Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/50043
|
| Title: | 影響成屋議價空間比率之變數研究-以台北縣.市為例
Research on variables influencing the degree of price concession- |
| Authors: | 邱千惠
Chiou, Daisy |
| Contributors: | 林左裕
Lin, Tsoyu
邱千惠
Chiou, Daisy |
| Keywords: | 議價空間
金融風暴
訂價策略
特徵估價
degree of price concession
financial crisis
pricing strategy
Hedonic pricing |
| Date: | 2009 |
| Issue Date: | 2010-12-09 16:51:11 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 由於運用特徵價格模型探討影響不動產價格之變數，國內外相關之文獻數量甚為豐富，但對於影響議價空間比率之變數，較少有研究者探討，由於議價空間比率影響賣方及買方之訂價或出價策略與對成交價格之預期，另對於估價人員採用市場比較法時，僅得待售案例時之情況調整亦有所幫助，故本研究試圖從蒐集相關不動產成交案例，探討有關影響其議價空間比率之變數。
因本研究之資料範圍鎖定成屋且透過仲介成交之案件，故透過與仲介經紀從業人員之訪談並與文獻回顧相關理論作相互印證，廣納可能之變數，並搜集台北市、縣成屋實際委託價格及交易資訊。將訪談蒐集所得之交易價格資料及變數，運用Excel 及SPSS統計軟體，透過敘述統計、相關係數分析、折線圖分析、特徵估價法之多元廻歸模型等方法，分析影響議價空間比率之因素，及其影響之程度。
實證結果發現：影響議價空間比率之顯著變數如下：
（一）區位變數有：樹林、林口、新莊為正相關，議價空間比率顯著較高，大安區為負相關，議價空間比率相對較低。
（二）成交時間變數有：97年第四季因金融風暴，該季議價空間比率顯著較高。
（三）物件個別屬性變數有：是否1樓、屋齡、平均委託單價與議價空間比率為正相關，透天產品與議價空間比率為負相關，透天產品議價空間比率顯著較低。
（四）總體因素變數有：北市北縣拍賣移轉件數與議價空間比率為正相關，北縣市買賣移轉件數與議價空間比率為負相關。
本研究建議買賣交易人或投資者應針對交易標的所在區位、交易時間點、標的物個別條件以及總體指標需深入了解，賣方在訂價或買方在出價斡旋時，將更能提高交易成功之機率。物件位於相對偏遠地區，由於條件相對較差，賣方在開價上需預留較大議價空間，並有讓價準備，而買方可多收集相關成交資訊，以減少因資訊不充足而支付較高之價格貼水。
另外，當市場上發生重大事件導致房屋市場變動時，此時仲介角色更具挑戰性， 應提供賣方相關分析資訊，協助使其提早瞭解市場變動情況，避免損失加劇。對於一樓產品，買賣雙方價格認知差異較大，應提供相近條件之成交行情，若是店面或商用產品，可再提供租金收益資訊，易使雙方對於價格較有共識，並促進交易價格之合理性。
而不動產估價師執行台北縣、市之估價案件時，若採用市場比較法，收集之比較案例為待售尚未成交之物件，可參考各區位議價空間比率之平均數，再評估上述顯著變數之正負相關性，酌予上下調整，以增進待售價格情況調整之精確度。
Although there are abundant sources of references regarding the use of Hedonic pricing models to study the relationship between real estate pricing variables and real estate price volatility, relatively few were dedicated to the research of price concession variables. Price concession variables determine sellers` asking prices and buyers` bid prices, or the expected deal price of a bid/ask strategy and even provide useful indications to real estate evaluators taking the market comparison approach when there are no actual deals to compare. Therefore, in this research we aimed to collect samples of actual real estate deals made to determine the variables that affect degrees of price concession by analyzing the degrees of price concession in proportion to bid/ask prices.
In this research, we confined our area of study to completed constructions transacted through real estate agencies. Through interviews with real estate agents and reviews of past theoretical references, we attempted to gather all possible variables from the time buyers and sellers approach real estate agencies to the time a deal is made; we also gathered data of bid prices, asking prices and deal prices of completed constructions situated in the various administration districts within Taipei City and Taipei County. Interview results, pricing data and the possible variables we had identified were analyzed using Excel and SPSS; our statistical analysis included descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, line charts and multiple regression of the Hedonic pricing model. The purpose of our analyses was to determine factors that influence the degree of price concession as well as the extent of such influence.
Our research results found the following variables that significantly influence the degree of price concession:
(1) Location variable: Shulin, Linko and Hsinchuang districts are positively correlated, suggesting a higher degree of price concession; Daan district is negatively correlated, suggesting a lower degree of price concession.
(2) Timing variable: The degree of price concession during the fourth quarter of 2008 was significantly higher because of the global financial crisis.
(3) Object-specific variables: Whether the property is situated on the first floor and aging variables are positively correlated to the degree of price concession; whether the property is an independent house is negatively correlated to the degree of price concession, suggesting a lower degree of price concession for independent house properties.
(4) Macro factors: The number of court auctions in Taipei City and County is positively correlated to the degree of price concession; the number of property sales in Taipei City and County are negatively correlated to the degree of price concession.
Through this research, we advise that property buyers, sellers and investors should gain further insights into the location, timing, characteristics and the overall environment relating to the properties they wish to close deals for. These insights will help buyers and sellers set bid/ask prices that are more likely to close deals, thereby reducing the cost of prolonged negotiations. Properties located in remote areas are have a disadvantage; sellers should reserve more room for negotiation and be prepared to make price concessions, while buyers should gather more information related to the deal of similar properties to avoid paying higher premiums due to lack of information.
Furthermore, the role of real estate agencies becomes more challenging in the occurrence of major events which cause volatility within the real estate market. Real estate agents should provide sellers the relevant data analysis to facilitate early anticipation of market changes, thereby preventing further losses. For properties located on the first floor, since there are relatively wider discrepancies between sellers` and buyers` expectations, real estate agents should provide more information related to the deals of similar properties to reconcile their differences. If the properties are for retail or commercial purposes, real estate agents may also provide information on rental or revenue to reconcile the understanding between buyers and sellers and give more rationality to deal prices.
For real estate evaluators attempting to evaluate properties situated in Taipei City and County using the market comparison approach but lacking deal references, they may consider taking the average degree of price concession across all administrative districts and adjust upwards or downwards based on correlations to the above significant variables and produce a more accurate indicator for the properties pending sale. |
| Reference: | 一、中文部份
(一) (期刊與研究成果報告部份)
李春長、張金鶚，1996，「房地產仲介市場賣方訂價與成交價和銷售期間關係之研究」，『經濟論文』，22(4)：592-616。
李春長、張金鶚、林祖嘉，1997，「房屋交易市場上銷售期間之研究:存活模式之應用」，國家科學委員會研究彙刊:人文及社會科學，7(3)，420-437。
吳森田，1994，「所得、貨幣與房價—近二十年台北地區之觀察」，『住宅學報』2：49-65。
周美伶、張金鶚,，2004，「購屋搜尋期間影響因素之研究」，『管理評論』，24(1):133-150。
林英彥，2004，『不動產估價』，台北：文笙書局。
林欽榮，2002，『消費者行為』，台北：揚智文化。
林建煌，2007，『消費者行為概論』，台北：華泰文化。
林秋瑾、楊宗憲、張金鶚，1996，「住宅價格指數之研究—以台北市為例」，『住宅學報』， 4：1-30。
林祖嘉，1992，「台灣地區房租與房價關係之研究」，『台灣銀行季刊』，43(1)：347-371。
林祖嘉、林素菁，1993， 「台灣地區環境品質與公共設施對房價與房租影響之分析」，『住宅學報』，1：21-45。
林祖嘉、林素菁，1996 ，「住宅需求、住宅價格、與貸款成數」，『台灣經濟學會年會論文集』：203-219。
林秋瑾、黃佩玲，1995，「住宅價格與總體變數關係之研究—以自我向量迴歸模式(VAR) 進行實證」，『政大學報』，71：143-160。
林秋瑾、王健安、張金鶚，1997，「房地產景氣與總體經濟景氣於時間上領先、同時、落後關係之探討」，『國家科學委員會研究彙刊：人文及社會科學』，7（1）：35-56
林祖嘉、馬毓駿，2007， 「特徵方程式大量估價法在台灣不動產市場之應用」，『住宅學報』， 16(2)：1-22。
林素菁，2004，「台北市國中小明星學區邊際願意支付之估計」，『住宅學報』，13（1）：15-34。
邱敬斌、賴世剛，2007，「鄰避性設施設置協商策略比較之實驗研究」，『台灣土地研究』，10(1)：1-22。
邱皓政，2007，『量化研究與統計分析』，台北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
洪得洋、林祖嘉，1999，「台北市捷運系統與道路寬度對房屋價格影響之研究」，『住宅學報』， 8：47-67。
張金鶚，1991，「房地產真實交易價格之研究」，行政院國家科學委員會補助計畫。
張金鶚、劉秀玲，1993，「房地產品質、價格與消費者物價指數之探討」，『政大學報』，71：143-160。
張金鶚、詹任偉，2005，「台灣房地產景氣動向預測準確度之研究」，『台灣銀行季刊』，56（4）：43-60。
張金鶚，2006，『房地產投資與決策分析-理論與實務』，台北:華泰文化事業有限公司。
張重昭，2003，「促銷價格標示方式與消費者內部參考價格對消費者行為之影響」，行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫。
張國忠，1999，『商業談判：原理與實務』，台北：前程企業管理有限公司，。
梁文貴，1998，「訊息不足對決策行為之影響-賽局、訊息與交易成本三理論之觀點」，”Tatung Journal”, 28：23-24。
辜炳珍、劉瑞文，1989，「房地產價格指數查編之研究」，行政院主計處研究成果報告。
彭建文、賴鳴美，2006，「賣方訂價策略對成交價格之影響分析」，『住宅學報』，15（1）：1-20。
彭建文、張金鶚，2000，「總體經濟對房地產景氣影響之研究」，『國家科學委員會研究彙刊：人文及社會科學』，10（3）：330-343。
廖仲仁、張金鶚，2004，「搜尋成本與定錨行為對於購屋者價格貼水之影響」，『住宅學報』，13（2）：47-62。
楊澤泉、李政道，2001，「台灣不動產景氣與政府政策之研究」，第五屆兩岸中華文化與經營管理學術研討會論文集，中國哈爾濱工業大學
廖仲仁、張金鶚，2008，「仲介服務對於住宅價格搜尋之影響」，『都市與計畫』，35（2）：155-173。
鄒欣樺、張金鶚、花敬群，2007，「建商不動產表價與議價策略之探討—景氣時機、個案區位、及建商類型分析」，『管理評論』，26（3）：47-69
鄧東濱，1984，『談判手冊-要領與技巧』，台北：長河出版社。
龔永香、江穎慧、張金鶚，2007，「客觀標準化不動產估價之可行性分析-市場比較法應用於大量估價」，『住宅學報』，16（2）：23-42。
(二)論文部份
李春長，1996，「房地產仲介市場交易行為之研究」，政治大學地政研究所博士論文。
李育坤，1988，「台北市地價變遷與空間分佈之研究—兼論捷運系統對地價之影響」，政治大學地政研究所碩士論文。
王淑慧，1998，「產品種類、品牌知名度、參考價格與涉入程度對消費者購買意願的影響」，成功大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
尤松文，2000，「網路商店中消費者議價行為之研究」，中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
李忠憲，2009，「規避損失及賣方行為-以台北市住宅法拍市場之驗證」，政治大學地政研究所碩士論文。
李泓見，2005，「台北都會區不同住宅類型及其面積價差之研究」，政治大學地政研究所碩士論文。
林國民，1996，「高雄市自有住宅特徵價格之研究」，成功大學都市計畫學系研究所碩士論文。
陳俊宏，2007，「多變量相關於不動產擔保估價之應用」，政治大學地政研究所碩士論文。
許侶馨，1989，「捷運系統對沿線地區地價影響之研究」，國立交通大學碩士論文。
梁安昌，1993，「不同價格訊息呈現方式下參考價格對消費者行為之影響」，政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
黃凱玲，2007，「上市櫃公司建商之利潤力績效與房地產景氣關聯性之研究」，政治大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
廖仲仁，2006，「住宅市埸之價格搜尋行為-定錨效果、仲介服務與市埸機制選擇之影響」，政治大學地政研究所博士論文。
劉振誠，1986，「住宅價格影響因素之研究—以台北市松山、中山、大安、古亭區為例」，國立中興大學碩士論文。
蕭展正，1986，「台北市人口與地價空間分佈變遷之研究」，國立政治大學碩士論文。
賴鳴美，2005，「訂價策略對成交價格與銷售期間的影響分析」，台北大學不動產與城鄉環境學系研究所碩士論文。
二、英文部份
Allen, M.T., 2001, ” Discounts in Real Estate Auction Prices：Evidence from South Florida”, The Appraisal Journal, 69 (1, pp.38-44.
Anglin, P.M., Rutherford, R.C., and Springer, T.M., 2003, “The Trade-off Between the Selling Price of Residential Properties and Time-on-the-Market : The Impact of Price Setting”, Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 26(1): 95-111.
Antonio Merlo and François Ortalo-Magné ,2002, “Bargaining over residential real estate: evidence from England”, CESIFO Working Paper No.778.
Arie Segev, Dadong Wan and Carrie Beam,1995, “Designing Electronic Catalogs for Business Value: Results of the Commerce Net Pilot”, The Fisher Center for Information Technology & Management Haas School of Business University of California, Berkeley, 1995：6-15.
Asabere,P.K.and F.E.Huffman,1993,’’Price Concessions,Time on Market,and the Actual Sales Prices of Homes’’,Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics.6（2）：167-174.
Asabere,P.K., F.E.Huffman and S. Mehdian,1993, ’’MisPricing and Optimal Time on the Market’’,Journal of Real Estate Research,8（1）：149-156.
Belkin, J., and Mcleavey, W.M, 1976, ’’An Empirical Study of Time on Market Using Multidimensional Segmentation of Housing Markets’’, Areuea Journal, 4:57-75.
Biswas, Abhijit & Edward A. Blair,1991, “Contextual Effects of Reference Price in Retail Advertisements” ,Journal of Marketing, Chicago,July 1991,55(3)：1.
Cubbin,J.,1974, ’’Price, Quality,and Selling Time in the Housing Market’’,Applied Economics.6（2）：171-187.
Della Bitta, Alber J., KentB. Monroe John M. McGinnis, 1981,“Consumer Perceptions of Comparative Price Advertisements,” Journal of Marketing Research, 18(4)：416-427.
Glower, M., D. R. Haurin & P. H. Hendershott,1998, “Selling Time and Selling Price: the Influence of Seller Motivation,” Real Estate Economics. 26(4): 719-740.
Harding J. P., J. R. Knight and C. F. Sirmans (2003), “Estimating Bargaining Effects in Hedonic Models: Evidence from the Housing Market” , Real Estate Economics, 31(4)：601-622.
Jeffrey Teich, Hannele Wallenius and Jyrki Wallenius, 1999, ’’Multiple-issue auction and market algorithms for the world wide web ’’, Decision Support System,July 1999,26(1):49-66.
Knight, J .R., 2002, ”Listing Price, Time on Market, and Ultimate Selling Price : Causes and Effects of Listing Price Changes “, Real Estate Economics, 30(2):213-237.
Kolter, P. and G. Armstrong, 2003, ”Principles of Marketing”, 10th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Lall,A.S.,1966, ” Modern Internation Negotiation：Principle and Practice”,New Yark：Columbia University Press.
Lancaster, K., 1966, ” A New Approach to consumer theory”, The Journal of Political Economy, 74(2) , pp.22-32.
Miller, N.G., 1978, ”Time on the market and selling price”, AREUEA Journal, 6：164-174.
Miller, N.G., 1982, ”Residential property Hedonic pricing models：A Review”, Research in Real Estate, 12：31-56.
Moukas, A., Guttman, R. and Maes, P.,1998, "Agent-mediated Electronic Commerce: An MIT Media Laboratory Perspective", Proceedings of the First International Conference on Electronic Commerce, Seoul, Korea.
Pagourtzi, E., V. Assimakopoulos, T. Hatzichristos & N. French,2003, “Real Estate Appraisal: A Review of Valuation Methods,” Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 21(4): 383-401.
Pruitt,D.G.,1983, ” Strategic Choice in Negotiation”,American Behavioral Scientist,Vol.27（2）：167-194.
Pyhrr, Stephen A. and Cooper, James R., 1982,’’Real Estate Investment’’, John Willey & Sones, Inc.:166.
R.H.Guttman,P.Maes,1998,’’Agent-mediated Integrative Negotiation for Retail Electronic Commerce’’,MIT Media Lab Paper,1998.
Richard Thaler,1985, “Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice”, Marketing Science,4（summer）:199-214.
Rosen, S., 1974, “Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition”, Journal of Political Economy, l. 82：34-55.
Sheth, J. N., & Garrett, D. E.,1986, “Marketing Theory:Classic and Contemporary reading”, South-Western Publishing Co.
Springer, T. M.,1996, “Single-family Housing Transaction: Seller Motivations, Price, and Marketing Time”,Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics. 13(3): 237-254.
Stull, W. J. ,1975, “Community Environment Zoning and the Market Value of Single-Family Homes”, Journal of Law and Economics, 18：4-8.
Urbany, Joel E., Willian O. Bearden and Dan C. Weilbaker, 1988, “The Effect of Plausible and Exaggerated Reference Prices on Consumer Perceptions and Price Search”, Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (June)：95-110.
Yavas A. and S.X. Yang, 1995 , “The Strategic Role of Listing Price in Marketing Real Estate: Theory an Evidence” , American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association Journal, 23：347-368. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
地政研究所
96923006
98 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0096923006 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [地政學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 300601.pdf | 5784Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 1960 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
