Here's a different way of saying what I am trying to get at:
People often complain that brokers are being unreasonable when they balk at an offer comparable to another report on the ROFR board. On the one hand, there is no reason for the broker to be anything other than professional about it, but of course they are human, so they aren't always professional*. But at the same time, just because Joe Dealfinder got the same contract for $X, that does not mean the seller should accept that as a reason to sell for $X, because it is possible (and in many cases likely) that they can find a buyer willing to pay more without having to wait months for it to happen.
And, in some cases the ROFR reports are genuine outliers, in which case the seller is absolutely correct to balk, and it may be reasonable to not even bother negotiating, becuae the prospective buyer is anchored to a price that, in the broader market, is not reasonable. And the larger brokers have a much better picture of the reasonable selling range than we do.
-------
*: I know that if I were a broker, I imagine I would sometimes be frustrated by people becoming indignant when they don't get the same price that Joe Dealfinder got. I'm sure none of *us* would do that, of course, but...
I figured I’d post anyway to add to the ROFR timeline. 
