Aug. 30, 2009 - quote for the day / NYT The Hunt

who is out of touch now?
The Sunday Real Estate section of the New York Times regular feature by Joyce Cohen, The Hunt, today profiles a woman who seems to have spent much of the last 18 months looking for a 2 bedroom with light on a narrow slice of the Upper West Side. She eventually found her light slice of Manhattan (as always happens in this feature) and closed last month.

Among various other adventures, she made a bid on another apartment that also closed last month. The article implies that the offer was made when the apartment was asking $1.6mm, which helps narrow the time frame considerably (below). The fun stuff is in bold.

Nearby, on West 111th, was a beautiful three-bedroom co-op on sale for $1.6 million. Ms. Gooding offered $1.05 million. Her only concern was the possibility of construction nearby.

When she finally heard back, the agent said the offer was so low as to be “out of touch.” The apartment sat on the market for a year and finally sold this summer for $1.075 million.

a better quote that I'd like to have overheard
Zing! That “out of touch” is a good quote, but the conversation I would like to see reported is the one between that agent and that seller. Maybe the seller agreed about the touchiness of the $1.05mm offer (which presumably would have been raised); but maybe not. I sure hope the seller knew about the offer.

on further review
I dislike short posts (I need to get over that), so -- having written this much -- it took only a little digging to find the apartment, which was offered for $1.6mm for only a short while. I will not identify the unit because this is a snarky post, but here is the listing history:

In defense of the agent, the real story is not quite what the NYT story implies -- though The Quote is priceless. In reality, agent and seller recognized in 6 weeks that they were at the wrong price, although it did take six months to get to a price that would generate a (deeply discounted) contract. I wonder at what point they tried to find Ms. Gooding and her $1.05mm ....

If the oh-so-quotable listing agent has half a brain, she will refrain from defending herself publicly.

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Aug. 29, 2009 - modesty rewarded, but 'how well?' remains the question

sometimes Manhattan Loft Guy gets it right
I posed a question on July 8 that was answered very quickly: will pricing 25% below 2007 hit The Market in a sweet spot?  The answer came in an update on StreetEasy the very next day: contract signed. It sure is nice to get an answer; better, an answer that supports one's general thesis....

The loft in question has not yet closed (so will remain anonymous), but found a contract in a somewhat thin market within 3 weeks. Nice work, that. I may not be able to identify this loft until a while after it closes, as the stubborn neighbor upstairs ("an upstairs neighbor has been stubborn, and offering another (essentially identical) loft at more than 20% above the new asking price, without generating a contract in the 8 months that has been offered") has still not generated a contract and has not bothered to change the price -- the hallmark of a seller waiting for a listing to expire. If it expires, I will be able to come clean about this building (one of "the roller coaster of brand name loft conversions in nabes that are tres fasconable"); if not, you will remain in the dark.

I reviewed on July 8 the building's listing history since the newly-converted-loft was converted in 2005, which involves considerable up-ing and down-ing. Hence my final comment on July 8 about the soon-to-be-in-contract-but-hardly-on-the-market sellers: "At a minimum, they are ignoring much of the background noise of the intervening roller coaster years. Props to them for that." That ignoring thing can be hard.

Aug. 28, 2009 - one less funny person at The Porter House

... unless the buyer is a clown?
I checked in at 66 Ninth Avenue (The Porter House) on August 16 (Porter House loft may be "beyond the beyond" but sells off a million, up 40% or down 25%) to tell a tale of  Manhattan loft sellers who recently closed 40% above their November 2003 purchase, but down 25% from where the upstairs neighbors sold while they were on the market at the wrong price. Yesterday's The Real Deal updates that building's news to note that a "comedy actress" well-known to many and liked by some just sold a high floor loft there for $2.61mm.

That not-so-funny-anymore loft was evidently #9E, in the brand new four steel-and-glass upper floors that cantilever out over the original furniture warehouse lower six floors. Let's look at what the comedian did with #9E.

from 2003 to 2009, up 69%
TRD's Adam Pincus reports that the sponsor sold the "1,836 sq ft" #9E in November 2003 for $1.6mm ($871/ft) -- not much of a premium over Old Loft #3W, which the developer valued at $1,522,284, or $784/ft for "1,942 sq ft", given the "120 sq ft" terrace and the height (and light) advantages of the new 9th floor. That puts the #9E seller up seven figures in six years, or nearly 70%, before considering round trip expenses. Happy math, that!

Of course, as even sellers with no sense of humor are wont to do, the comedian wanted happier math, having started to market in March at $3.25mm (we'll come back to that number, so make note). Proving to be a serious seller, they dropped the price a healthy 8% within four weeks ($2.995mm) and again by 5% six weeks later ($2.85mm). They were in contract from there within another 6 weeks, so were on the market just over 4 months before contract. That contract negotiation was, of course, serious, and chopped another 8% off the last asking price, or a total of 18% off the original March asking price to close at $2.61mm.

the neighbors did better last year (of course)
As with the Porter House sale I hit on August 16, this sale has a lovely comp with which to asses the change in The Market pre- and post-Lehman. In that case it was #4W selling on July 3, 2008 at $2,787,500, compared to #3W selling on June 23, 2009 at $2.15mm. In this case, the very recent #9E sale at $2.61mm compares with the July 1, 2008 of #8E for $3.1mm (raise your hand if you remember the original asking price for #9E). Pretty strong evidence that the value of #9E declined by about 16% in a year.

Those downstairs neighbors had an interesting listing history, as well (is there such a thing as Listing History Porn??). They over-shot the market (an endemic situation), but recovered to generate a bidding war. Check this out:
 

This history is interesting because they were on the market at The Top, without getting their price (or any price) for five months, and then they got someone to pay $100k over a two-month-old asking price. Also interesting that they did not generate a contract at the April 2008 contract price of $3.1mm when they were asking (only) $3.3mm from November to January. If that eventual buyer was looking in November, you'd think that buyer would have bid to a $3.1mm contract then. Perhaps the buyer did not emerge until later; perhaps the seller was not willing to compromise (yet).

further shameless speculation
If there was a bidding war in April 2008 for #8E, as this history suggests, I wonder if the losing bidder bought something else then or ... perhaps that bidder came back to snap up #9E a year later, "saving" almost $500k.....

It is much less speculative to believe that the comedian was distracted (mistaken) by starting in March 2009 above where #8E had closed 9 months earlier, as the facts proved that no one stepped up with an acceptable offer off of $3.25mm. By April, even asking $105k less than #8E's clearing price generated an offer. Still, the comedian sold 69% above her November 2003 purchase price, so she should be smiling even if she left 16% of notional dollars on the table.
 

(h/t to Curbed for the TRD link)

Aug. 27, 2009 - revisiting Trouble in Tribeca, while stopping in Soho

a promise, kept (rare!)
When I hit the Manhattan loft #3S at 155 Franklin Street (the Sugar Loaf) as a June 2009 sale 16% off the 2006 clearing price (August 5, 155 Franklin Street crashes past 2006 to close up 28% (since 2000)) I made a note-to-self to revisit The Real Deal July 31 article Trouble in Tribeca that noted that this was one of only five lofts in Tribeca that closed in June. So let's go visiting....

tweaking TRD data
The article relied on data from StreetEasy and OLR and noted that "[t]he number of closings may not be completely inclusive because there is sometimes a lag period when closings are reported". In fact, one of the 5 "June" closings they cite was a deed dated May 29 (#19A at 270 Broadway), and there were 3 other Tribeca loft closings in June that they did not catch for this July 31 article: 161 Hudson Street #2B, which closed on June 30 at $2.41mm;  28 Laight Street #1 [Cobblestone Loft], which closed on June 24 at $2.845mm; and 100 Reade Street #5A, which closed for $1.545mm on June 23. (You can find these closings on the handy dandy spreadsheet of Manhattan loft closings that I posted about on August 23, which can be found in the cloud here.)

These adjustments hardly change the overall tenor of the article: there was much less sales activity in Tribeca in June 2009 compared to June 2008.

I don't personally have enough comparative data to fully explore Tribeca sales trends (come back to the spreadsheet in a year or two ;-), but two thoughts in the real Deal article about Tribeca make sense:
 

Although I am not quite sure if that first factor is meant to address employment prospects (are there more Wall Streeters worried about their job prospects in Tribeca than elsewhere?) or general wealth (did rich people take a bigger hit in the recession?), both factors would seem to disproportionately impact Tribeca because not only does Tribeca have very many very expensive lofts but it has very few relatively inexpensive lofts. This is one highly concentrated pocket of real estate wealth.

June was actually a bigger month for Tribeca closings than July. I count (only) another 5 Tribeca loft closings in July (see the spreadsheet) and (so far) only 3 in August.

whither Soho?
While Soho has a broader range of property values than Tribeca, the wealth-and-jumbo factors should also apply there. I count 3 Soho loft closings in June, 9 in July, and (so far) 4 in August.
 

(The two at 459 West Broadway were actually by a single seller to a single buyer.) Still not enough here to draw solid conclusions, other than to note that Soho ain't cheap (though it does have a few more [relatively] low-end sales) and to wonder why does everyone want to live on Greene Street during a recession?
 

Aug. 25, 2009 - did 525 Broome Street get value for the 2008 renovation?

paired sale shows apparent gain over 2008
The major improvement to the Manhattan loft sales data I aggregated into a Google Docs spreadsheet and posted (as MLG #1,000 on August 23) (click here to access it in the cloud) is that I have past sales data for those lofts that were recently sold and that were bought by those recent sellers sometime in the last five years. Indeed, there are 82 such paired sales in my 229 loft resale data set.

from "open canvass" to "painstakingly renovated"
When the Manhattan loft #3 at 525 Broome Street sold in June 2008 it was billed as an "open canvass" with "infinite potential". This "2,100 sq ft" loft had been in live/work space (in the delightfully named American Nut & Screw Building) with 11 foot ceilings, steel beams and columns, maple floors, a fireplace, big windows, maple floors ... and all that potential. It was on the market from July 2007 to January 2008 (in retrospect, the height of the market) but at the wrong price ($2.59mm). When it came back to market in March 2008 it was at the right price ($2.35mm), as that price generated a contract in 18 days (at $2.15mm).

quick work
The June 19, 2008 buyer wasted no time in filling out that canvass, as it was back on the market barely 3 months later (September 25) at the pre-Lehman-price-in-a-post-Lehman-world of (feel the burn) $3.45mm. I hope that price was not a reflection of the cost of the 90 day renovation, as The Market battered the asking price to $2.95mm (November), $2.75mm (December), and finally to $2.59mm in April, which generated the contract in June that closed on July 31 -- at $2.35mm. (Ooooohhh, that burn!)

It is difficult to assess the level of finishes in this painstaking-but-90-day renovation, as the listing description lacks proper proper names and is relatively lacking in detail description of, for example, the "beautiful bathrooms" or the "custom design features". Using the $200/ft ballpark figure, that's approximately $450k in renovation costs to put on top of the $2,15mm purchase when measuring how this flip worked out.

the temptation to over-shoot on price
From that perspective, it is understandable that they wanted to be aggressive on price in September 2008, even after the Lehman hit the fan. They were already in for about $2.6mm (purchase + renovation) before considering that they paid a 1.925% mortgage recording tax and the 1% mansion tax, that they had to carry the purchase mortgage and the monthlies (did they ever live there?? there's very little furniture apparent in the pix), and that they were due to pay a 5% commission plus the 1.825% in city and state transfer taxes on the sale.

Of course The Market does not care what a seller has to pay, or has paid; The Market only cares about what the seller and buyer can agree upon. In this case, the July 31, 2009 buyer of a renovated loft and the June 19, 2008 buyer of a blank canvas agreed that the loft was worth $2.35mm after all the renovation. Net-net, these rough ballpark scribbles suggest they took a bath of about $500k or $600k in 13 months. Ouch.

What looks like a nice (odd) gain from just looking at deeds turns into a painful and sweaty loss. Maybe they bought in June 2008 intending to make it a beautiful home for them for years to come, and then something happened; or maybe they closed then always intending to flip. Eight million stories ....

those feet, odd
Marketed in 2007 at "2,100 sq ft", the flip offered in September 2008 was billed as "approx 2,250 sq ft". StreetEasy uses each figure for each sale. Property Shark, on the other hand, rates this loft at "2,900 sq ft" -- probably assigning it a percentage interest in the condominium's common space since the building is only 40 x 61 ft. With a footprint of 40 x 61 ft, both of the marketing measurements seem within the range of reason, figuring that the elevator and common stair take up from 200 to 350 sq ft. In my spreadsheet, I use "2,250 sq ft" (the number used in the listing that sold recently).

floor oddity
This loft is designated #3 but is on the second floor. (The basement is a separate condo unit and is designated #1.) I bet that confuses people who visit the loft all the time.

noise oddity
I grimaced when seeing that this loft was marketed as being "in quiet Soho", until I realized how far west they are. Since my office now sits along Broome Street I see (and hear) traffic heading toward the Holland Tunnel back up as far back as Broadway. But this loft sits between Sullivan and Thompson Streets, just past the dogleg when tunnel-bound traffic bends left from Broome Street onto Watts. I wonder how easy it is to get in front of this building in a cab at high-traffic times, but I am not surprised that this loft could be quiet.

[update: I realize that I hit this loft twice when it was being sold for it's potential. This March 24, 2008 post notes the price change from the (formerly patient) seller and includes a link to an open house review way back in the frothy days of November 16, 2007.]

© Sandy Mattingly 2009
 

Aug. 24, 2009 - three zeroes / flipping the odometer on a major Manhattan Loft Guy milestone

the rundown on the Countdown
That Countdown thing that has appeared on the last ten posts was pointed to the 1000th post since Manhattan Loft Guy launched three and a half years ago. O N E  T H O U S A N D posts, as of yesterday.

It occurred to me as I was counting down that the post that got the Three Zeroes should be 'special' in some way, rather than being a 'regular' post. I think that hitting number 1,000 with my master list of (essentially) all Manhattan lofts that have sold since early November, resales and new developments, qualifies. I can already see many data points on the spreadsheet that deserve a post, as well as lines for 'big picture' (interesting) analysis. If the MLG readership helps to really exploit the potential in the spreadsheet, who knows where it may lead?

you can't make this stuff up
I mentioned in yesterday's post my limited spreadsheet skills. As if to prove my lack of ability in math generally, I counted wrong in starting the countdown, hence the "oops". If I can't even count backwards from tenautomatically (and correctly), you know I need a great deal of help to make the closings spreadsheet more usable!

© Sandy Mattingly 2009
 

Aug. 23, 2009 - master list of Manhattan loft closings since November

this is The Big One
It has been quite a while since I posted loft-closings-in-last-30-days, but I have not stopped keeping track of Manhattan residential lofts as they close. While there are many limitations in the data (discussed below), the collection is worthwhile enough to post as is, without giving in to my temptation to wait until it is more complete or more useful.

Without further ado ... click here for a Google Docs spreadsheet with 229 resales of Manhattan lofts since November  [sheet 1], and another 164 deeds filed for new developments [sheet 2].

I am not going to offer much commentary on the data at this point, but will do so in the coming days and weeks. The major improvement over the 30-day sets is that I have included prior sale information for the third of the resale set that have now sold twice in the last five years or so. That is a potentially very rich source of trend analysis.

need a geek
I am not a wizard at spreadsheets (d'oh). If there is a Manhattan Loft Guy reader out there who wants to play with the data in more sophisticated ways than I have done, I would love to hear from you. In the current state, this is pretty much a data dump, with the only calculations for price-per-foot and days-until-contract, and the only sorting being by deed date. There's much more that can be done, but I don't have the talent or time to do more at this point.

Anyone interested??

limitations
The major limiting factor in this data collection is that it is based on my ability to recognize "loft" closings when I periodically scan the list of deeds filed in Manhattan. My former weekly data collections were automatic in the sense that my data source at the time (OLR) was search-able for "lofts" as designated by listing agents. Since I don't have that source since changing firms I have made a choice to only sift through Downtown deeds on StreetEasy, meaning that I am ignoring lofts in the (relatively) few true loft buildings on the Upper East Side or Hell's Kitchen, to use two examples. Call me lazy, but I don't want to sift through every damn closing in Manhattan....

If any of you note a loft closing that I have overlooked (uptown or downtown), let me know and I will track it down and add it.

The data is based on StreetEasy's links to deeds and listing histories. If no "square feet" are in the deed information or the listing, then that field is blank on my spreadsheet and there's no price-per-foot calculation. If there is incomplete information on StreetEasy for listing date or contract date, those fields are blank, and there's no days-to-contract calculation. In a few cases I have made judgments to ignore the reported data on contract date or last listing price because the information just looks wrong to me. For example, a listing history may show a price reduction days before a contract is signed, at a price suspiciously close to the closing price; that looks to me as though a listing agent is manipulating data to suggest that there was only a small discount from asking price.

With that caveat, the data on the spreadsheet should all be verifiable through publicly filed deeds and the inter-firm data base that Corcoran uses. There are probably typos resulting from careless keyboarding when I enter data; I know I have caught a few so it is very likely that I did not catch all. Feel free to let me know of any errors.

At some point I may segregate it by date, or create subsets by date, so that the prime spreadsheet doesn't get more unwieldy. Any suggestions for how to improve this spreadsheets will be considered.

Much more to follow!

COUNTDOWN: 10 ... 9 ... 8 ... 7 ... 6 ... 5 [oops] ... 4 ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... 0 !!!!!

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Aug. 21, 2009 - risk, revisited / I am still a coward, but the 'brave' did not sell (yet)

checking back on the Spring
I recently had a conversation with a former shareholder in one of the Manhattan loft buildings that I visited in my March 25 lengthy rumination, am I a coward? assessing + bearing risk in a risky world, as she was curious about how her former neighbor's loft was (was not) selling. So I went back to look at the listing history of the three lofts I used as the specific scenarios that generated this conclusion:
 

None of the three lofts has sold, but each has reacted to The Market a little differently.

One took one (very mild) shot at a price drop, reducing the asking price by 3% after 2 months. It went off the market "temporarily" a few weeks later. Perhaps it will come back after Labor Day. My guess is that it won't be back any time soon, or (if it does come back) that it will come back at a much sharper discount. This seller does not look like someone who

wants to sell.

That one appears to fit this profile, as they have made

serious effort to 'catch up to the active market':

The second one has tried, and tried, and tried. In fact, that one nearly fits one projection I offered on March 25:

That one started a bit under $2mm and dropped the price 3 times, changing the second digit each time. Problem (for them) is that they have dropped 20%+ and they have a 'tired' listing (about half-way to a birthday, so far). They may yet be willing to negotiate to a deal, but they have yet to attract a serious bidder. That female dog --

-- is barking that if they had started in February where they are now they would probably have struck a deal long since.

The third has taken yet another tack, sort of / kind of midway between the other two. That one has dropped twice, but mildly (about 7%, total), in nearly 6 months, with no price change in about 2 months. Manifestly, they have not found the part of The Market where the buyers are (

, they have not been able [willing?] to 'catch up to the active market').

These sellers have seriously upgraded the loft since they bought it some years ago. Perhaps they are overmuch in love with their renovation, fitting this profile in my March 25 rumination:

Their problem -- to date -- is that no one else provably loves their loft as much as they do. Thus, no one has bought it out from under them. Even at the current price (down 7% in nearly 6 months) no one is likely to. Perhaps they plan to drop again after Labor Day, in a more significant way. If they

want to sell (like the second loft mentioned, but unlike the first), I can only hope that my assumption is correct that they have fully understood what they have been doing here:

My guess is that they have gotten similar advice from their agent that the second loft owners got, but have been too stubborn to take it (so far). Absent a more aggressive price, I see this one as lingering on The Market until the listing expires.

In the first case, the more-brave-than-I agent made a 2-month investment of time and effort. In the second case, the more-brave-than-I agent had a seller with a Plan B, but has invested a lot with no return (yet). In the third case, the more-brave-than-I agent has (perhaps) been sucked into a great deal of effort and no reasonable expectation of making a sale until (unless) the sellers change their approach.

To repeat (again!):

I just hope the sellers understood what they were doing, way back when they started these marketing campaigns.

COUNTDOWN: 10 ... 9 ... 8 ... 7 ... 6 ... 5 [oops] ... 4 ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

Aug. 20, 2009 - 64 Grand Street closes UP 12% since 2006

The Market has many faces
One of these days I will do a long post about how The (overall) Market is made up of individual transactions that vary widely from The (overall) Market trend. But not today. Today the news is about a Manhattan loft that is anomalous only if your theory is that all transactions move in the same direction. 64 Grand Street #7 closed last week at $1.64mm after having traded previously at $1.475mm in October 2006.

This is a Long-and-Narrow "2,200 sq ft" (possibly; in 2006 it was "1,900 sq ft") loft that was gently marketed as a project: "an unquestionable value for a buyer with vision looking for a clean canvas and good bones". That description is very similar to the 2006 marketing pitch ("Needs TLC - great bones!"), so it appears that the recent sellers made few improvements or upgrades after buying in 2006. It still has only 1 bathroom, bit it also still has great light, Empire State building views, and a location at the bottom of prime Soho (between West Broadway and Wooster). The 4 windows on one long wall provide a lot of flexibility for a future renovation.

nice job
The loft came to market on March 3 at $1.75mm and made only one price adjustment, dropping to $1.64mm on April 22 and finding a contract at that price one month later. The closing was August 12. Props to the sellers and to Corcoran's Maura and Robert Gells for quickly finding the right price -- a price that runs counter to general market trends.

a lot of upside
This building is part of a single coop with 66 Grand Street. The October 2006 sale of #7 was the last sale in that building (64 Grand) and the most recent sale at 66 Grand Street was #5, in the frothy days of July 2007. That Long-and-Narrow "1,900 sq ft" loft (with windows only on both narrow ends) was billed as "stunning" and sun-drenched. It was offered in February 2007 at $2.35mm and closed at $2.23mm.

I assume the buyers of #7 at 64 Grand are going to develop those good bones. There should be more than enough room between the 2007 mint-y sale of #5 at 66 Grand and a renovation on top of the $1.675mm purchase price for #7 at 64 Grand for a first class renovation to make economic sense. At least, I hope the next time #7 at 64 Grand is marketed it is not offered as a one bathroom "project".


COUNTDOWN: 10 ... 9 ... 8 ... 7 ... 6 ... 5 [oops] ... 4 ... 3 ... 2 ...
has anyone figured out this Countdown thing yet??

© Sandy Mattingly 2009
 

Aug. 19, 2009 - strong pricing hint on lovely loft for sale at 360 West 36 Street

exception to the rule (he's begging me)
Most Manhattan Loft Guy readers understand why I haven't commented on identifiable current listings for the past year and a half. I am going to make an exception for a loft (a) that I really like, and (b) whose listing agent is practically begging me to comment on it. The loft is #10S at 360 West 36 Street; the agent is master blogger / video pioneer Doug Heddings of True Gotham [reminder to DH: you promised to blog more frequently]; the begging is in a comment to my July 29 post, "How about that incredible 2000sf Loft at 360 West 36th Street that will likely trade around $1.25M or so.   That's $625/sf!  Shameless marketing of my own property I know but thought it fit PERFECTLY in this piece." Since Doug's blogging persona (and real life character) is strongly in favor of consumer information and real estate transparency I am confident that he will not mind me talking about his listing here -- though it won't be the same "shameless marketing" as he might do in support of his client the seller.

my opinions, not his
I wholeheartedly agree that this loft is a real opportunity for the right buyer at the price it can sell for ("around $1.25M or so" in Doug's words), though I am somewhat less enthusiastic about some of the adjectives and adverbs he is using to sell it. The good news is that this is a very large loft for the price ("2,008 sq ft", now offered at $1.395mm, down from $1.695mm in January), with terrific light and some views, and a classic loft style. The layout enhances the sense of space, taking advantage of the long run of windows on the south wall (more "light" than "views") and leaving a very large dining area and a "living room" (sitting / media area). The master bedroom on the west looks far out to Jersey (sunsets!).

The overall 'feel' is more funk than sleek, featuring exposed piping and mechanicals, long runs of exposed (ancient) radiators, large steel-frame windows. The kitchen and baths are all modern and well-equipped (the master bath is particularly so). The layout includes a set of closets outside the master bedroom that provide a corridor to the master bath, and an interior room set up as gym and office (with a clever casement window into the living area).

this loft is not for everyone (neighborhood is love-it-or-hate-it)
I brought one buyer to see it and enthusiastically described it to a second. For both, the loft is not bid-worthy at nay price because they don't love the neighborhood. Sitting nearly at Ninth Avenue on a very gritty commercial block, many people are going to be put off by the micro-nabe in which it sits. I can't argue about anyone's personal reaction to the sense of grit, but I definitely encourage anyone who likes that sort of thing to consider this loft. There is definitely some old-school Manhattan loft 'charm' to the grit, and the immediate neighborhood features small theater and arts groups and more food sources than choice restaurants.

The white-box 2003 loft conversion 315 West 36 Street is just down the block (I hit a sale there on June 23), as is some new (mid-scale) hotel, but the street level is dominated by non-residential uses. The 2003 luxe conversion Cass Gilbert at 130 West 30 Street did very well on a block that I find to be much more gritty than this. The Glass Farmhouse at 448 West 37 Street is even more remote than this block (I hit a new listing there way back on December 7, 2007, with some commentary on grit and that neighborhood). And the Cupcake Cafe is around the corner....

As configured, this loft is not set up for a family larger than 3. That gym/office can certainly be converted to an interior sleeping area, but the existing 2d bedroom is rather ... tight. Not only is that 2d bedroom small, but it cannot be enlarged without major surgery (moving the kitchen). In other words, for a big loft the space is not very flexible very inexpensively.

searching for The Market
The #10S seller and very experienced professional agent have been searching for the market value of this loft since January. The current asking price is $1.395mm but the agent has signalled to Manhattan Loft Guy readers (and probably others ;-) that the seller will take at least 10% off that price. At around $625/ft, a sale at that price would be a large discount off the last sale in the building: the "1,250 sq ft" #8NW sold in May 2007 for $1.275mm, after selling in February 2005 at $1.095mm. The 2005 and 2007 sales pair for #8NW is interesting given my recent fixation on 2005 - 2009 pairs (that July 29 post) and because the last "S" unit to sell was #11S, which sold in April 2005 for $1.1mm. (StreetEasy has "no listing associated with this closing" but out system shows that that old Corcoran listing was sold more for its character than finishes ("designer" kitchen, jacuzzi and glass block shower aside; 1980s much??).

The #10S sellers and True Gotham hope that 2005 is not the correct market frame for measuring value here.


COUNTDOWN: 10 ... 9 ... 8 ... 7 ... 6 ... 5 [oops] ... 4 ... 3 ...
 

[Update 2 PM: sorry about the multiple posts of the same thing today; the platform was a little squirelly and I kept hitting "send" without being able to see that it had posted]

© Sandy Mattingly 2009
 

Aug. 17, 2009 - 161 Hudson Street closed after 14 weeks, up 33% (since 2004)

don't worry about the interim
The Manhattan loft #2B at 161 Hudson Street had a pretty good run through the 2009 market, starting at $2.7mm in March, dropping twice in April (to $2.5mm) and closing June 30 at $2.41mm. That quick history shows that they really wanted to sell, and had a decent grasp of The Market. 

Aug. 16, 2009 - Porter House loft may be "beyond the beyond" but sells off a million, up 40% or down 25%

context tells the story, but what's the context?
The Manhattan loft #3W at 66 Ninth Avenue (The Porter House) was marketed very enthusiastically at prices The Market was not ready for. It cleared on June 23 at $2.15mm, which is a difficult number to put in context. In the context of neighborly competition, it got killed. In the context of past sales, it has been up and down. But first, some listing history ....

This loft flirted (teased?) The Market for a few months in 2007, when they were asking $4.2mm. (Same firm, different agent.) When it came back to market in May 2008, they were asking $3.25mm and competing with the upstairs neighbors in #4W, who were then asking $2.85mm. 

Aug. 15, 2009 - buying high, selling low (ouch) at 114 Spring Street

this one is difficult to fathom, my promise notwithstanding
The Manhattan loft #2 at 114 Spring Street has (and has had) a lot to recommend it: prime Soho location, "1,900 sq ft", 12 foot barrel-vaulted ceilings, bright lights and cast-iron views, and a renovation described as "magnificent" (Venetian plastered walls!). Back in the (frothy) day, it even had a (mild) bidding war: offered at an even $1.8mm, it closed at the rather awkwardly uneven $1,808,333 on May 15, 2006 after having come to market only on March 4, 2006.

Those 2006 buyers got killed by the 2009 market.

getting to 2006 quickly, but not helpfully
When these 2006 buyers came to market as 2009 sellers in February they were grossly wrong about The Market (they started out on February 4 asking $2.1mm for their $1,808,333-in-2006 loft, but they adjusted quickly (dropping to $1.9mm, then $1.825mm and then $1.7mm within 3 weeks. That did not do the trick.

motivated, without doubt (and unsuccessful, for a while)
Let's review that quick summary, because there is no question that these folks were (a) paying attention and (b) motivated to sell.

Yes, they started too high at $2.1mm on February 4 -- asking a 22% premium over their May 2006 purchase. But they adjusted after 12 days, 22 days and 23 days, down to $1.7mm, a 6% discount from their 3 year old purchase price and a full 19% less than where they had started only 3 weeks earlier.

But it took one more price drop (after they waited only 3 weeks, to $1.5mm on March 21) to find a buyer and a contract as of May 29.

Department of Repetition Department
To recap: within 44 days of coming to The Market too high ($2.1mm) they dropped the price 4 times, by then asking 17% less than they had paid in 2006.

From the last price drop on March 31 it took them 2 months to find a buyer and a contract. That deal closed on July 28 at $1.393mm -- a further 7% off the last asking price, a large third off their original ask, and an excruciating 23% off the May 2006 clearing price.

prime Soho took a huge hit here
I have promised not to be surprised at lofts that close in 2009 around (or below) 2005 prices. (In my July 29 attack of the Killer Comp (when 2005 pricing does not help) I said "Note to self: stop being surprised by 2005 comps.".) I am having trouble with that pledge, looking at this loft sale-and-resale. I suspect -- but cannot yet prove or disprove -- that this July 2009 sale 23% off the May 2006 purchase is not fully representative of The Market, that it is a (relative low-lier) that will go into determining market averages.

I am not going to repeat (again!) the price history, but you are free to re-read it above. (Please, please...) Props to these sellers for proving that they really wanted to sell and would do so at the best price The Market offered, and to (former and now-again colleague) Martin Eiden for steering them through this (brief but poetically painful) Odyssey and home to Ithaca (or wherever they went).

interesting layout
The loft is a classic Long-and-Narrow, with the benefit of 2 windows on one long side and plumbing in widely varied spots. The result is an unusual floor plan for a Long-and-Narrow, with the (windowed) kitchen at one Narrow end, the master suite at the other end, and a real 2d bedroom (with a side window) near the master, The entry is in the middle of one Long side, into the living room (instead of into the kitchen or dining area, as often happens with a Long-and-Narrow).

I don't see anything in the pre-2006 renovation or layout to suspect that The Market punished this loft for being unusual or too idiosyncratic. But i have to feel that punish it The Market did....

To repeat (again): Note to self: stop being surprised by 2005 comps. And 2006 comps.

A Manhattan Loft Guy tip of the hat to Reader Thomas for reminding me to comment on this sale.

COUNTDOWN: 10 ... 9 ... 8 ... 7 ...

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Aug. 14, 2009 - early weekend diversion: Pie Chart

a dish (plate) from the Daily Dish
This made me laugh.

COUNTDOWN: 10 ... 9 ... 8 ...

Aug. 13, 2009 - 170 Fifth Avenue closes AT 2007 (maybe)

isn't that cool?
There have been a series of Manhattan Loft Guy posts of late comparing 2009 clearing prices to 2005, or other prior sales. (This July 29 post canvassed quite a few, attack of the Killer Comp (when 2005 pricing does not help), and I have added several since then.) Generally speaking, 2009 has not done very well in this competition, so I was a little surprised to see a recent sale in which 2009 may have held its own against 2007.

Aug. 12, 2009 - another big developer haircut as 246 West 17 Street closes at 25% discount (again)

cutting to deal
I hit some new developments that closed after significant discounts from their last asking prices on June 20 (developer haircuts at 15 East 26 Street, 333 West 14 Street, 50 West 15 Street + 246 West 17 Street) and on July 6 (last sponsor sale at 59 John Street / folding tent + closing wallet). When I saw a recent closing in another new loft development, I checked the numbers. Sure enough, there seems to be only one unit left in this 30 story development, with 2 in contract. The barber has been working hard here, for months.

The new development at 246 West 17 St poses a bit of a description conundrum for true Manhattan loft snobs, as it is both a conversion of a 3-story loft building into true "lofts" and the addition of 7 floors of ("loft-like") new construction on top of that 80 year old base. The developers were actually remarkably sensitive to this issue, as the building was (awkwardly) marketed as "Apartments and Lofts".

real loft, apartment plan
The unit that just sold (#2E) is in that base, so truly a "loft" (for those of you who care about such things). This "1,488 sq ft" loft has 12 foot ceilings but a very apartment-like layout. It was first offered in February 2008 at $1.825mm, where it sat for nearly a year. One price drop in January brought it to $1.645mm but the drop in May to $1.595mm did the trick: a contract was signed by July 1. That deal closed on July 20 at $1.2mm, a cool 25% off the last asking price and a full third off the original February 2008 price.

hard working barber
The StreetEasy page for this building shows four closings between February and June at discounts from last asking prices from 20.4% to 27.5%, so there is nothing unusual about the #2E discount on July 20. Two other sales around Memorial Day require a little clicking to see the discounts. The combination of #7A-8B* (huh??) closed on May 26 at $4mm; the units had been last offered individually at $$1.55mm and $3.25mm, so that's a 20% discount. #1C closed on June 4 at $1.35mm, which looks like only a small discount from the asking price of $1.375mm, but that was sufficiently anomalous to click through and see that the last rel price change for #1C was to $1.995mm on May 13 and that the "$1.375mm" price was adjusted on June 5 (the day after the closing) -- clearly some kind of mistake. From $1.995mm to closing at $1.3mm was a 35% discount.

A busy barber, indeed.

The first closings in this development were in September 2008 and show some discounts even then -- just from higher numbers and net-net nothing like the 2009 final sales.

COUNTDOWN: 10 ...


© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Aug. 11, 2009 - did a jazz fan or a muppet maniac buy Mingus's place at 5 Great Jones Street?

cue Cindy Adams
(That's for "only in New York, kids"....) The Manhattan loft #2 at 5 Great Jones Street was marketed for its character ("authentic artist" loft, 14 foot tin ceilings) and its provenance ("[o]nce the home of Jazz great Charles Mingus and the creator of Big Bird Kermit Love"). At "2,300 sq ft" on a peculiar block, I am not sure if the February asking price of $1.995mm included a discount for condition or a premium for provenance. Either way, the mild April drop to $1.85mm certainly did the trick.

All in, it took only 5 months from coming to market February 13 to closing July 8, so that April price (and/or the character?) (and/or the provenance??) worked to not only get a deal, but a deal at that price. With no comp sale data in this small coop (looks like 4 units) and a limited number of comparable buildings on this block it is hard to get a feel for values here. If anything, hyper-local sales (in)activity suggests that the Mingus-Big Bird connection (not Mingus and Bird) did well, comparatively, given that it sold.

There was a recent unsuccessful attempt to sell a "2,000 sq ft" loft that boasted a "timeless" renovation for $1.695mm ($850/ft) right next door at 7 Great Jones; mirrored by the equally unsuccessful marketing of a smaller 2-bedroom loft ("1,200 sq ft") next door on the other side at 3 Great Jones for $1.295mm (under $1,100/ft). These asking prices failed to generate a deal, but asking $804/ft at 5 Great Jones got a deal at $804/ft for an "authentic" artist loft. (Nothing says "primitive" for a Manhattan loft -- as in needs a total upgrade -- quite as elegantly as "authentic" artist loft.)

getting carried away doing The Google...
Back when the listing was new (in February, at $1.995mm), Curbed's funky Friday post included the Wikipedia info that Mingus got evicted from this place -- for firing a gun through his wall into a neighbor's apartment (but the Wiki info is not sourced).

Curbed did not report on any Kermit Love connection to this loft, but this NY Times obituary notes that Love not only built Big Bird, but also Mr. Snuffleupagus, Oscar the Grouch and Cookie Monster; he also played the role of Willy the Hot Dog Man. I don't know if the listing agent is right about this loft having a Kermit Love connection, but this book excerpt (see p 72) notes that Love had his puppet-making studio on Great Jones Street. Perhaps this loft is where Big Bird was born!

I am thinking it was bought by a Sesame Street fan....


© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Aug. 10, 2009 - bidding war erupts VERY late, as 49 Warren St gut job closes

caution: follow all StreetEasy links
This one is weird.... I began this post in my mind with a headline like "pricing it VERY right at 49 Warren Street" because the StreetEasy listing associated with the closed sale of this loft on July 29 begins on June 6 at $1.3mm, with an apparent contract on June 20 and a clearing price of $1.375mm. That would have been very quick work, pretty much figuring out The Market exactly.

late night TV
But wait, there's more! There's another listing associated with this Manhattan loft, showing that the loft has really been on the market with the same agent since September and took three price drops from $1,852,200 (huh??) to get to $1.3mm before that agent (and this listing) changed firms.

Aug. 9, 2009 - 2005 + 10%? that might work

There's a lovely square loft newly available for sale in a prime Manhattan loft area that is asking about 10% more than the clearing price when it sold in June 2005. I think this is likely to be close enough that The Marketwill reward it with an offer off of this asking price.

square can be a problem
That square layout would be ideal if it had more than one exposure; as it is, it is somewhat challenging. It is big enough for several bedrooms, but as configured this one has a master "bedroom" with no windows (one very clever picture might lead you to overlook that detail until you were in the space). The layout challenge is compounded by the fact that all the plumbing is on the wall opposite the windows (this building has two lofts per floor, one in front, one in back, with all the plumbing running only up the center of the building). Thus, the master "bedroom" has a nearby bathroom en suite, but other lofts on this side of the building have a real master bedroom (with window) and en suite bath because they add a long closet, sitting room or dressing room between the bedroom and master bath.

The listing suggests that these lofts don't come to market very often, which is odd because this very loft sold in 2005 and more odd still because one in the same line sold this past Fall (after Lehman, but with a pre-Lehman contract). That loft seems to have been in similar condition to the new-to-market loft and fought The Market down from Spring to Fall, closing very close to the current asking price. If that loft and this one are sufficiently comparable (as appears to me), I'd expect this one to close at a discount to that one's October clearing price -- but a discount within the range of reasonablenegotiation.

I will keep it on my list, and hope to report that it traded without a dramatic price drop. Time, as always, tells; Manhattan Loft Guy just reports.

Aug. 8, 2009 - "loft porn", indeed (weekend diversion)

the wonders of the web
I can't remember how I got there, but clicking through one interesting link after another this morning led me to this review of The Mini Loft Bible at the LoftLife Magazine site. A magazine for "Loft Life"? Who knew??

more porn
I have bookmarked the site for future Manhattan Loft Guy exploration. But here are some kitchen images to get your juices flowing, from their blog.

© Sandy Mattingly 2009