Oct. 18, 2007 - the virtues of patience as a marketing strategy / 476 Bway gets full ask after 51 weeks
blinking at 'mature' listings
A week ago I asked who
blinked at 79 Laight? contract in 13th month. We won't know until that deal
closes how close that (seemingly) stubborn seller got to the asking price, so maybe the seller blinked and took a big
haircut or maybe the buyer blinked and gave the seller the price being asked.
Then the sales history of #11F at 476 Broadway caught my eye because it had been featured as a
closed sale in the NY Times early this month (you might have to play with that image size in order to read what it
says). Full research showed a long long sales history, capped by a full price contract closing nearly a year after the
last price change.
from May to September, from 2004 to 2007
The owner of #11F at 476 Broadway started to sell in May 2004, asking as much as $3.125mm
and as little as $2.85mm before changing firms in March 2006 and increasing the price to $2.995mm in June 2006. They held
at $2.995mm from June 2006 until signing a contract 51 weeks later and finally closing last month - at $2.995mm.
macro wisdom vs. micro fact
The common wisdom in the real estate business is that a property that does not sell after
being fully and well exposed to the marketplace has a price problem. Sometimes the common wisdom does not apply, with one
example at 476 Broadway and possibly a second example at 79 Laight.
back to The Text
Repeat after me: "Fair Market Value" is the price (a) agreed to by (b) a willing seller and
(c) a willing buyer, both of whom are (d) fully informed and neither of whom is subject to (e) undue compulsion. That is a
basic formulation of a core principle of Econ 101.
Without getting myself too confused here, FMV is relatively easy to discern for commodities
(something there are many of that are essentially inter-changeable) in a market with many buyers and sellers of the
commodity. FMV is much harder to discern when the asset is more or less unique, there are few sellers of similar assets
and few buyers who need or want such an asset.
Sellers of "unique" Manhattan lofts and their agents (enablers?) are the micro-level actors who account for deviation from the
macro-level rules. Thus, in the case of #11F at 476 Broadway, the presumed market "fact" was that the asking price of
$2.995mm did not represent the Fair Market Value of that asset from June 2006 until May 2007 - because no
willing buyer stepped up to it. Yet, in June 2007, a willing buyer agreed to that price and the deal has since closed.
where the rubber meets the road
One could argue that the #11F seller was not a classically "willing" seller before June
2007, because s/he did not adjust the price in light of the market's rejection of $2.995mm as the proposed value of the
asset. Rather than being a market seller, s/he was an I-will-sell-only-if-I-get-my-price seller.
One could argue that if that seller really wanted to sell before June 2007, that
seller had to drop the price in response to market inaction.
I bet various people did argue with that seller. Some bidders, almost
certainly. Probably the seller's agent. Perhaps a spouse. But the seller was stubborn and (ultimately) successful in
getting the price.
That's the behavior that makes The Market. Hundreds of micro events aggregating to a macro.
Not all of which 'make sense' under macro principles.
It's a bitch sometimes, if you are a seller, or a sellers' agent, or a seller's spouse. Or
the reasonable and well-informed buyer who wants to purchase an over-priced asset that cannot be purchased except
above the 'market value'.
© Sandy Mattingly 2007
|
Comments (3) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: Broadway, Laight, Price Drop, Marketing
|
Oct. 7, 2007 - serenity has its price / 270 W 19 St in contract
successful marketing campaign nearly complete
270 West 19 Street #4B seems like one of those "unique"
lofts that is truly distinctive. It has been marketed by Laurie Karpowich at Corcoran that way, which worked
to the extent of getting a contract within 4 four weeks. Not too shabby in a possibly 'jittery' market.
Nothing cookie cutter about the description (though I don't love the syntax). "you are immediately taken by the beautiful courtyard visible from any of your oversized
windows or private terrace. With giant elm trees and manicured back yards its [sic] hard to believe you are in the
heart of the new Chelsea…" There's more, of course, but that's part of the
opening.
The challenges here included only "1,085 sq ft" for a 2 bedroom loft -
hardly spacious. That, and asking a new construction price.
Marketing a loft is all about attracting the right buyers with the right set of expectations, then meeting those
expectations. "Sun-drenched" better be bright; "classic" loft better have character; "soaring" ceilings better not be
10 feet, etc. Since not all lofts are created equal, some indication of how this one is different is a very
good thing.
As I have said now in three open house reviews, they are selling serenity at this loft, and not being bashful about
the price. $1.525mm and $820/mo (condo; pretty low!) for "1,085 sq ft" is $1,400/ft, In a building in which the best
sale so far has been just under $1,200/ft.
That sale was the loft below this one in June 2006, which was marketed at about 200 miles an hour with descriptions
such as "every piece of important "apartment jewelry'", "condo loft has BLING!", "[b]espoke Italian new kitchen and baths and
hi-end super-luxe designer details throughout- this is the condo loft you never thought you would find",
"[l]ive like you imagined with soaring ceiling heights, pin-drop quiet, blinding open South
AND East light". (Raise your hand if you know that "bespoke" means handmade.)
serenity trumps bling??
I guess that bling-bling worked for #3B; selling serenity has certainly worked for #4A.
The seller paid $1.195mm when the building was converted in November 2005, so should be very happy with the serene
approach.
© Sandy Mattingly 2007
|
Comments (0) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: West 19, Serenity, Outdoor Space, Marketing, Contract
|
Oct. 7, 2007 - fire the super-heroes / 35 W 23 is back without Aqua-Lad
change in marketing, no change in firms
I smiled when I came across the
listing for the 4th floor at 35 West 23 Street back in August because the web description was so different from
the usual broker-babble.
Check the listing for the unconventional description. I will just say that
anybody who can pull off dropping Batman, Bruce Wayne, Lois, and even Aqua-Lad into a Manhattan loft listing with a
straight face (and to humorous effect) must have a terrific relationship with the seller. And an accommodating
manager.
Curbed picked up on the non-traditional approach about two weeks after I did,
Broker Babble: Tranquil Lair, which
included a comment about whether Lois Lane would have curled up with Batman, and other sundry Curbed
juvenilia.
holy pink slip!
Sadly, you won't be able to check that listing, as it was taken off the market a
month ago and is back as of Friday- with a different Corcoran agent and a very different description. Batman, Bruce Wayne,
Lois, and even Aqua-Lad have been fired!
three winged bedrooms (possible fourth) and two and a half bathrooms including
the master suite with a dressing room and large master bathroom with dual sinks, jacuzzi tub and separate steam shower.
The center-piece of the loft is the raised chef's kitchen with granite countertops, Viking stove, Sub Zero refrigerator
& freezer and dual dishwashers. The Living Room boasts wall to wall book cases that extend up to the 11" original tin
ceilings with state of the art lighting and sound
I am sure they did not do it on purpose, but they used the word "super" once, not as in super-hero, but as in "super
sunny". I don't suppose anyone else would notice that, except perhaps me and Hubert Etchison. Sorry, man.
Interesting decision by the seller to switch agents but not firms. Obviously, the firm-based (and web) marketing oomph is
exactly the same then, as now. My surmise two months ago was that the super-hero campaign was so quirky that it suggested
the owner and agent had a very good rapport, but - if so - that got strained without a sale. I don't remember the former
pictures all that well, but the ones now up seem new to me (and fewer), so maybe they are simply simplifying the
marketing.
was it the characters or the number?
Melissa Monteforte from Corcoran has been brought across the river from 718 to do the
marketing, at the same price as the unsuccessful super-hero campaign of February into September.
I guess the seller decided that the unit did not sell in that period because of the fanciful marketing rather than because
of the price. (As I noted on August 8: "third floor sold in 2004 for $2.15mm. Etchison marketed
this unit (through Halstead ) when it was sold in 2003 for $1.95mm (it's been a few good years, eh?). I don't see any 4th
floor building permits since 2003, but maybe it wasn't super-hero ready then....")
or something else?
I noted in August that "The "3,400 sq ft" floor plan will not be for every loft lover, as it has way more walls than many people
like, but it packs a lot of utility." Interesting that the current campaign does
not include a floor plan on the web, to show all those walls, and rooms. It may impress buyers as too many walls (so, too
much work at the price).
I suspect it was the price, but we'll have to see. Seller may be getting antsy.
© Sandy Mattingly 2007
|
Comments (0) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: West 23, Corcoran, Changing Agents, Floor Plan
|
Jul. 17, 2007 - end of uber-lofts? (uh … no)
scaling down amenities + dollars
Funny how journalism works, when two items can make a trend.
The Real Deal ran a short piece last week about who some developers are scaling back some services or amenities to reach a lower price point or a lower monthly expenses.
In re-reading Fewer amenities, more sales just now, I was a little surprised to see that there are only two examples given, and an equal number of (soft) marketing quotes. (To be fair, bloggers need fewer than two examples, sometimes no examples at all.)
For example, in September Citi Habitats will be marketing Carriage House Chelsea, a 24-unit, high-end condominium at 159 West 24th Street, with only a few perks [??]. There will be a part-time doorman, 24-hour monitoring system and eight automated, fee-based private parking spaces that are likely to cost an additional $175,000 to $250,000 per year. The units are expected to start at $700,000 for a 600-square foot open loft space, $100 to $200 less per square foot than condos with considerably more bells and whistles, said Cliff Finn, managing director of Citi Habitats Marketing Group. The monthly maintenance will be 20 to 30 percent less than the more amenity packed buildings, he added.
high-end?
I am not sure what they mean by a “high end” condominium with “only a few perks” – especially with 600 square foot units. In a small building you may well not have a doorman, gym, cold room off the lobby, or other “high-end” amenities, but you need a pretty high level of interior finishes to be “high-end”. No idea if this Carriage House Chelsea will have those finishes. But with 600 square foot units, this will appeal to a different market segment than buildings with larger units, including the Chelsea Stratus at the other end of this block (with media lounge, billiards, fitness center, basketball court, dining area with catering Kitchen, landscaped rooftop terrace with a dog run).
I don’t think this approach will work in Tribeca, for two reasons. Acquisition costs are probably too high to do anything other than a new uber-loft, with bells and whistles to drown out an orchestra. Second, the TriBeCa loft buyer who wants “new” probably wants the bells and whistles. Carriage House Chelsea looks as though it may attract more first-time loft buyers (who else is buying a studio?).
The other example cited in the Real Deal article is way uptown, at 257 W 117 Street, where changing the amenities package permitted them to drop the common charges from $1.10 a foot to $0.75 a foot. I suspect that this is what you need to attract downtown buyers to uptown properties.
Why do the same thing downtown if there is a strong market for the amenities (as there is)?
© Sandy Mattingly 2007
|
Comments (0) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: Carriage House, Chelsea Stratus, Amenities
|
Jan. 22, 2007 - NY Times on Seller Stress Syndrome
how hard is it to stay ‘show ready’ for months?
There was a big article in Sunday’s NY Times Real Estate section (The Home That You Can’t Call Your Own) that dealt with the stresses that sellers live under while their Manhattan loft or apartment is offered for sale.
battle metaphors (invasion and Marine barracks)
Teri Karush Rogers did a nice job in getting so many sellers to bare their souls (and their angst); to top it off she closed with a nice quote from me (later on that). Rogers set the scene, contrasting the (obvious) pain of moving to the (insidious) pain of preparing for strangers with money that you want traipsing through your apartment, opening your closets and cabinets:
Tethered indefinitely, they must endure invasion (and banishment) at an hour’s notice, countless rejections by strangers, scrutiny of voyeuristic neighbors and, more frequently these days, the erosion of their own expectations.
Battle fatigue can set in quickly under the strain of keeping one’s home in the meticulous condition of a Marine barracks.
relationship metaphors (searching for a mate)
One seller, Melissa Alcruz, compared her three-month ordeal with a search for a mate. “You have to make the apartment look good, but you can’t look too fussy or high maintenance — your house can’t look like a museum,” said Ms. Alcruz, 37.
Homebound by a difficult pregnancy, Ms. Alcruz nevertheless compulsively cleaned her floors and windows each day while enduring more than a dozen showings and two open houses per week and swallowing backhanded compliments like, “Wow, they did a really great job for a so-so apartment.”
skirmishes, but toddlers may be beyond metaphor
When it comes to controlling clutter, initially and before each showing, parents of young children engage in an ongoing skirmish against action figures, Legos and Exersaucers. It can involve a grueling daily slapstick routine of hiding and retrieving toys, highchairs and strollers.
“We literally took luggage carts of toys down into the lobby of the building every Sunday for open houses — toys, ottoman, laundry baskets, everything we could possibly move out of the apartment — and we would bring it back up” from a storage closet in the lobby on Sunday night, said Ms. Ain, who has a 21-month-old daughter and lived through four months on the market.
“During the weekday showings, I would scramble to get the big toys and stroller out,” she said. “It became very harried. I happened to have a toddler who was not a great sleeper, and I was very emotional and overwrought.”
choices, always choices
Personally, I find that sellers are much better at doing ‘the drills’ that are required, and do them more willingly, if they understand from the beginning that the agent is not making Rule To Make Their Lives More Difficult. When the sellers understand that the readiness of the loft or apartment can be a factor in helping them sell more quickly and/or at a higher price, they “get it”, and they choose it.
It can come to appoint where the sellers are near exhaustion with the effort – or just having a bad day or week. If they have covered all this before, it is easier for the agent to ask the seller how they would like to proceed: do we take it off the market for a while, or do we cut down on appointments for a while, or do we pay to have some housekeeping help for a while, or …?? Most people, if they can get a good night’s sleep over it, continue to make the compromises necessary. Or they are encouraged (not by the agent, exactly, but by the market’s feedback) to drop the price if they can’t maintain the condition.
Agents often under-estimate what is required to keep a loft or apartment “show ready”, especially if there are toddlers or teenagers involved. Some folks are intrinsically neat, but most of us are not.
I has one loft listing for which I did a showing while the teenager (home from school mid-afternoon) was asleep in his room instead of at the library as expected. We left that door closed that day.
I had a seller audibly exhale once we were done with showings, gasping that she could now leave her underwear out again if she wanted to. Sellers are wonderful, God bless ‘em, and almost always hold it together.
Back to the big finale of Rogers’ NY Times article….
If the agent understands that the sellers are under great stress and can tell when they are ready to blow, the agent is more equipped to handle the situation positively.
when all else fails
So when I see a seller is in the red zone, I would rather they not limit appointments or reduce their attention to being “show ready”. I would rather they blow at me (even if I have to lie to myself that is nothing personal ;-)
Sandy Mattingly, an associate broker at Coldwell Banker Hunt Kennedy, encourages his clients to dump their angst on him.
“Part of the agent’s role is to be a blotter for that so they can get it out of their system and go back to running on a smooth level,” Mr. Mattingly said.
Does that feel better? Now let’s sell the loft….
(C) Sandy Mattingly 2007
|
Comments (0) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: Ny Times, Teri Rogers, Sellers Stress, Show Ready
|
Nov. 29, 2006 - marketing 201 / sun and clouds out of alignment at 236 W 26
how not to sell a sun-drenched loft
But what first caught my eye is the disconnect between the first word in the listing and the first picture on the website. (Either I am screwing up the formatting or Corcoran is blocking my ability to cut-and-paste photos from their website. Click on the listing info above to get the pictures.) How many people will look at the first photo and think "sun-drenched"??
Picture #3 is even worse.
windows, windows, windows, and windows
Which is a shame because the unit is sun drenched. Compare the floor plan to the pix and you will see that nearly all of two walls in the 35x17 foot LR are windows, facing south (35') and west (17') well above nearby roof lines.
Having recently been in (different Corcoran agents) The Smiling Blumsteins' listing upstairs in #701 I know that this is a "sunglasses" loft -- when the winter sun is low it is very bright here. So the #601 marketing reflects (no pun intended) the learning of Marketing 101 by addressing right off one of the key distinguishing features of this loft: it is more "sun drenched" than just about every other Manhattan loft on the market. (BTW, #701 is a combined loft extending to the east past the bedroom in #601, totaling 2700 sq ft, and is a beautiful loft. Open House Sunday noon – 1:30)
out of alignment
But Marketing 201 teaches that all marketing efforts must align. It is hard to sell a sun drenched loft to uninformed buyers by taking pictures on a cloudy day.
Bad luck to have a cloudy day. This will not be a big problem for buyers with agents who know the building -- because the floor plan alone will tell them that the sun drenches -- but how many such agents are there? It is classic bad marketing not to re-take your pictures to align with the objective facts -- especially if you lead your marketing with one objective fact.
as long as I have my knife out...
And another thing, while I am in a (hyper?) critical mood. In addition to the "gorgeous light from south and west windows" being contradicted by the marketing photos, the "open professional chef's kitchen" is essentially AWOL. Look again at Picture #3. I assume that really is an "open professional chef's kitchen" at the end of that loooong vista, but does that photo strike you as an "open professional chef's kitchen". Not to me, it doesn't.
The agents with #601 are experienced downtown agents who appear to be successful. Let's see if they re-take the pictures.
© Sandy Mattingly 2006
|
Comments (0) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: Capitol Building, Sundrenched, Open House
|
Sep. 26, 2006 - puzzling price policy / slow death near Union Square
why drop a price?
I have been watching a loft listing at 4 West 16 St (#8A) since it came to market in April, because I listed a unit in this building last year. I thought the original asking price of $1.35mm was pretty aggressive in April, even with what looks like a nice renovation (mine was in 20 year-old original condition, but a little bigger, on a higher floor and on the quiet [rear] of the building).
After not selling in two months, Pat Levy at PruDE dropped the price by $75k, and then by another $50k this week, to $1.225m.
price should help sell (d’oh!)
Which leads me to wonder “why drop a price?” The chorus will answer “to sell the apartment!!” but I was thinking on a different level. Or, on that level, but with emphasis on selling the apartment. The question-within-a-question then becomes “what price change will help sell the apartment?”
As I tell people to whom I pitch a listing, the asking price is the single most important element in setting buyer’s expectations about a listing. Does a $75k price change increase the likelihood of selling the apparent? I don’t think so, but others may have different opinions.
how to ‘suggest’ a seller is negotiable?
One theory appears to be that a small price drop makes sense because if suggests that the seller is negotiable without having to be desperate about that. I don’t agree. I think the fact that a Manhattan apartment has been listed for four months or more is enough of a hint to buyers that he seller may be (should be) negotiable about price.
One theory is that a price change makes sense if it brings ‘new’ buyers to the listing. I agree.
bring in new buyers
The hard part in doing this is to assess where the typical buyers establish price ranges. In this case, an original asking price of $1.35mm is – to me – not so radically different from the intermediate ‘ask’ of $1.275mm to bring in buyers who had not yet considered #8A. Anyone willing to spend $1.35mm is probably already considering anything price at $1.275mm.
In fact, the new price this week of $1.225mm is not very different from $1.275mm either. This is so, even though a move from $1.35mm to $1.225mm might have been enough of a spread to being in ‘new’ buyers – if it had been done directly.
The problem is that doing two price drops to get from $1.35, to $1.225mm risks boring people who are out there and familiar with the inventory. (To buyers who are just beginning to look, there is no problem with the new price being boring, but there are not as many new buyers each week as old buyers.) And anyone paying attention to days-on-market will realize that the listing is borderline ‘tired’.
sellers don’t like price drops that ‘take away’ money from them
Sellers hate to ‘give away’ money – even money that they never had in their pockets (like the $125k that the 8A seller has “lost” by dropping the price to $1.225mm). As a result, many sellers are tempted to drop the price by a minimal amount – if at all.
Which leads to death by small increments.
Most agents have stories about an apartment that finally sold well below where they thought it should have sold for. Often, these stories feature price histories with many small changes. (E.g., the 2 BR that went from $1.2mm to $900k in increments of $50,000.) In retrospect, the agents say that a larger intermediate price change (say, from $1.2mm to $1mm) would have resulted in a higher and quicker sale.
I know it is painful – for sellers and for agents.
pain, all around
I went through this with a seller recently. Our $2.5mm asking price looked good at the start – especially compared to three other apartments in the building. When we finally changed the price, I strongly recommended that we needed a ‘dramatic’ price change in order to capture a different set of buyers. The new price of $2.1mm did that, and we are about to have a signed contract.
In that case, the market place (bless its cold heart) told us that the $2.5mm was not a price that would get us the best price available in the marketplace. So we bit the bullet.
Not to pick on Pat Levy at PruDE, but I don’t think that moving #8A in two steps to $1.225mm will be as effective as doing it once. And – in this market of large inventories – it may not yet be even at the right price to attract the best price available in the market for that unit.
I will continue to watch what happens. Good luck, Pat.
© Sandy Mattingly
|
Comments (0) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: None
|
Sep. 3, 2006 - “vast loft like” apartment at the Stewart House (not!) / marketing mumbo jumbo
Loft-"like" sticks out (badly) in a loft neighborhood
I was cruising the NYTimes.com site (what you sometimes have to do without a true MLS in Manhattan) and came across this listing described as a “[v]ast loft like 2 bedroom apartment”. It happens to be in a neighborhood that has real loft buildings, south of Union Square, but this one is most definitely not a loft building, nor is this apartment “loft like”. But the agent wants the cachet of “lofts” so that is how she is selling it. To me, a peculiar choice.
It is a second floor unit in The Stewart House, 70 East 10 St, which is a fine postwar coop building with a high level of service. What it is not is a loft building. It was built as a coop in 1960 (not as a rental, and later converted) and it looks every bit the 1960 apartment that it is: white brick, low-ish ceilings (8.5 feet??), standard apartment-sized windows.
That’s the main picture in the listing, but check out the pictures in the NYT listing offered by Beth Chase. Please tell me immediately if you think “loft like” when viewing these photos.
Marketing the to wrong buyers?
If I have a buyer looking for anything "like" a loft, I am not taking the buyer to the Stewart House. And anyone who likes the units in The Stewart House is not going to look at lofts. Curious marketing choices….
As it happens I was in this building with a “non loft” buyer about a week ago, looking at a Corcoran listing by Janice Figueroa and Michael Jones. The unit we looked at (see listing data here) was pretty much the opposite of a loft – though it had its own charms as an “apartment”. It is in very good original condition (meaning, nearly 50 year old bathrooms and kitchen). Indeed, the telephone on the far nightstand that you can just barely see in the picture below is a rotary. (If you don’t know what a rotary phone is, ask your mother.) If you go see this unit, say hello to Janice for me.
© Sandy Mattingly 2006
|
Comments (0) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: None
|
Aug. 31, 2006 - Lofts are sexy – marketing “loft-like” apartments
I often get email blasts from agents about their listings, some of which are over the top, some just barely alive. For purposes of this discussion, I am amused by the apartment listings from non-loft neighborhoods that describe the apartments as “loft-like”.
Over-selling to other agents?
Maybe it is just me, but I figure that people who would be interested in “loft-like” apartments in Manhattan would be very interested in actual lofts. And if they were interested in real lofts, they would not be looking for apartments in … say ... the Upper East Side. But enough professional agents disagree that I can keep a collection of listing announcements for “loft-like” apartments that do not seem very much like lofts to me. But maybe they do to people who really like Upper East Side (standard) apartments.
How many points for an open litchen?
Take the Hampton House, a 32 story condominium tower built in 1985, that is at 404 East 79 St. Looking at pictures of listings on the web for this building, the ceiling heights look pretty standard at less than 9 feet. Foroogh Zarinehbaf at Nest Seekers Apartment 4A has offered for sale (though “temporarily off the market” as of last week), with inter-broker emails describing it as “loft-like”. It looks like a pretty standard (cookie-cutter) UES 2 bedroom layout, with an open kitchen, with about 1100 square feet. About the only thing in the description, floor plan or photos that is at all “loft-like” is an open kitchen.
I don’t think so.
A loft antonym?
Then there’s the 1950s East Side former rental building at 150 East 56 St that is about the least “loft-like” buildings imaginable: white brick, small windows, low ceilings. But Matthew Yee at Corcoran is marketing 11B to agents as a giant loft-like 850 square foot one bedroom apartment. In addition to the (obligatory) open kitchen, this one has a large open space for the kitchen, dining area and living room (20x 28 feet), which could be loft-like with a higher ceiling, with bigger windows, with a whole lot of other things it does not have.
No suspense, but I don’t think so.
The incredible shrunken loft (not)
Finally, a nice try. Unit 2C at 331 East 92 St is a studio that looks like no more than 250 square feet, described by Steve Lopez at Benjamin James as an “elegant loft-like studio with soaring high pressed tin ceiling, beautiful exposed brick wall,”, which is a mouthful (especially for a tiny studio). Soaring ceilings sounds like a loft. Lots of authentic lofts have pressed tin ceilings and/or exposed brick walls. And – of course – open kitchens (how could it be otherwise in a tiny studio??). But there is nothing loft-like that can be encompassed within 250 square feet.
Partial credit for the nice try, but I don’t think so.
Hint to buyers: if you want something "like" a loft, don’t shop on the Upper East Side.
© Sandy Mattingly 2006
|
Comments (0) :: Post A Comment! :: Permanent Link
View more entries tagged with: None
|
|
on matters of interest to Manhattan coop or condo loft apartment dwellers, buyers, sellers, and others, especially about New York City real estate
Links
• Home
• View my profile
• Archives
• Email Me
• Blog Manager
|
RSS Blog Feed
