Paris · London · New York · Dubai · Tokyo Mon–Sat 9:00–20:00

The journal.

What we learned on the floor, written by the people who were there.

What we got wrong12 September 20267 min · 1 640 words31 rue Saint-Dominique · Paris 7e

The Saint-Dominique drawing room, photographed in March
The drawing room in March, before the first hour · photographed 9 March by Camille RousselStraightened only

We priced a flat in Saint-Dominique too high in March. Here is what it cost.

Seven weeks, eleven hours kept, no offer — and a cut of €140 000 we should have taken in the third week. The owner has read this piece and asked us to publish it with her flat named.

Camille RousselCamille RousselAdvisor · Desk 07 · since 2019 · answers in 1 h 10

Her eleven figuresSend this on

I14 March

The number we chose, and how.

We put 31 rue Saint-Dominique on the floor at €1 950 000 — the middle of three numbers the owner had been given, and the one I argued for. I arrived at it on three comparable sales in the same three streets, an adjustment for the courtyard aspect and a small addition for the kitchen. What I did not weigh was that two of those three had taken five months to sell. I used the prices they achieved and ignored the time it took.

rue de Verneuil · 112 m²154 daysSold at €1.88 mrue de Grenelle · 121 m²149 daysSold at €2.02 mrue du Bac · 109 m²38 daysSold at €1.79 m
IIWeeks 1—3

Three buyers said the same sentence.

Eleven buyers saved the home in the first fortnight and four asked for an hour. I kept all four and wrote them up the same evening. Three said a version of one thing: the flat was worth what we were asking, but no better than the two others they were seeing that week. Nobody said the price was wrong. They said it was not better than its alternatives, which is a different sentence and a more dangerous one.

“Fairly priced, but so are the two we saw on Thursday.” — hour 2, 22 March
IIIWeeks 4—7

What I wrote instead of cutting.

By week five the saves had stopped and no new hour had been asked for since the ninth. I wrote to the owner on 18 April to say April is quiet in the 7th. True, and not the reason. The honest letter would have said: three buyers have now told me the same thing and I have not acted on it. The cut came on 4 May — four weeks after the third buyer had effectively asked for it, and by then two of the four had bought elsewhere.

By the fifth week we were the only people in the building who still believed the price.
Asked, 14 March€1.95 mThe middle of threeCut, 4 May€1.81 mFour weeks lateSold, 14 June€1.79 m8.2 % under the asking
IVSince June

The two dull things we changed.

Every comparable now carries its days-on-floor beside its price, and that figure appears on the sheet the owner signs — so the number that was missing from my working is now the hardest one to miss. And when three reports carry the same sentence, the desk head sees it without me raising it: reports are read across the desk, not only down it.

“You told me the truth in June. I would have liked it in April.”
The owner, 19 JuneShe asked that this be published with the flat named. Three of the twenty-seven pieces here are about something we got wrong, and all three stay published, dated, and named.The pledge line this broke

5 comments4 answered by the author

Sort by

Sophie Marchand

Sophie MarchandBuyer13 September 2026

It is the right piece to have published. What I would still like to know is whether the third buyer ever told you in writing, or only in the room — because if it was in writing, the four weeks look worse.

ReplyShareAnswered

Camille Roussel

Camille RousselAuthorAnswered in 40 min · 13 September

In writing, in her report of 22 March. You are right that it looks worse, and it is the reason reports are now read across the desk rather than only by me.

Hélène Faure

Hélène FaureDisagrees14 September 2026

This reads well but it is still a piece in which the desk decides what its own mistake was. The honest version is shorter: you told her what she wanted to hear in March.

ReplyShareAnswered

Camille Roussel

Camille RousselAuthorAnswered in 1 h 05 · 14 September

That is a fair reading and I am not going to argue it away. I did want the mandate, and the middle number was the comfortable one.

Grégoire Lantier

Grégoire LantierOwner13 September 2026

My flat is one of your comparables, and I remember perfectly well that it took five months. I am glad to see the days printed beside the price now.

ReplyShareAnswered

Camille Roussel

Camille RousselAuthorAnswered in 50 min · 13 September

It was the number nobody wanted to say out loud, and you said so at the time. Your 154 days are in the panel at the top of this piece.

Julien Brun

Julien BrunBuyer15 September 2026

I was one of the two who bought something else. The flat was never overpriced to me — it was just the third-best of three that week. Had the cut come in week three I would probably have offered on it.

ReplyShareAnswered

Camille Roussel

Camille RousselAuthorAnswered in 55 min · 15 September

Which is the whole cost of the four weeks, put more plainly than I managed in seven paragraphs. Thank you for writing it down.

Marc Delaunay

Marc DelaunayDisagrees16 September 2026

Publishing this is good for you. I would find it more convincing if the owner were compensated rather than quoted.

ReplyShareNot answered yet

Load older commentsShowing 5 of 5 · nothing edited or removed since 2019

Leave a commentCamille answers in about an hour · two of the five above disagree with her

This is about

Published with your name and the day you wrote it. Comments are never edited and never removed — including the two above that say this piece lets the desk off too easily.