So I decided to swing for the fences and see what the seller would concede to.

First, we would concede that over a 39-year time horizon it is highly likely that the value of the property would easily cover any net profit losses, though that fact would not necessarily effect cash flow needs.

This can be very challenging but if you hold their feet to the fire they will eventually concede and you will be able to move forward.

And you STILL came out ahead, it probably did indeed double in value.At some point we must concede that it's not "luck," the dice in the SF Bay Area are quite loaded, and they are loaded in favor of property owners.

I thought about countering, but even if he did concede to a non-exclusive deal and/or a lower fee, I'd always wonder if I were truly getting his best efforts.Thanks for the input!

However, I will concede that you are correct.

A tenant's *need* to move is a much different motivator than even the nicest unit.We have a renovated condo that is about $100 above what Rentometer.com says, but they do concede a higher price for renovated properties.

However, if I am willing to concede that point, I don't see any way he can simply walk off the job at this point (at the time of final inspection).

howdy gents, thanks for your inputI'm pretty sure she won't go for that, but I completely concede it is not in my best interest to allow 50/50 with zero skin in game on her end. 

Break it apart and see what, if anything, can be conceded.