Sep. 2, 2009 - 876 Broadway comes + goes QUICKLY / knowing what you can get, and getting all of it

Aug. 2, 2009 - when you reach the right price ... 105 Fifth Avenue closes

small discount, right price
The Manhattan loft #7A at 105 Fifth Avenue closed on July 22 at $1.125mm, only a 4% discount from the (last) asking price of $1.175mm, proving that if you drop the asking price enough you don't have to discount very much to make a deal. (File this under "Small Consolation", I think.)

They had been trying to sell this "1,350 sq ft" loft since October, starting at $1.495mm, so the total discount was more like 25% -- a fat quarter -- with periodic stops at $1.399mm, $1.295mm, and $1.25mm. The "triple mint" loft includes a new one on me: a master bath with "decorative architectural column". I don't see that column in the floor plan or any photos, but wonder how it could be both "decorative" (serving no function other than decoration) and "architectural" (as if it help keep the floor above, above).

The interesting thing about the clearing price is the suggestion that the buyer offered a large discount from the fifth (and last) price, to which the seller may have responded "I am not desperate; we are serious about this price (finally)".

11% off since 2008
The other interesting thing about the sale price is that -- at $833/ft -- it is 11% off the last sale in the building, the sale of #4D at $935/ft, or $1.65mm for "1,760 sq ft", in November 2008. (To digress, the interesting thing about that sale was that it was 21% off the original ask of $2.1mm.) Perhaps #4D had already taken a market hit when it contracted in October 2008, but 11% seems a relatively modest price drop.

digressions, digressions ... we got digressions
The other interesting thing about that sale is that the contract date and sale date are only five weeks apart. PDQ for a coop, though a laggard compared to the three weeks from contract to close in the case of #7A. That is one quick coop board!

I can't think of another coop closing that was this quick. I will step away from the keyboard before I digress again....

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Jul. 26, 2009 - big loft, big roof / 43 East 19 Street penthouse closes under $4mm for (maybe) 4,100 sq ft + 2,050 sq ft terrace

condition is a question, size a smaller question
The Manhattan loft #8 at 43 East 19 Street is a lot of loft: "4,100 gross SF per floor" plus a huge terrace (half the size of a full floor, at "2,050 sq ft"). The listing description emphasizes volume over finishes, while noting "wonderful original detail". It is hard to see whether and to what degree it may benefit from upgrading, but the closing price is a relatively modest 15% off the original ask. It is also a possible bargain for the amount of interior and exterior space -- especially compared to a 2007 sale without exterior space.

pretty quick, all told
The listing history is actually relatively rapid for a listing in this price neighborhood: it came to market November 4 at $4.595mm and had two price drops totalling only $200k in January and March before hitting contract in June and closing July 9 at $3.905mm.

2007 was a long time ago, but a difficult adjustment
The 7th floor sold in June 2007 for $4.395mm. On the one hand, it had three mints; on the other hand it had no outdoor space. While the condition of the 7th floor seems to be an upgrade over the 8th floor penthouse, does the $490k spread between the clearing prices account for (a) change in The Market since 2007, (b) triple-mint vs. probable upgrade in condition, and (c) "2,050 sq ft" private roof space??. (Note also that this listing used "3,650 sq ft" as the size.) I think not.

Playing with some numbers here .... If you assign the roof deck a(n arbitrary) value of $250/ft, that accounts for just over $500k in the July 2009 purchase price for the penthouse. Using the more credible "3,650 sq ft" size from the 2007 listing for the 7th floor rather than the "gross SF per floor" of the recent listing, the $3.4mm remainder of the penthouse purchase comes out to $931/ft for the interior penthouse space, compared to the minty $1,200/ft for the 7th floor (roughly a million bucks). That is not a very big spread, since it has to account for both the renovation of the penthouse and the two years elapsed since the 7th floor sale.

I am not seeing evidence of a major market decline from these two sales. Although my rough analysis here is premised on an arbitrary value for the roof deck of $250/ft, any lower valuation of the roof space adds to the disparity in favor of the penthouse interior space valuation. I can't see how big a mortgage the July buyer put on this loft, but I have to believe it was very difficult to get good comps for space this big with private exterior this big. As you will see, the buyer had enough cash to put a substantial percentage down, so perhaps the appraisal issue was not vexing, after all. Nonetheless, I'd be curious about how The Pros comp this one out....

(Note that StreetEasy provides the careful reader a pretty clean way to assess current value for this much space in need of an an upgrade in this building, without the distraction of outdoor space. Let's just say that the jury is still out.)

h/t to the Observer's Max Abelson for the penthouse closing history (via The Real Deal), which has not yet hit StreetEasy but is available on Property Shark. By the way, do you think the buyer got a car-and-driver, or a 'whole new life'??

another fun fact
This loft sold in March 1994 for $715,000; it looks as though the 1994 buyers were the 2009 sellers.

And another: the coop benefits from ownership of ground floor space now occupied by the restaurant Craft. Nice Craft-work indeed: the current maintenance is lower than the maintenance for the the penthouse in 1994! (There is an assessment in place to replenish the reserve fund, but still ....)

May. 20, 2009 - price discovery is (still) a female dog / flailing in Flatiron

not finding buyers at that level, or that one
There's a lovely classic Manhattan loft for sale (nearly all of) the last 9 months. It has always been difficult to value lofts in small buildings that don't have a lot of turnover, but this one proved particularly challenging for the seller and agent.

When they started in the glow of the embers of Lehman, they were asking $3.6mm for the mints, renovation and light typical of "very nice" lofts in this area. I can't imagine there was much activity (given the history as it unfolded), but it took about five months for them to drop the price to a place there might be some buyers. Given that they dropped $650,000, I'd say they were (finally) convinced there were no buyers near $3.6mm.
 

May. 15, 2009 - into the way-back machine to close at 42 East 20 Street, down seven figures

not bullish at all
The bloom is definitely off the bull at 42 East 20 Street, a/k/a the Bullmoose Condominium, which was a huge success in the wave of Manhattan loft conversions in 2003. Another candidate for how the mighty have fallen.... (See some data at the Chelsea Mercantile, 252 Seventh Avenue from my May 5, is Chelsea Mercantile off 25% since 2007? ) Two recent sales suggest values here have fallen into the way back machine. (There's a third very recent sale, with no number available yet.)

#5C at 42 East 20 Street (don't know how long that Mercedes Berk link will work) closed on April 30 for $1.35mm, which is rather notable because the last sale in the "C" line here was $1.69mm in April 2005. It is also notable for a long and tortured history.

pain, followed by pain, then more pain
The sellers of this "1,607 sq ft" loft with 11 foot ceilings, 10 foot windows, "designer" kitchen, and "lavish spa" bathrooms thought they had quite a valuable loft when they offered it for sale in April 2008 (indeed, the height of The Market) for $2.395mm. They recognized that -- although they were not at the market price -- The Market changed, so they dropped the price to $1.995mm on September 22, 2008 (soon after the fall of the house of Lehman). But they still were not at The Market, so they dropped to $1.895mm when they changed firms in November.

When the ball dropped and the corks popped it appears that they realized that (a) they really needed to sell, and (b) they had no idea where The Market was, as this is what happened:

Now THAT shows a whole lot of motivation! (And pain.) But it worked, and they signed a contract on April 13 and got the condo to waive quickly so that they closed two weeks later, April 30. The $1.35mm clearing price is:

• 56% of the original asking price in April 2008
• 80% of the price their upstairs neighbors got in April 2005
• $840/ft

not nearly as much pain
#3B did relatively better than #5C when it closed on May 1 at $2.7mm. For starters, that clearing price was $987/ft for this "2,735 sq ft" "super contemporary" and "ultra stylist" loft (they didnice work in this 2003 conversion, they really did). Second, although they started down the path towards a sale just after the #5C neighbors, the path for #3B involved fewer bumps, and probably less pain. They started this campaign on May 20, 2008 with an original price of $3.55mm and on July 8 dropped to $3.295mm. In November it appears that they formally took it off the market (StreetEasy and our data-base agree on this), but negotiated with somebody to sign a contract on February 25. This contract took a lot longer to close than with the #5C contract signed on April 13, but it closed on May 1, the day after #5C.

That $2.7mm clearing price was only a 24% discount from their May 2008 asking price of $3.55mm. Yet it was a 31% discount from their original asking price of $3.95mm with a different firm in November 2007.

seven figure hits
That is two lofts in this lovely 2003 conversion that closed recently at least One Million Dollars (read it in that Lotto Guy's voice) off their original asking prices. Yikes.

more data coming
I started looking at The Bullmoose today because #5A is on today's inter-firm hot sheet as Sold and Closed. I will keep an eye out for that clearing price. This "2,222 sq ft" loft might close above $1,000/ft (unlike #3B and #5C), as the last asking price was $2.45mm. But it may also be a Seven Figure Hit, as it started in June 2008 at $3.395mm. Double yikes.

(The sales history of #3A [the last "A" line to close before #5A] is very interesting: sold in March 2006 at $3.495mm; sold in September 2008 at $3.025mm.)

That's three neighbors who have learned that price discovery is very hard in a thin market.
 

May. 8, 2009 - at 260 Park Avenue South 2006 = 2009

up, then down (probably not flat)
The Manhattan loft #4-I at 260 Park Avenue South sold in March $2,000 lower than these sellers paid in July 2006.

Had they been marking to market all along (tracking their real estate investment), they would undoubtedly have been pleased for a while after July 2006, then perhaps concerned as they started to think about selling in 2008. By the time they came to market in October 2008 at $1.795mm they were probably a little worried about getting back the $1.577mm they paid 2+ years earlier. As they should have been....

It took The Market a while to persuade these sellers that $1.795mm was not where the buyers are, but when they adjusted in January to $1.65mm they had a contract by the end of the month. 60 days later, they had their money almost back (clearing price = $1.575mm), with no need to wonder about paying capital gains taxes but some peace of mind. Hope they are happy, wherever they went.

This "1,328 sq ft" loft presumably has the standard deluxe finishes that were original to the conversion when the residential conversion of three adjoining buildings was completed in early 2006. The original buyer closed in March 2006, then acted like a motivated flipper: on the market with a few weeks (at $1.595mm), then dropped the price without a deal after another 3 weeks (to $1.55mm), then dropped again after not getting a deal in another 3 weeks (to $1.5mm). That flurry generated the deal with the to-be-sellers-in-2009 people -- apparently after a bidding war, as the clearing price of $1.577mm in July 2006 exceeded the last two asking prices for the loft.

The finishes and amenities at 260 Park Avenue South -- and its success -- upped the ante for the neighborhood, leading (inevitably) to 240 Park Avenue South, one block down and one step up in amenities and finishes (and one irritating soundtrack on that building's marketing website). The current inventory of 260 PAS (per StreetEasy, here ) has an average price per foot of $1,445/ft; the new Gwathmey Siegel glass-and-rounded-corners building at 240 PAS has average asking prices for its inventory of $1,782/ft (again, StreetEasy ).

So goes the arms' race.

yes, The Market has many data points
When Curbed.com linked to two recent Manhattan Loft Guy posts this week (thx, Lock + crew!) about sales 25% off prior sales in two different loft buildings, there was a little bit of commentary there along the lines of "d'oh -- everything is off 25%, so this is not news".

It is rather pointless to get into an extended discussion on Curbed (perhaps that will change with the new no-anonymous-guests-all-must-register policy), though I hope it would be obvious that The Market is the sum of transactions, not all of which will trend in the same direction or in the same degree at any given point. Hence, I find it interesting to see what has actually sold in a given building, compared to what has previously actually sold.

Then, instead of saying "the whole market is down 25%" (compared to when?), I can say that this building appears to have lost X% of value since Y date, which helps to estimate present value of a unit in the same building. Works for me. I assume it works for actual buyers and actual sellers who are only interested in specific lofts in specific buildings, rather than in The (overall) Market. YMMV
 

Dec. 19, 2008 - pushing on in Flatiron, but not as hard

a reader writes
In this continuing series asking the (musical?) question is that Manhattan loft too pushy on price, or not pushy enough?, I hit a candidate a while back that one MLG reader identified easily (my efforts to assure listing anonymity notwithstanding). That perceptive reader suggested keeping an eye on a neighboring (anonymous) loft, which I believe I have identified. Indeed, I believe that that Flatiron loft is a candidate on the too pushy ... side of the contest.

This reader-generated candidate came to market within a couple of weeks of its MLG partner at a bit less. While that reader suggested only that I keep an eye on it, the seller has already identified it as too pushy, by dropping the price $100k.

how much for the renovation?
This loft sold 2 years ago for $860/ft, bragging then only about a new kitchen. The new listing is all about being newly renovated. I suspect that they did not spend $300/ft on a renovation, but never mind ... it has not sold yet as the sum of (1) the 2006 purchase price and (2) $270/ft for renovation. It will be interesting -- in a vulture kind of way -- to see where this one ends up. As that reader suggests, I will keep an eye on it.

 

© Sandy Mattingly 2008  

Nov. 30, 2008 - neighborly competition leads to neighborly mistakes? the laboratory at 24 East 22 Street

MLG went there before the NY Times
You may remember that the NY Times ran a piece about multiple apartments for sale in the same building back in August (August 10, Neighborly Competition). You may also recall that I used to talk about current listings, one of which involved competing Manhattan loft listings on the 4th and 5th floors at 24 East 22 Street. I just restored that February 9 post (‘rare’ open house duel at 24 E 22 / fighting about windows) because neither of those Manhattan lofts is an active listing by another firm. I was pretty stunned by the listing histories of the two lofts, leading to a rumination about how competing listings in a building impact each other, leading to this post.

It will take me a while to get to an answer (MLG is still wordy, wordy, wordy...), but here's the fun question: is it easier to make a mistake if someone else is already making one?

what will the neighbors think? what will The Market think??
The Times quoted a terrific Corcoran agent about one aspect of neighborly competition:
 

Of course, you can always find a point-counterpoint structure, and Teri Karush Rogers has no shortage of sources:

Yeah, putting an apartment on the market at the same time as a neighbor's can strain relationships within a building. But I wonder about the degree to which competing listings can lead sellers to over-value their apartments. Let's get back to 24 East 22 Street and the 4th and 5th floor Manhattan loft competition.

Here's what i said in my compare-and-contrast post on February 9:

Note that the two units were offered at $100,000 apart in February, after one had been on the market for 3 months already and the other for 8 months already (at $105k higher). Given the descriptions, it is hard to imagine that anyone who came across one of the two lofts would not also go to see the other; as I said, the preference would probably come down to simple preference about finishes (unless those additional west windows on the 5thfloor would be the key factor for some buyers).

Before I get into what actually happened to these competing listings, lets drag another quote from the NY Times.

'absurd' price competition, or Market pricing?
I LOVE this NY Times quote (you'll see why soon):

Perhaps especially in the context of The (current) Market, "absurdity" is in the eyes of the beholder, no?

painful history
Soon after my compare-and-contrast post, the 5th floor seller dropped the price to $2.695mm, but then took it off the market completely shortly later. Leaving the field entirely to the 4th floor.

The 4th floor sold, but it took ... a while, and what must have been serious pain.

very painful history
Before the 5thfloor dropped to $2.695mm, the 4th floor abandoned that position by dropping $245k, to $2.45mm on February 17, then another $200k, to $2.25mm on March 28 (is that the drop that killed all motivation on the 5ht floor??), then another $400k, to $1.85mm on April 25.

That's what I call evidence of motivation! In the space of 9 weeks, the price dropped $600k (about 25%), and $800k overall from the original asking price of $2.695mm in December 2007. That get the job done, with a contract signed as of June 12, and a deed transferred on July 16 at $1.8mm.

That is 8 months and a closing 33% off the original asking price

who could have predicted?
Retrospect brings clarity. Both sellers in this building (and their agents) mis-perceived The Market. One seller pushed on, to find The (actual) Market; the other dropped out still way above where The Market turned out to be.

I wonder how much that (eventually) successful seller (and agent) on the 4th floor was distracted by the competing price set by the 5th floor. Without that price (starting at $2.9mm in July 2007), might the 4t floor have started lower than $2.695mm in December -- when The Market was better for a seller than 7 months later? Without that high-but-false 'comp', might the 4th floor seller have dropped more quickly, more dramatically, but not quite to the one-third-off that it took to get the thing sold?

No way to know, of course. But fascinating. Let's go back to that last quote about "absurdity" from the NY Times.

That looks remarkably like the competition between the 4th and 5th floor lofts at 24 East 22 Street, doesn't it? The Market is The Market is The Market, right? By definition, that is real, not absurd, right? Painful, but real.

footnote to pain
In defense of the mistaken judgement evident in retrospect, the 5th floor unsuccessful-seller-in-2008 was a buyer-in-2004. Presumably they took it off the market in 2008 because they did not have to sell (to move to San Diego or for any other reason). They may have had a particularity acute reason for not matching the 4th floor listing history down below $2mm -- they paid $1.9mm in 2004.

© Sandy Mattingly 2008  

Nov. 20, 2008 - how big a discount for renovation? 64 West 15 Street closes with and without

how big a drag is a big job?
I've been thinking about the difficulties in this market of selling a Manhattan loft that needs a lot of work. Unit #2E at 64 West 15 Street is a recent example, as it just closed (deed filed November 3). At least in this instance, there was not as big a market discount for the fact that major renvaotion was needed as I would have thought. Let's explore....

more cash, greater income, more scrutiny
Anyone who buys a 'project' loft needs substantially more liquidity than the buyer of a fully renvoated / updated loft because the cost of the renovation (a) won't be folded into a first mortgage, (b) if financed, will be at higher rates than a first mortgage, and (c) will be subject to greater scutiny by the coop board and lender and will require higher income to support the appropriate debt-to-income ratio. Many coops will view a purchase application for a major renovation project as though the buyer will pay cash for the renovation, and judge the buyer's financial profile accordingly.

a strong stomach
Further, I find that there are fewer buyers out there with the appetite for a major renvoation than before. The buyer will need somewhere else to live for some months (and probably longer than originally planned). That means the buy will be paying for two living spaces for the duration of the renovation, or camping out with family or friends. (Buyers who need to sell another home in order to buy the to-be-renovated loft are particularly vulnerable here.) The buyer needs to have the courage and confidence that the renovation can be brought in close enough to budget to have the project make economic sense. Of course, the contractor version of Murphy's Law is a major concern here, as few major renovations seem to be brought in on time and on the money. Especially with lofts, there is a legitimate fear of the unknown -- while it can be exciting to see what is really behind some walls, not everyone has the stomach for such excitement.

Then there's the risk that the finished product will not match the buyer's dreams or architect/contractor's renderings. For many people, the certainty of buying the 'done' apartment warrants a premium over the hope that buying (and successfully completing) a project will result in the same level of finishes or pizzazz.

I will try to keep an eye out for examples to test how The Market reacts in these situations. 64 West 15 Street turned out better (for the seller of a project loft) than I would have expected.

point
Said to be "1,400 sq ft", #2E was marketed as a real project ("[t]he possibilities are endless, bring your imagination and start dreaming!"). With only two interior pix (one showing glass bricks, my form of 'carbon-dating' a loft renovation to 1980 or so), I will take the Smiling Blumsteins at their implied word that this unit needs a lot of work. The asking price of $1.299mm certainly offered some discount for the work to be done -- and it was manifestly enough of a discount, as confirmed by the fact that it did the job (contract within four weeks of coming to market on July 12 at the full asking price). Props to those Blumsteins and to the (happy, quick) seller.

counterpoint
In wonderful counterpoint, #2W closed recently, with a deed filed on August 26 for $2.3m, off an asking price of $2.395mm (reduced twice from $2.7mm since February). Based on lisings for other "W" units in the building, #2W looks to be "2,000 sq ft", so it sold for $1,150/ft in a "meticulously rebovated" condition. (The StreetEasy listing page is here.)

Compared to the meticulously renovated clearing price of $1,150/ft for #2W, the $928/ft for the endless possibilities of #2E matches just about exactly the notional ballpark figure of $200/ft for a major renovation (we established that ballpark about a year ago, in the December 10, 2007 need renovation stories / a reader writes for help), with hardly any wiggle room priced in for delay and the risk of the renovation working out. That surprises me a little.

Does anyone out there have another current example?

Sep. 26, 2008 - one data point leads to another / net loss on sale at Altair 18

Jun. 20, 2008 - 11 West 20 Street #2 closes / did they get THAT??

Jun. 11, 2008 - data point in a sideways market / closing at 32 West 18 Street

poster child for "selling less" in Altair 18

32 West 18 Street #2B (Altair 18), had been for sale since October, starting at $4.6mm, dropping to $4.2mm, then $3.995mm, then $3.75mm, then (finally) $3.5mm in April, with $5,186/mo (condo). [The original PruDE listing info is gone from their site but Street Easy is a good ("easy") source of information about past sales (and current listings) in a building; this building's page is here.] It had a signed contract in May and shows up as Sold & Closed in the inter-firm data today. While that is undoubtedly a huge relief for the sellers after 7 months and 5 prices, that sweet relief comes at quite a cost.

The closing price is not yet posted on city records that I can see, but the price trajectory suggests they did little better than the final asking price of $3.5mm (if that). The now-breathing-again seller was the original buyer of this unit (although he never moved in) in August 2007. He paid $3.45mm then (his during-construction contract was signed in August 2006) and launched his flip attempt within 3 months of closing, looking for a 33% bump. That did not work out.

The market for this particular loft has been flat, at best, over nearly a year -- something that neither the seller nor his agent predicted.

been here, hit that (twice)

I hit this loft as part of a nice pair of dueling open houses in January (back when I was doing that sort of thing) with a similarly priced loft at 217 West 19 Street. That post was old enough that I did not get around to scraping it off when I pulled posts thatcommented on then-current listings from other firms, so it is still here: January 18, dueling $4mm open houses at 217 West 19 Street + 32 West 18 St.

happier seller on 19th street

The other half of that 'dueling open house' pair fared better. As I said in closing that April7 post, above, it found a contract within 6 weeks of coming to market in January at $4.1mm, after one price drop to $3.995mm. It has since closed (7 weeks ago) at $3.9mm, less than a 5% discount from their original asking price.

© Sandy Mattingly 2008

May. 20, 2008 - quick sale at 20 East 17 St

Mar. 26, 2008 - it can be flipping hard / back story on NY Post Just Sold at 260 Park Avenue South

Mar. 24, 2008 - no cigar, as 12 West 18 Street is back on market

Mar. 12, 2008 - new at 20 East 17 Street / views not (many) dollars

Mar. 10, 2008 - when bad things happen to good contracts / 49 East 21 Street is back

not a board problem
Often, if you see a loft come back on the market in Manhattan 3 months after a contract was signed, you think Board Turn-down. But 49 East 21 Street is a condo, so that does not explain #10B coming back to market this weekend.

cold feet?
Somebody changed their mind. If the seller, they would have taken it completely off the market if they decided not to sell; if the buyer, one assumes it is a change in life / job / family circumstances (some of those 8 million stories in the naked city, Anon).

The loft came to market in mid-November and had a signed contract within 4 weeks, so you would reasonably guess that the contract price was at or close to the $1.795mm asked. (Common charges and taxes are $1,815/mo. for "1,308 sq ft"). But the unit is back on the market at $1.75mm. [UPDATE 12.14.08: it finally got it done after a May 4 price drop to $1.695mm, with a contract as of may 21 and a deed filed on June 18 with a clearing price of $1.59mm]

Said to be both "stunning" and "triple mint", this corner loft is nearly square, with south exposures in the living room and master bedroom, and wests in the master and (small) 2d bedroom. The 'state of the art' kitchen is disproportionately large for the overall space, implying a heavy usage. This feels to me like the original finishes and details, from when this seller bought in December 2004 for $1.145mm.

2004 conversion
Overall. the floor plan is more "apartment" than "loft" -- though the building is clearly a loft (it is the old UFT headquarters, converted in 2004 [building website here], with high ceilings and big windows; the developer opted for layouts from 1,282 to 1,461 sq ft -- none especially "spacious").

building history
#9A ("1,400 sq ft") sold in December for $1.9mm, finding a contract within four weeks and discounting $50k off the listing price. That listing description is similar to the current description for #10B, though that one was "barely ... lived in". Property Shark says #4A ("1,375 sq ft") sold in October, but I don't see a clearing price and our inter-firm listing history shows a January close, and a bumpy ride until then. The ask started at $1.895mm, dropped to $1.795mm after 4 weeks, then we show a pattern of 4 contracts out then back on the market, until the January update as Sold & Closed.

#8C ("1,461 sq ft") sold in July for $1,862,500, having found a contract within 2 weeks off an asking price of $1.925mm. That unit was marketed as having "the best floor-plan in the building"; if you can see it here you will agree that the additional 150 sq ft over the "B" floor plan makes a huge difference in 'space' and efficiency.

All in, I don't see anything about the recent building history that should make the #10B asking price a stretch. [UPDATE 12.14.08: with the trading price at $1.59mm in June, it is fair to say that The Market found $1.795mm to be a bit of a sretch, after all]

Mar. 3, 2008 - new at 222 Park Avenue South w windows everywhere

[

]

layout, layout, location
Unit 10E at 222 Park Avenue South came to market this past weekend, a classic Manhattan loft in a long-established coop along a stretch of Park Avenue South that teems with new developments. Presented by Monica Ritterspoon of Corcoran, they are asking $3.75mm and $2,817/mo for "2,450 sq ft" that is very efficiently arrayed into 4+ bedrooms and 3 bathrooms.

As she says, there are windows "everywhere" -- 18 in all, with 2 huge south-facing windows in both the master suite and the living room. (They must be the ones providing the "skyline views".) It is rather remarkable that with 'only' "2,450 sq ft" they have managed the 4 bedrooms and an office and 3 walk-in closets and a large dining area (17 x 16 feet), yet have room for a 34 x 20 foot living room.

I can't quite tell from the pix, but there is the possibility of a dramatic flow -- as you enter in a long gallery along side the kitchen and the loft 'opens up' as you get past the dining area, presenting the views and windows in the living room to your left.

space, space, space (no finishes?)
The listing description is all about the space and light, with no bragging at all about finishes. For example, the only description of the kitchen is that it is both "large [and] eat-in" and there is no mention of bathrooms, other than that there are 3.

space oddities
The room dimensions on the floor plan have to be a bit off. Compare the master bedroom at 14.5 x 14.5 feet to the "bedroom w mezzanine" at 14.5 x 14. The island outside the kitchen ion photo 3 is not on the floor plan, but must be right in the middle of the dining area.

meanwhile, on the 3rd floor
Fascinating comparison to #3E, which has been offered for sale since September by a Corcoran team including Brian Babst. Same footprint as #10E, though this one is all about the finishes and is essentially a One Bed Wonder. Here, the footprint is said to be "2,500 sq ft" and they are asking $4.25mm (down from $4.75mm) and $1,578/mo (why the disparity in maintenance??).

Here, there is "uncommon attention to detail", "rich materials" and a "masterwork of design". But there are many fewer windows than in #10E.

and on the 4th
The last sale i see here was #4D, which sold in October for $1.5mm. Said to be "1,300 sq ft", this was described as much closer to #3E than to #10E ("architect designed and meticulously renovated", "beautiful custom built-ins", "finest materials", etc.). Before that, #9B sold 14 months ago (in a transaction that is not in our system) for $1.3mm. Unfortunately, I have no information about size or condition on that one.

$1,500/ft, or 1,750/ft done -- or none of the above?
Until #3E sells, it is hard to get a building comp to support #10E's pricing. They are a fascinating pair, no? One has a great layout and great light (and no bragging about finishes); the other has a top renovation on a low floor with little light. Unless #10E shows better than it is described, you'd think that the #3E completed renovation represents at least $450k in added value (in a very different layout, of course).

[update 12.4.08: #10E closed, with a deed filed on August 21 for $3.2mm; #3E has been off the market since September]

(C) Sandy Mattingly 2008

Feb. 18, 2008 - 2 new on West 20 Street / building yin vs yang at 15 W 20 + 9 W 20

[

]

so close yet…
These two new Manhattan loft listings could hardly be closer to each other. The units are nearly the same size, with very similar layouts. Neither brags about light or views. But the dollar differences are rather … err … dramatic.

the boutique experience at Altair 20
#8A at 15 West 20 Street (Altair 20) is new to market this weekend through PruDE's Lisa Gilroy, asking $3.25mm and $3,869/mo for "2,259 sq ft" in this 2006 newly constructed condo where the first closings were last August.

Altair 20 was one of the recent high finish + high service buildings, where 17 units have to support the La Palestra fitness center, doorman (not overnight?), and cabana style roof deck. Hence the hefty common charges. This looks to be the first flip; the original sales price for #8A was $2.6mm but they raised it to $2.675mm before the contract was signed for $2.625mm and it closed in June 2007. (#9A traded at $2.725mm in July; #7A for 2.525mm also in July.) [UPDATE 12.14.08: the loft was taken off the market in May after price drops in March ($3.095mm) and April ($2.995mm); clearly, The Market was not biting]

This unit looks to be in original condition, with the standard high-end finishes including an “ultra chef’s kitchen” (with wine cooler + coffee system + plate-warmer), cherry floors and radiant heat in the 3 bathrooms. The layout is classic Long-and-Narrow with 2 bedrooms in back, a windowless den/study and plumbing on both sides in the middle. The interesting layout choice in this unit is the kitchen has a path-through, but is otherwise closed. How un-lofty!

The building was gutted in 2006 (an old office building??) and has some loft characteristics, including ten foot ceilings (in most of the unit) and 3 structural columns. The windows are tall, but not terribly large (3 in back, only 4 in front), with not much to see form the 8^th floor. The joint building website (with Altair 18 at 32 West 18 Street) is still up and full of breathless promotion, here. (There are many additional details about the kitchen and baths in that website, beyond what is in the listing description.) You will see that they were (and are) selling the ‘boutique’ experience.

Open House Sunday February 24 from 12 to 2 PM.

who’s the faux loft competition for 9
The 6th floor of 9 West 20 Street is not at the bling-bling end of the loft spectrum that Altair 20 aspires to, but it is a classic loft building repurposed in 2001 for residential. This one is said to be "2,152 sq ft" and is asking $2.499mm and $1,913/mo (condo) for a triple mint loft for people who are "tired of faux lofts".

Sheila Lokitz of Corcoran promises pictures soon, but the floor plan is classic Long-and-Narrow, with plumbing in the middle and enough windows on one long side to have a 3rd bedroom and a windowed bathroom. (The footprint is very similar to #8A at 15 West 20 Street, in fact, though the window here makes a 3^rd bedroom instead of a den/study.)

It is hard to directly compare finishes without pictures of this one, but the major difference here is easily expressed: $1,913/mo in common charges and taxes vs. $3,869/mo at Altair 20. And the $750k in asking price for (essentially) the same size space.

a window on The (current) Market
The 8^th floor and the 10^th floor both sold last Summer for $2.661mm, both well above their asking prices ($2.395mm and $2.495mm, respectively). The 8^th floor was said to be “architect designed”; the 10^th floor other claimed very high finishes and to be “sun-filled”. If the 6^th floor finishes are at all comparable, this $2.499mm asking price will tell us a lot about The Market if it lingers. [UPDATE 12.14.08: it more than lingered; after dropping to $2.399mm on May 1, out data-base shows that it was taken off the market in June; but there is ambiguity about that, since Street Easy shows a deed filed in June (but no price reported) while Property Shark shows no deed]

[BOTTOM LINE as of 12.14.08: as the 6th floor finishes do seem to have been comparable to the neighbors' units on the 8th and 10th floors that traded at $2.661mm in 2007, the fact that #6 did not sell even off of the reduced $2.399mm did tell us "a lot about The Market"]

First showing will be at the Open House Sunday February 24 from 12:30 to 2 PM.



© Sandy Mattingly 2008

Feb. 9, 2008 - ‘rare’ open house duel at 24 E 22 / fighting about windows