Jan. 30, 2009 - eating crow while getting reamed / Chelsea loft goes to 30% off

oh, to be a fly on the wall
Imagine, if you will, the following hypothetical dialogue:

Owner: "I'd love to sell, what do you think we can get?"
Agent: "If we start at $1,750/ft we should get a good deal"
O: "Wow! That would be terrific, since we paid $1,200/ft two years ago. Who else has gotten that price in the building?"
A: "Actually, no one. The two now in contract are under $1,000/ft and at about $1,150/ft. The one sale last year was just under $1,000/ft, but remember -- you paid $1,200/ft the year before that!"
O: (to self) "WTF?" (to Agent) "well ... if you really think we might get that ..."
A: "oh yes, we definitely might get that. You gotta think big in this market"

6 weeks later
A: "our price does not seem to be working"
O: (to self) "d'oh!" (to agent) "ummm, yeah ... what do you suggest?"
A: "I suggest bold action! Let's drop the price somewhere in the range of 15-20%!!"
O: "(gulp) if you think that will do it ..."
A: "are you kidding? that's a huge drop"
O: (to self) "d'oh" (to agent) "ummm, OK"

4 weeks later
O: "haven't heard from you in a while ... how's that bold action going?"
A: "(gulp) not so well ... no offers. Yet. But ..."
O: "But nothing. We'll never sell at this rate. I am taking it off the market"
A: "but ..." [click]

4 months later
A: "you know, we really can sell your loft if we price it for today's market"
O: (to self) "d'oh!" (to agent) "ummm, yeah ... what do you suggest?"
A: "I suggest bold action! Let's drop the price somewhere in the range of 15-20%!!"
O: (to self) "d'oh!" (to agent) "ummm, didn't we already do that?"
A: "yes, but it didn't work then. You gotta think big in this market"
O: "ummm, that's less than I paid for it ... but, OK, if you think that will do it"

[to be continued ...]

hypothetically, on the other hand
Though the facts about the listing history above are true, there is -- of course -- no way to know what the actual dialogue was between Owner and Agent. Perhaps the Owner insisted on the way-way-too-high starting point with the Agent accepting grudgingly and only on the condition of a large price drop in 30 days if necessary. The fact that the Owner has stuck with the same agent after 4 months off the market suggests the Owner does not hold it against the Agent. But somebody here must be eating some very large crow at this point.

strange times, indeed
While I have seen price drops of this magnitude in this market, I don't recall any with quite the trajectory of this one. This loft essentially self-nominates (and wins!) the Manhattan Loft Guy too pushy ...? thread. (In case you are wondering, the Owner bought the loft when it was claimed to be in triple mint condition and I see no significant difference in condition, in comparing the past and present listing descriptions, so this is not a case of someone over-valuing a renovation.) Stay tuned....

 

© Sandy Mattingly 2009  

Jan. 29, 2009 - a good time to go for pricing records, or are flippin' owners just pushing it?

bullish on sex appeal
There's a pretty new listing in one of those veddy veddy architecturally significant new Manhattan loft developments that has me scratching my head. Then another one popped up in a less significant but still pretty new new development. Then yet another flip popped up in one of the more successful new loft developments. Followed by a fourth flip, this one in a not so architecturally significant building (though it is spectacularly sited) in a very new new development.

In Manhattan Loft Guy parlance, they are today's candidates for the too pushy ... or not pushy enough?? thread.

one developer was hard pressed
Brand spanking new in the not too distant past, the veddy significant loft was bought (at a discount from the developer's price) above $1,200/ft. Now that it has been broken in, it is offered for sale at nearly $1,500/ft. It is one of the larger units in the building, and the only things that have sold for more money are one penthouse sold in the original offering (about which I have no information; no size, no outdoor space info, no nothing) and one unit that is 10% larger that traded as a resale at 3% higher than the new asking price.

Granted, one much smaller unit sold in pre-Lehman 2008 above $1,400/ft, but (at least many of) the original sales in the building -- though it was much touted in the popular and architectural press -- were at pretty significant discounts from the asking prices: in the range of 6% to 7% (one sold at 21% off).

I get it that the new sellers are banking on the sex appeal of this well publicized building (which seems to have attracted some celebrity owners), but .... But indeed. Banking on such ephemeral elements in a harsh market for sellers, in which buyers have access to the past historical value of such ephemera, is a risky proposition these days if the sellers really have to sell. (Remember that thought, about ephemera, as we will use it again soon.)

other developer was on the money
The second developer seems to have gotten the asking prices when this new building sold out a few years ago; indeed, in a couple of instances they seem to have pulled a unit back from the market and later sold above what they had been asking. The building is big enough that they priced by floor, with this particular unit having closed for $25,457 mire than the floor below and $56,003 less than the loft immediately above. (Per foot, this unit sold under $1,050/ft.)

limited + schizo resale history leads to what kind of marketing?
I see exactly two flips in 2007 in this building, one at over $1,400/ft, one around $1,150/ft. The only 2008 flip was around $1,300/ft. Given this history and The (current) Market, where would a prudent seller price a loft to sell? If you are the seller of this loft, you go for it by pricing above $1,250/ft, at a price that you should know does not work: the price is (essentially) pennies above a higher floor identical unit that has had 3 prices in 3 months, the last just below the new price of the new to market loft.

3rd developer did darn well, flipper's boat is still sailing
The third new development with a recently offered flip sold a significant number of units with "0" days on market -- meaning they had a buyer ready to sign a contract (and eventually, to close) before the unit has been released officially for sale. The new flip was no tone of those units; indeed, the developer took a 5% haircut to do the deal, which closed in late 2008. I wonder if the flipping owner (how's that for an epithet: "that FLIPPIN' owner!!!") ever moved in, as it is now for sale. I also wonder if that flippin' owner really wants (needs?) to sell. Unless s/he is counting on the cachet of the building, going for a record price is a risky proposition. (The new price is more than 25% higher than the late purchase; insert ephemera remark here.)

4th developer is sitting pretty, flipper hopes to climb
The fourth new development I noticed in January with a recent offer to flip is in a building that has gotten a huge amount of press. This one closed weeks ago under $1,800/ft but is now offered for resale above $2,000/ft. Yikes! (Cue the ephemera....)

As these marketing campaigns develop, they will be very fine grist for the too pushy ...? mill. Sex sells, sex appeal sells, successful sales can breed additional (even, more successful) sales. These babies are swimming upstream.


 

Jan. 28, 2009 - out of range, out of mind ... setting records or delaying sale?

pay the price if they don't pay attention
The risk in pricing a Manhattan loft above where anything in a building has sold is that potential buyers will be turned off by the price before considering the plus factors you tout to justify a record price. In this market, that is a risky approach -- anything that shrinks your potential buyer pool will make a sale take more time, or not occur at all.

Nothing controversial about that paragraph is there? Depends on where the rubber meets the road, I guess.

pricier than Whole Foods
This hard rubber is meeting the road somewhere in the Greater Whole Foods Meets Trader Joe's area sometimes known as Union Square. There's a lovely Manhattan loft new to market this month with much bragging: proper proper names, classy materials, thoughtful details; all in all a myriad of ways that this loft exceeds in quality (byimplication, at least) anything that has ever sold in the building. The risk they run is that this thing is priced about $250/ft higher than anything else that I see that has sold in the building -- and those sales were in much better than estate condition.

not a Filene's Basement price
This hard rubber also meets the road near where Chelsea and Flatiron intersect, or overlap. There's another lovely loft newly for sale in that area that was purchased in 2005 under $1,100/ft but is nowoffered nearly $400/ft higher. Yes, 2009 is not 2005 ( doesn't that cut both ways!), but $400 should have paid for a deluxe plus ultra renovation. I am not sure that even very good marketing will draw enough eyeballs into this space.

I wonder how many people will even go visit these lofts to be dazzled into paying a large premium over building norms. Looks like two candidates for the too pushy ...? thread to add to the Manhattan Loft Guy watchlist.

 

© Sandy Mattingly 2009  

Jan. 27, 2009 - Manhattan loft inventory as of January 25 = 883

Number of Manhattan lofts offered for sale as of Sunday night definitely reflect a new year: 

This is up 18 in a week, while up 193 since my recorded low in mid-August.

See my May 19 post for what I am counting, and why it is difficult.

Jan. 26, 2009 - new Manhattan loft listings + NO (!) closed sales in last 7 days

 
This is the sixty-fifth Manhattan Loft Guy report on the number, price distribution and neighborhood distribution for Manhattan lofts reported as new to the market or as closed sales in the last 7 days.

The stats as of Sunday night include a gross anomaly:

• there were 28 Manhattan lofts reported as new to the market in the last 7 days and NONE as sold, which is either an unprecedented dead week for closings or a reflection of (an also unprecedented) terrible week for record-keeping (I generate last week's closings by searching for closings within 14 days, but get zero for 7 days, so the zero result appears to be an accurate reflection of what is in the data base)
• 16 of the 28 new ones are offered between $1mm and $3mm and 5 above $5mm
• only 2 of the 28 new loft listings are in new development
  
  

  By price	New = 28	Sold = 0
  $500k to $999k	4
  $1mm to $1.99mm	10
  $2mm to $2.99mm	6
  $3mm to $3.99mm	1
  $4mm to $4.99mm	2
  $5mm+	5

   

  By neighborhood	New = 28	Sold = 0
  Battery Park City
  Chelsea	3
  Clinton	1
  East Village
  Financial District	1
  Flatiron	2
  Gramercy	1
  Greenwich Village	2
  Kips Bay	1
  Little Italy
  Lower East Side
  Morningside Heights
  Murray Hill	2
  Midtown East
  Midtown West
  SoHo	6
  Sutton Place
  Tribeca	4
  Turtle Bay	1
  Upper East Side	2
  Upper West Side	1
  West Village	1

• 
  
   
• New loft listings in new developments

• 49 Warren Street

  2

   
• 
  
   
• Sold lofts in new developments 

  
  
  For information about how I get this stuff and why I slice it as I do, see methodology for New + Sold in The Last Seven Days. For my rant about how soft this data may be, see loft or not? caution: active ranting ahead.

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Jan. 23, 2009 - comparing nuggets / 4Q Manhattan loft data + overall market

so few nuggets
The overall Manhattan 4Q Numbers, 3 ways, with some year-over-year comparisons:

The loft niche is under-reported in two of three Manhattan quarterly market reports, so comparisons among the firms is difficult (The Miller wins, by default, essentially). The Miller Samuel 156 loft sales must have a very different mix from the unknown number that Corcoran identified. Just looking at some Miller Samuel numbers, comparing the overall market to the loft market, the overall market has caught up tothe loft niche in days on market, but loft Miller Samuel's inventory moved opposite the overall market by a significant degree. The loft niche represented 6.8% of sales and 7.7% of inventory, a rough parity.

The full market reports from each firm for 4Q08 in pdf format are here for Miller Samuel, Halstead (I fixed the link in the Jan 7 dribs and drabs post), and Corcoran. I hit the nuggets of each on January 7 (Halstead), January 8 (Miller Samuel), and January 10 (Corcoran)

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Jan. 21, 2009 - 30 days of actual Manhattan loft sales, Vol 2

still riding the jalopy
I captured 30 days of reported Manhattan "loft" sales from the inter-firm data-base on January 11, comprising a second set of 30-day-sales data. The limitations, cautions, gripes and hopes set forth in my initial collection (December 18: hard data is hard to find ... here's some on 30 days of actual loft sales) all still apply.

top line numbers are 22 and 28
For the 30 days prior to January 11, 2009 our inter-firm data base reported as Sold and Closed Manhattan "lofts" 22 resales and 28 developer/sponsor sales in new developments, compared to the 24 and 19 reported in December. Once again, I am reluctant to do too much parsing of such limited data, but the median price-per-foot for the 16 resales I have enough data to compute was either $1,043/ft, $1,050/ft or mid-way between them, depending on whether the "median" of 16 points is point #8, #9 or the average of points #8 and #9. On the other hand the average was $1,104/ft for the 16 resales, compared to $1,170/ft last time. For new developments, I can compute median and average per-foot numbers (for 22 sales) as $1,183 or $1,190 and $1,258/ft (compared to $1,272/ft and $1,269/ft, respectively, in December).

Again, to me the most interesting current "days on market" number is the spread between when an apartment came to market and when it got into a contract that (later) actually transferred title. I get a median Days Until Contract for resales of 91 days or 131 days (or their average, darn those even numbers of data points) with a range of 37 days to 764 days, and an average for resales of 170 (compared to December's 179 days). For new developments, the spread is again from the ridiculous (780 days to contract) to the sublime (zero days; that would be signed contracts on lofts released just for that buyer), with a median of 123 and an average of 194 days (much higher than December's average of 147 days).

google = smart
Yes, those Google guys are as smart as they say they are (at least for sharing Google Docs spreadsheets), so the raw data is on-line here.

limited history, so limited commentary
With only two sets of 30-day-sales-data, there is not much to say that will be very insightful (or valid). That should change, going forward with more data sets. Have at it ... enjoy!

 

© Sandy Mattingly 2009  

Jan. 20, 2009 - best cold day EVER

it's a brand new day
I am writing this Monday, for posting on Tuesday at the precise moment the new President takes the oath of office. By that time (this time) I will have been standing at 12th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue for nearly five hours (if all goes to plan) and will be watching the Inauguration from there on big screens.

Three hours later, the Inaugural Parade will start and should take 15 minutes or so to begin to pass in front of us, headed by the President, Vice-President and their families. Then, a host of bands....

happy cold
I believe that the crowds along the Parade route and on the Mall will make up the largest collection of happy people ever assembled in this country. Also, probably the coldest large group.

Sun won't be up until 7:23 AM, when the forecast temperature is 22 degrees ("feels like" 12). The high looks like 29, at noon until 4 PM ("feels like" 18). We should be off PA Av by 5PM, as the temperature begins to drop and there is a chance of snow flurries for a couple of hours by then.

Think warm thoughts. Choose hope.

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Jan. 19, 2009 - Manhattan loft inventory as of January 18 = 865

Number of Manhattan lofts offered for sale as of Sunday night is essentially flat, after last week's New Year's surge: 

This is up 2 in a week, while up 175 since my recorded low in mid-August.

See my May 19 post for what I am counting, and why it is difficult.

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Jan. 18, 2009 - new Manhattan loft listings + closed sales in last 7 days

 
This is the sixty-fourth Manhattan Loft Guy report on the number, price distribution and neighborhood distribution for Manhattan lofts reported as new to the market or as closed sales in the last 7 days.

The stats as of Sunday night:

• there were 19 Manhattan lofts reported as new to the market in the last 7 days and only 12 as sold, a slow week for closings
• 12 of the 19 new ones are offered between $1mm and $3mm, while 9 of the 12 closed sales were below $3mm
• only one of the new 19 loft listings is in new development, while 7 of the 12 closed sales are in new development
  
  

  By price	New = 19	Sold = 12
  $500k to $999k	5	2
  $1mm to $1.99mm	7	5
  $2mm to $2.99mm	5	2
  $3mm to $3.99mm	1
  $4mm to $4.99mm		1
  $5mm+	1	2

  
  

  By neighborhood	New = 19	Sold = 12
  Battery Park City
  Chelsea	4	3
  Clinton
  East Village
  Financial District	1
  Flatiron	1	4
  Gramercy	1
  Greenwich Village	2	1
  Kips Bay		2
  Little Italy
  Lower East Side
  Morningside Heights
  Murray Hill	4
  Midtown East
  Midtown West
  SoHo	4
  Sutton Place
  Tribeca	1	1
  Turtle Bay	1
  Upper East Side
  Upper West Side		1
  West Village		1

• 
  
   
• New loft listings in new developments

• 447 West 18 Street (Chelsea Modern)

  1

   
• 
  
   
• Sold lofts in new developments 

  
  

  420 West 25 Street (Loft 25)	1
  140 West 22 Street (The Clement Moore)	2
  15 East 26 Street (15 Madison Square North)	2
  101 Warren Street	1
  243 West 60 Street (Adagio 60)	1

  
  For information about how I get this stuff and why I slice it as I do, see methodology for New + Sold in The Last Seven Days. For my rant about how soft this data may be, see loft or not? caution: active ranting ahead.

Jan. 15, 2009 - Oculus squints just a bit to get it at 50 West 15 Street

© Sandy Mattingly 2009  

Jan. 14, 2009 - December volume + absorption / loving the actual data

Jan. 13, 2009 - Manhattan loft inventory as of January 11 = 863

Number of Manhattan lofts offered for sale as of Sunday night definitely reflect a new year: 

This is up 51 in a week (the largest weekly increase I have observed), while up 173 since my recorded low in mid-August. (Forget that lowest-lower-since-September-21 thing from last week.) Happy New Year, indeed.

See my May 19 post for what I am counting, and why it is difficult.

Jan. 11, 2009 - new Manhattan loft listings + closed sales in last 7 days

 
This is my sixty-third report on the number, price distribution and neighborhood distribution for Manhattan lofts reported as new to the market or as closed sales in the last 7 days.

The stats as of Sunday night:

• there were 29 Manhattan lofts reported as new to the market in the last 7 days and 23 as sold, as activity on both sides increases in the new year
• 19 of the 29 new ones are offered between $1mm and $3mm, while 15 of the 23 closed sales were between $500k and $2mm
• none of the new loft listings are in new development, while 15 of the 23 closed sales are in new development
  
  

  By price	New = 29	Sold = 23
  $500k to $999k	5	6
  $1mm to $1.99mm	10	9
  $2mm to $2.99mm	9	3
  $3mm to $3.99mm	4	1
  $4mm to $4.99mm	1	3
  $5mm+		1

  
  

  By neighborhood	New = 29	Sold = 23
  Battery Park City
  Chelsea	6	1
  Clinton	1	2
  East Village		1
  Financial District	2
  Flatiron	5	8
  Gramercy	2
  Greenwich Village	2	1
  Kips Bay		1
  Little Italy
  Lower East Side
  Morningside Heights
  Murray Hill	1
  Midtown East
  Midtown West
  SoHo	3
  Sutton Place
  Tribeca	4	3
  Turtle Bay	1
  Upper East Side	1	2
  Upper West Side		3
  West Village	1	1

• 
  
   
• New loft listings in new developments

• none

   
• 
  
   
• Sold lofts in new developments 

  
  

  421 West 54 Street (The Hit Factory)	1
  140 West 22 Street (The Clement Moore)	7
  15 East 26 Street (15 Madison Square North)	1
  137 Duane Street (Diamond Duane)	1
  157 East 84 Street (The Legacy)	2
  243 West 60 Street (Adagio 60)	3

  
  For information about how I get this stuff and why I slice it as I do, see methodology for New + Sold in The Last Seven Days. For my rant about how soft this data may be, see loft or not? caution: active ranting ahead.

Jan. 11, 2009 - 30 days of Manhattan lofts sales / report coming ... later

Quick note that I have prepared another spreadsheet with information on the 40 Manhattan lofts we show as sold and closed in the last 30 days (22 resales and 18 sales by developers), but I will sit on it a bit to see if some clearing prices show as public this week. (As of now, I lack closing prices for 18 of these sales.)

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Jan. 10, 2009 - Corcoran nuggets: Manhattan loft market tracks overall, bigger does better

small nugget, that
The third big firm quarterly market report, from Corcoran (pdf, here), is like Halstead's in that it has little loft-specific information. (I hit Halstead's dribs and drabs on January 7; there was more meat on The Miller's bones, hit on January 8.) Corcoran's loft-specific information is limited to average and median sales prices and average price per foot for 4 sizes of lofts, on only a year-over-year comparison. The data for the loft segment (on p5 of 13) and the overall Manhattan market (on p4 of 13) are essentially parallel (expressed as percent increase 4th quarter of 2008 over 2007):
 

Worthwhile information -- to learn that the loft market behaved in sync with the general market (at least as far as prices) -- but not much

news

here. Darned little to actually chew on....

chew on larger lofts

I

can

chew on the size-specific Manhattan loft data from Corcoran, but without much other context to relate it to the overall market data. All measures of average and median loft price gains (on p5 of 13) were in the two larger loft segments (2,000-2,500 sq ft and 2,500+ sq ft), while the smaller size segments (1,000-1,500 sq ft and 1,500-2,000 sq ft) prices were flat or down slightly.

There's just no way to find a direct larger market comparison for this loft data by size because there is little other data presented a on price per foot, or this kind of size segmentation. The closest thing is the table showing that in the overall market, median price changes year over year (on p4 of 13) reflect a similar overall trend (though at different levels than for lofts, on p5 of 13):

compared to changes in loft median prices, by size loft:

Meh

.

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Jan. 9, 2009 - did developer leave a lot of money on the table in 2007?

pushing past the past
There's a resale that caught my eye, a new construction Manhattan loft that was marketed in 2006 and closed in 2007. This Tribeca unit closed in the first offering at $1,100/ft after the developer dropped the price twice and then accepted an offer for another 12% off the last price. (This was not one of those new development sales that involves a closing a year or so after the contract was signed: it closed the month following the contract.) Does that sound to you as though the developer left a lot of money on the table? Not to me, either.

Hence, my confusion about this unit being marketed now above (... wait for it ...) $1,800/ft. Especially after a unit in the same line did not sell after quite a long time for (only?) $1,400/ft. Maybe I am missing something in the descriptions, and the $1,800/ft current listing is supported by a masterful renovation / upgrade, but who upgrades that much and then flips?

Without a huge addition of value, the pricing theory eludes me. If the premise is that the developer sold low in 2007, leaving money on the table to be picked up in 2009, good luck. Hence, this is today's candidate for the too pushy, or not pushy enough? thread. I vote too pushy.
 

© Sandy Mattingly 2009  

Jan. 8, 2009 - real nuggets as The Miller counts Manhattan lofts in 4Q report

consistent numbers + analysis ... what a concept!

Yesterday I hit the Halstead 4Q08 report (insofar as it addressed Manhattan lofts; i.e., not so much: nuggets from Q4 market reports / Halstead dribs + drabs). Short story: apart from the data point of $1,181/ft as the average for Manhattan loft in their (quantity unknown) sample, the data was (still shameless here) all over the map (not in a good way) and "a mess". Any analysis was simply missing. In contrast, the Miller Samuel 4Q08 market report (pdf, here; the Manhattan loft info is on p4 of 4) is much more informative because it has more numbers and because there is a cogent analysis.

late night TV pitching

The Miller has the average price per foot for a Manhattan loft in the quarter at $1,268/ft, off slightly from the Third Quarter ($1,278) and off just a bit more off the prior year's 4Q ($1,290/ft). But wait ... there's more: the 156 Manhattan loft sales in 4Q08 were down 30% quarter-over-quarter, but up 44% from 4Q07. Still more!! Days on market (The Miller counts from last list price) were 160 4Q08, up dramatically from both the prior quarter (130) and the prior year's quarter (141). But wait ... there's still more!! Loft inventory 4Q08 of 768 (however he counts it) is down 16% from the prior quarter and 11% from the prior year's quarter.

In addition to all the good numbers presented in a consistent format, The Miller provides context for this market segment, noting that the reported average and median sales prices for Manhattan lofts were skewed up because the average size loft sold increased 17% year-over-year, and that new development inventory was proportionately greater in 4Q08 than 4Q07 (28.7% vs. 21.8%). As usual, I highly recommend the Miller Samuel report as the best quick take on the Manhattan market overall, and on the loft segment.

key numbers

Key numbers for me are Manhattan loft transaction volume (yes, there is a market, still) and days on market (but The Market is much slower). Consistent with the Manhattan coop and condo market as a whole, loft closings were at an increasing discount from last asking prices, about which The Miller said (on p2 of 4, about the overall market; my bold): the "large spread between the average listing price and the contract price is evidence of how sellers continue to be 'behind the market decline'. The same pattern was seen in days on market ...". It is not so much  that I appreciate The Miller because he makes comments of great insight; it is that -- in contrast to other market reports -- there is any insight. Compared to Miller Samuel, the other reports tend to be data dumps accompanied by backwards 'analysis'.

dribbling on Halstead's dribs + drabs

Among The Miller's comments is one that is (a) obvious, but (b) useful context for one of my beefs from yesterday about the Halstead report on the Manhattan loft market. Of course, I still don't know whether Halstead thinks there were 156 or so lofts sold last quarter (as The Miller reports), but that (low) number suggests why slicing and dicing the loft data into four 'neighborhoods' (as Halstead does) is pretty pointless. The Miller noted that "[b]ecause of the smaller market segment, the loft market sales activity and listing inventory tend to be more volatile". My take-away is that if you then take this small segment and break it into four smaller segments, volatility increases and utility decreases. As I said yesterday, meh....

I still need to post about Corcoran's loft numbers, then try to take an overview of the 3 quarterly reports that (only theoretically) cover the same 'public' data.

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Jan. 8, 2009 - set price off low comp or high comp? too pushy (or not) in Tribeca gets neighborly

comping is hard
Fascinating new listing for a Tribeca loft in a fairly recent high-end Manhattan loft conversion. They are asking above $1,250/ft for space that sold in the conversion at around $850/ft, probably with many of the same proper proper names (and other indicia of bling-bling) with which it is offered now. But that original sale price is not a particularly useful benchmark. The interesting (and perilous) question is which neighbor's 2007 sale is the better benchmark -- and the question is perilous because the two sales (the most recent in the building) were at such different levels.

comping is scary
One sold for nearly $1,400/ft; the other for under $1,150/ft. The latter was described glowingly (even gushingly) as a gorgeous space with ooh-la-la finishes, so there is not likely to be much difference between those two spaces in level of finishes. Perhaps there is a low-floor discount for the lower-priced unit, but I find it hard to believe that this accounts for much.

The other sale in the building in 2007 was also in highly praised condition and sold quickly above $1,300/ft. So ... which sale is the best indication of current value in the building? The new sellers are counting on the two high prices, obviously, arguing that their asking price (below either of those two sales) is not pushy at all. Any potential buyer will bang on the lower one, equally obviously, arguing that the sellers are too pushy by $100/ft even using 2007 valuations straight up.

Fascinating, indeed (from a bystander's perspective). From the seller's perspective, perilous.
 

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Jan. 7, 2009 - are they fooling only each other? / 3 neighbors push, 1 smiles

regressing (meanly)
I have been following a funky-but-spectacular (in its way) Manhattan loft and -- after noting the last price drop (and reading a little frustration between the lines of the marketing text) -- I checked on two other units in the same building also for sale. Their stories are strikingly similar; in cynical terms, they are even predictable (from an outside cynic's perspective). From a market dynamics perspective, they are probably dragging on each other at this point.

From the perspective of neighborly relations, I wonder what happens when these folks run into each other in the elevator. There are three sellers who seem unwilling to break away from the pack, or to reach for the clearing price of a neighbor.

Unit "A" (not its real name) is my personal favorite and has been on the market the better part of a year. It has had 3 price drops, having started around $1,400/ft. It is now right above $1,000/ft.

Unit "B" is equally braggy (though in a different way) and has been available for a shorter period than "A", but has also had 3 price drops (in a more compressed range). "B" started under $1,200/ft and is now offered around $1,050.

Unit "C" is also brag-worthy but has been around long enough for only one price drop, from around $1,100/ft to just over (stop me if you have heard this before ...) $1,000/ft.

no surprise, right?
The last sale in the building was in November, and Unit "D" is also a member of the beautifully-renovated school. That one started at nearly $1,200/ft almost a year ago but had to come down before striking a deal 13% off the reduced price -- it got a bit under $950/ft. Unit D struck its deal before Unit C came to market, but by then all 3 of the selling neighbors were probably aware of where Unit D had to go for a deal.

This strikes me as sufficiently interesting (and convoluted) for a primitive table (all prices approximate, of course, to protect the anonymous -- and MLG). Hope this does not make it more confusing:
 

Fascinating how the three available lofts are pricing ever closer to $1,000/ft, even though each is being marketed as somehow 'special'. Fascinating that none of the 3 'survivors' has yet bitten the asking price bullet by matching the last actual sale. I wonder what it will take to get another one of these babies sold (the old clearing price may be too old by then).

© Sandy Mattingly 2009