not*, and so I gave an example of what he *could conceivably* have meant.

AlanF wrote: > Oh and don't forget to bargain the agent down on commission - if the

I'm no expert, but isn't the opposite true?

When there's no demand (slow) they would want to reduce their rates to attract what few fishes there are.

Dave F.

I'd prefer to choose the best estate agent rather than the highest valuation.

The OP could have meant that elephants were pink but he (the OP not an elephant) had a very poor command of English - maybe the elephant, too!

This is the problem with arguing for the sake of it!

what few fishes there are.

Both views have merit.

"PeterSaxton" wrote

How do you tell who is "best" ?

"PeterSaxton" wrote

Where did the OP mention either of 'elephants' or 'pink'? You really do talk some rubbish sometimes, Peter! :-(

Yes, yours is better. By fine tuning one should be able to balance price against speed of sale and to have the agent motivated the same way as the seller.

Robert

Perhaps he realised that his post is likely to be read by people in the future. For them 'next year' is misleading.

Robert

Common sense. It's a better method than using the highest valuation which is pointless.

The discussion was about what the OP could have meant not about what what he said.

If you don't understand the difference between the two you better go back to your lying and arguing - preferably not here though.

This is the who point of my post. Once you get away from the words used and extend it to what a person meant you open the floodgates to anything.

"PeterSaxton" wrote

Given that he didn't use either of those words, nor any words that mean anything like them, it is hardly likely that the OP meant what you suggested. OTOH, Ronald's suggestion does have *some* merit...

Don't you see the difference?

"PeterSaxton" wrote

Eh? What factors do you consider? What weights do you apply to each factor? How do you determine the true facts?

"PeterSaxton" wrote

As no-one has advocated using "the highest valuation" to determine which EA is 'best', your comment here is irrelevant.