In In re Redevelopment Authority, 35 Pa. Commw. 415, 386 A.2d 1052, 1058 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1978), the Court discussed the standard applicable when determining whether to admit evidence of a property's purchase price, stating as follows: Our decision here ... should not be construed to suggest that the wise trial judge will generally exclude evidence of the condemnee's purchase price. Just the opposite is true. In exercising his discretion in this area, the trial judge should start with the premise that the condemnee's purchase price or other indication of value by him, as logically relevant evidence, should be admitted. However, he must determine whether the probative value of this evidence is outweighed by other factors which would confuse the issue by unduly distracting the jury from its primary inquiry as to the present value of the property. Factors to be considered are: (1) the circumstances of the sale or other occurrence involved, e.g., whether it covered the same property, whether it was a voluntary one between a willing and informed seller and buyer, or whether it was made with condemnation in mind; (2) whether it was remote in time from the date of condemnation; (3) what changes had occurred in real estate values in the area or in the general character of the neighborhood in the interim; (4) what changes had occurred in the subject property. As to (3) and (4), these factors should generally be considered as going to the weight of the evidence, not to its admissibility.