If the rest of the house looks good except for the carpet, than replace it.

If however the house needs many upgrades, don't bother.

Eve

Prepare the house for the buyer's eye !

I'm with Jeff Dowler on this one, replace with a neutral color so that the house shows fresher.

Replace or discount. Allowances are hard to "sell", and harder to get the lenders to be OK with.

Replace before...buyers see carpet neglected, what else did the seller neglect...

Replaced it. Bob Crane I agreed with u.

Logically it may make more sense to wait, but most are slaves to their first impressions so most will suggest replacing the carpet.

It depends, but likely better to replace with a neutral carpet of good quality.

It depends. We jsut went through this on a condo with Berber that had some worn places. Got estimate for new cheap builder grade neutral for $1500.00 Owner hated it. Called carpet cleaners- and had it cleaned for $180.00. The cleaned carpet was good enough in this case. If you're going to buy new carpet, at least get the middle grade or better.

The sellers should replace the carpet.  

Sellers often push back and say they want to give an allowance because the buyer may replace the carpet anyway.  

Unfortunately and very predictably, buyers apply a much higher dollar amount to replace carpet than sellers do.

Most importantly, the worn carpet is a distraction and gives the impression that the seller failed to care for the home and this could result in a lower offer and a longer repair list. 

Depends on the condition of that carpet. You have one chance to make an impression. 

To me carpet, paint, and front landscaping are good items to invest money in.

Carpet allowance-- as in escrow hold-back? If there's a loan involved, be careful. Many investors will not allow a hold-back like this anymore. Better to get a seller credit for closing costs equal to the cost of re-carpeting and call it a day...

It may depend on the entirety of the offering - if the home is deeply discounted and offered as a fixer, perhaps not. If the home has a lot of competition among newer/more upgraded homes, possibly. One thing in my experience--when a carpet allowance is offered, buyers tend to then lowball and expect the allowance on top. So if you're going to allow for carpet, might as well replace it.

If a good shampoo won't make the carpet resentable I would recommend that it be replaced. Sometimes a buyer can't envision the room with a new carpet if there is a worn carpet in place.

Fresh paint and carpet are basics that attract buyers.

Replace - or price accordingly

I like it to be replaced. Worn carpaet can drive buyers away or lead to much lower offers. 

I would change it prior as you only get one first impression.  Having the carpet there for buyers to see and telling them it could be there when they buy it are two different feelings.

In my opinion, allowances don't work - replace the carpeting or reflect the condition of the home in the listing price.   

Good morning Chrissi. Both ways will work, I always prefer to see that carpet replaced prior to getting the property on the market, as first impression is important.

Chrissi Chapman Topoleski I think replacing the carpet before the home is on market is a better idea.

No.  Who wants carpet anymore?  I've seen people spend good money to do that only to have buyers say "WTF were they thinking putting in CARPET?!?!?!?!" and then rip it out and put in wood floors.

I think it depends on the caliber of the house.  If it is in really bad shape and the house will not sell, I might suggest replacing it.

Yes if it is really dirty or thread-bare it looks bad.

In my marekt it depends where the carpet is located. In the living room, wood is the primary product that sells so new carpet could hurt and the buyer may have wanted an allowance or concession. In the bedrooms new carpet helps.

replace! 

Chrissi

If it was used as a rental and has soiled. I replace the carpet.  It is fashionable to have hardwood floor and is often more affordable...... Just a few bucks per sf vs $15 for quality carpet....

It depends on the particular situation.

I would suggest replacing the carpet. You want to make a good impression on the showings. But if the rest of the house also needs work, then consider value pricing and go with it. The investor buyer might just love the opportunity. 

Always best to replace in my own opinion.

I think Mike & Eve Alexander got this one right

In our market, many have hardwood under the carpet, so it is ideal to rip up the carpet & refinish the wood.  It costs less than replacing carpet and improves value and speeds up the sale.

If it's carpet for carpet, given those 2 choices, it's generally better to replace it.  It will show better and sell faster and better value vs. someone discounting for the inconvenience.

I have had luck both ways, but one small room I would replace it

Buyers buy from what they SEE so replacing is better so it shows better. Allowances generally favor the Buyer, not the Seller because they estimate it will cost much more to replace than it actually does, at least in my experience.

Replacing it is the way to go

It varies with the condition of the rest of the home.

IMHO, Carpet is a cosmetic item.

First impressions count!! Today's buyers have a hard time falling in love with a 'fixer-upper' even with an allowance that may or may not fly with the lender.

My first thought is 'no' Chrissi Chapman Topoleski.  We see alot of old, stained original carpet here in our community, and most Buyers now want it gone, and want tile in it's place.  Wood laminate is also very popular, and both tile and laminate are preferred 'over' carpet.  I've even seen some who didn't like a house that had different colored wood laminate in the bedrooms, than what was in the entire rest of the house.  A carpet allowance is always a consideration, though it depends if that is what you feel is needed as a 'deal breaker' or 'deal maker'.    

You've got me sitting on the fence on this one, Chrissi.   As much as I want to say replace it before the sale to get a higher offer, I wonder if the offer wouldn't be lower because what was put in is not in the buyer's taste and they want to rip it out as soon as the deal closes.

At the same time, that same buyer might prefer you leave the existing worn carpet, just clean it, and give them a carpet allowance so they can get that special patterned, polka dot, striped, five color shag they have always wanted.

How about we go middle of the road ?  Pull out the old carpet, buff and stain the underlying wood floor and let them decide whether they want carpet and the related dust etc.   That way neither seller or buyer spent money on NEW carpeting the other one didn't want.   Problem solved !

Chrissi,

You have good answers from the community.  I don't understand how people are willing to live with worn out and stained carpeting in the first place.  A

 I would think depends on how worn the carpet is. A credit for new homeowners to replace with their choice of flooring would be my answer.  

I think the home would sell faster with new carpeting.

There are some good inexpensive carpets to put down; remember one person's dollar is another's hundred so no to the allowance.

Depends on how bad the carpet is. Tearing it out may be a good option and then a carpet allowance offered. There is no second chance on first impression rule.... holds

I have found most buyers cannot estimate correctly, and usually best to replace it versus offering a carpet allowance.

All or nothing at all.  Either change it up front or leave it and let the buyer ask for a credit if they so choose.

I have to agree with Mike & Eve Alexander.  If that is all that is lacking, the homeowner would get a better price for the home if it was replaced.  It depends on what the homeowner can afford and what else needs to be done. Sometimes something as small as new flooring, can make a huge difference in the return on investment.

I agree with Mike & Eve Alexander but would add that sometimes the carpet is terrible and then  it should be replaced even if the rest of the house needs work too.

I honestly prefer carpet allowances because I think replacing flooring is a waste of time if the people are just going to yank it out anyway...

Chrissi, most of my clients really hate wall-to-wall, at least in the living/dining areas and would want to replace it with wood.  But it's not a great idea to try to sell a house with nasty carpet.  I'm a big help here!

Buyers can no longer tell what the home will look like with new carpet or flooring. I've been convinced of this for years now.

The house with the least amount of work will win with an offer.

Seller always loves to throw in 'but what if they decide to rip it out'. Who cares! You've sold your house!