LingLing wrote:Thank you very much for your quick response. Well. Why we chose to locate our practice in the city of Fort Pierce? Good question. My husband is a surgeon and he wants to locate his practice right in front of a major local hospital. When we moved from California, this is the only hospital that doesn't have a surgeon with his specialty (now we know why). He rushed into renting this office space without too much research and rent negotiation. We relied on a local medical office management company that didn't tell us about the city. I was mad at my husband's decision but he is already locked in for 5 yr lease. I should say the local hospital administration has also welcome him with an open arm. His business is doing well and people driving from very far away to see him because of his skills. Now the landlord wants to sell his condo to him. Maybe I am being unreasonable. I just don't think we should pay the price that is calculated based upon another city. I think no past sales and high vacancy rate should be calculated into FMV. Yes. One of your answers is right. I found another appraiser who told me that he can't find any recent sales in the area and will have to use the hot area as the comparison. We may have to wait until there is a recent sale.
Again, my bolds....
Ling Ling,
We might be into something here... it's early so, it might take a few responses, to diminish [from a distance] the Seller's appraisal..
I, for one, am confused, why was no income approach done, based upon the above statements, Isn't there a value of the 'leased fee' estate... Does the "subject" not provide a basis for Gross Rent Multipliers=GRM's? etc....
I think the No income approach was boilerplate, how do the rest of you view that?

