« Condo of the Day: Half a Brownstone in the Slope Tuesday Photo of the Day »

May 16, 2006

Price on Former HOTD Slashed Almost 20%

house
Thanks to a reader who brought to our attention the fact that the price at 899 Union Street has been slashed $500,000 in the aftermath of last month's post questioning why the house was priced $300,000 more than a very similar house in better condition down the block. Don't get us wrong, though: This house is a real beauty in a prime location. We'd be surprised if it didn't move quickly at this price. It's also interesting to look at in comparison to yesterday's HOTD on St. Marks for $2.3 million.
899 Union Street [Corcoran] GMAP P*Shark
Does Not Compute on Union Street [Brownstoner]

Comments

I also not that another Corcoran HOTD on Dean in Crown Heights has been cut after 7 weeks on the markey albeit by a more modest $55,000. This was the one that was owned by the broker I think and has been cut from $1.3 million down to #1.245 million - a 4% drop.

Kind of interesting to see a broker eating his own cooking. Would a broker really recommend such a small reduction to a client after that much time on the market?

Posted by: bkborn at May 16, 2006 11:47 AM

looks like a great home. but union street has got to be one of the most heavily trafficked streets in the area. not exactly the quite, tree-lined block. my 2cents.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 12:33 PM

I agree with 12:33 but I suspect you have a corresponding discount of a few hundred thou compared with the same house if it were on Carroll or Garfield or Montgomery.

Posted by: linusvanpelt at May 16, 2006 12:44 PM

I wouldn't be proud in the least if I used my clout as a frequently read blog to help devalue Brooklyn.

What has been gained, really?

Posted by: Ed at May 16, 2006 1:09 PM

Wow, Bstoner. I did not know that you have to power to devalue brooklyn. Go easy now. Power Corrupts.

Posted by: djr at May 16, 2006 1:18 PM

Maybe Mr B can bring back Ebbets Field!

Posted by: linusvanpelt at May 16, 2006 1:20 PM

Response to Ed.

If a blog like this helps to facilitate the free flow of information in the brooklyn marketplace, then a lot is being gained. Whether you be a buyer, seller or broker, marketplace information and sentiment helps efficient decision-making. I think it is a mistake to view this as an exercise in deflating or devaluing market.

Posted by: crouchback at May 16, 2006 1:22 PM

I wouldn't say that the property was devalued in any way. It seems like a delusional owner or broker just saw the light. Value is determined by what's paid, not the asking price.

Thanks for keeping things (kind of) sane.

Posted by: HC at May 16, 2006 1:24 PM

I think many of us (who view our properties as homes rather than investments) would be better off if prices were lower. Right now I don't see how the "old style" renovator interested in buying a place and putting her sweat and tears into slowly bringing back a house to its previous glory can do so. Everything is just too expensive. So properties are sold to developers, some of whom rip everything out and sheetrock and home depot it to hell and back. Of course that has nothing to do with the price of a house such as in this listing which in these days would always beyond the reach of a new homeowner (altho I guess maybe not back in the 70s).

Posted by: putnam-denizen at May 16, 2006 1:40 PM

Ed,

Don't knock the messenger. The truth has been gained.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 1:46 PM

...and the truth hurts. But no pain, no gain.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 1:48 PM

Here's a couple past Brownstoner Open House picks.

105 Lincoln Pl was highlighted on Brownstoner on 11/4/05 for $2.4m. Sold 2/2/06 for $2.0 mill. 400K or 17% under ask.

How about 548 Third St, highlighted on 4/22/05 for $3.2m. It sold for $2.8m on 9/7/05. 400K or 13% under ask.

Here's a good one. 482 E16th St, highlighted on 11/4/05. Sold for 900K. A mere 275K under ask but a whopping 23% under ask.

Maybe Brownstoner does have the Barron's touch. For those unfamiliar with Barron's its a financial publication that Wall Streeter's read religously every weekend. For the longest time, short selling the cover story company worked like a charm. Barron's was the bear market trader's best friend. To bad we cant short the individual house picks.

Posted by: ItsAWrap at May 16, 2006 1:51 PM

Bravo, bravo, putnam-denizen. I would cheerfully kiss off some of the laughable "paper value" of my house in return for a market where firemen, teachers, and social workers trying to raise a family didn't have to move out of the region or commute from a cheesy townhouse in the Poconos. We "got ours"--barely--a blood, sweat and tears reno that we're still working on 20 years later. Today, a developer or contractor would snap it up, give it a quick Stepford-House makeover, and flip it. As for Mr. B, pointing out delusion and greed hardly amounts to "devaluing" anything...perhaps "correcting" is more like it!

Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at May 16, 2006 1:58 PM

To be clear, inclusion as an Open House Pick does not mean we necessarily think the listing is priced right, only that the house has something interesting or redeeming about it...

Posted by: Brownstoner at May 16, 2006 1:59 PM

Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at May 16, 2006 2:03 PM

Hey Ed,

Yes, it is too bad when people have information on the marketplace. It was so much easier when sellers let the brokers set the price, buyers let the brokers tell them that the price was perfectly fine, and everyone went along their merry way, wasn't it?

Down with Ed. Up with information.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 2:13 PM

I believe that a buyer in the 2 million+ bracket is well able to decide for him or herself if they want to spend that much on a house in any particular neighborhood. The fact that some prices have been dropped is in response to not being able to sell the property as the initial asking price. While Mr. B may get people to take a second look at the values and neighborhood and while it seems everyone in life reads the blog, it isn't in his power to devalue anything. If anyone devalues a property it's the brokers and sellers who set an overly high price in the first place and then have to lower it when the house doesn't sell.

I have a hard time understanding why Ed takes every opportunity to make negative comments, most of them off the mark.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 2:27 PM

re this comment: "Right now I don't see how the "old style" renovator interested in buying a place and putting her sweat and tears into slowly bringing back a house to its previous glory can do so. Everything is just too expensive."
This sounds a little like me. I don't want a total, total fixer-upper but do want something slightly less expensive that we can put our own stamp on. What's hard is figuring out how much the renos will actually cost. We have seen a 4-story brownstone fixer-upper in Prospect Heights which we think we could get for around $1.2 (a few thousand under the asking). It's on a decent block, quite near to the beautiful St. Mark's house going for the overpriced $2.3. The house needs facade work, some structural work, some (but not the whole house) electrical work, new kitchen, the usual cosmetic stuff--painting, plastering, sanding--on first 3 floors, and maybe a gut reno on the top floor (it's pretty raw space with a funky bathroom). Some new windows needed. A deck would be nice, etc. etc. The parlor floor is the nicest, with original burled walnut detail (were painted but then scraped but need to be finished), parquet floors, several slate mantels, etc. We're afraid that even if this is quite a good price based on the surrounding houses, we can't afford the work involved to get it in shape for family living. Any thoughts?

Posted by: anon in PH at May 16, 2006 2:37 PM

I respectfully disagree with 2:27. Buyers and sellers are often exhausted, stressed and under pressure to make a deal. Brokers actively exploit these vulnerabilities. Remember brokers have a first-order interest in completing a sale quickly even if they leave a little moeny on the table for either side.

This forum shines a very bright and revealing light on the property, location and price of the hotds. The comments are generally by well-informed and, most importantly, experienced owners and residents. Even posters with agendas make good, if extreme points that have value. Shilling brokers are the only counter productive element I see.

It is only natural that information of such high quality will impact market one way or the other. 'Stoner gets the ball rolling, but the impact comes from the comments.

Posted by: bkborn at May 16, 2006 2:45 PM

We moved into a fixer-upper that we can't afford to fix up right away. I think the trick is to be able to tolerate the house as is and then to be willing to deal with the inconvenience of fixing things up while you live in it. It's not easy, but life is full of trade-offs. We're just happy that we found something in our neighborhood even if it will be years before our house is our "dream house."

Posted by: clinton hillbilly at May 16, 2006 2:52 PM

Hi bkborn, anon 2:27 responding. I do agree about brokers. I'm not discounting their very large influence. But in terms of Ed's comment that Mr. B is devaluing property all around Bklyn- that I don't believe.And I think the fact that a number of properties have dropped their prices bears me out regarding buyers. I don't know of very many buyers who would look at property without researching the area first. I would think that most buyers go in with a budget, and with the hope of getting the asking price lowered. Some people will go over their budget- and that's where I think brokers prey on their vulnerabilities.

And you are right about the commentary being so important. I've learned more about homes and real estate on this blog than I have anywhere's else. It's just the idea that Mr. B would be taken to task for "devaluing property" is ludicrous. A little realism in housing prices is certainly more than welcome and that's a good thing.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 3:47 PM

amen clinton hillbilly. we've been in our fixer upper about 3 yrs and are finally getting the ugly siding soon. of course it took us a lot of time just to find someone to do the work, and then we had to wait for him to be available, but it allowed us time to save the $. unless you have millions everyting is a trade off. what kills me is the way 2.3 million, (and similar prices) are thrown around like peanuts.

Posted by: anon at May 16, 2006 3:49 PM

Hey 3:49, do you have a frame townhouse where you are getting the siding changed over to original clapboard? Any suggestions on who to use besides T&A woodowork?

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 4:31 PM

My hubby and I want to leave Vermont and move back to Brooklyn, but we haven't been able to afford it...that is until now! With devaluations like this we should be able to save up enough to move home in, like, 76 years!

Give me a break, Brooklyn is doing just fine. I bet the appreciated equity in a lot of these homes is enough to buy and sell my home a dozen times over. We would be thrilled if appreciation in NY slowed to 'normal' for a few years while OUR market spiraled out of control..until then, you are so right ItsAWrap, no teachers or firefighters (or affordable housing advocates) for you!

Posted by: lp at May 16, 2006 4:57 PM

Jeepers, the ladies have twisted themselves into quite a tizzy! I think the PLG troll is one of them!

Look, folks -

There is a legitimate conversation to be had about the direction Brooklyn is taking right now with respect to the rest of the city.

There are detractors who are trying to pull it back - knock down the real estate market, scrap the plans for the arena, etc.

I've said repeatedly that discussions of Brooklyn real estate should be put in context with what is going on in Manhattan. Unless prices in Manhattan are being slashed 20%, we have no reason to jump for joy. In fact, it means we are moving backward.

Now I ask all of you, which direction do you want Brooklyn to move in? Do you want first class restaurants? Do you want first class schools? Do you want culture and arts and sports? Do you want a thriving urban experience mixed in with low-rise, beautiful brownstone blocks?

I like the progress this borough is making, and I'm proud to have been a part of it for more than a decade.

I don't think being a cheerleader for regression does much good.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 5:45 PM

Yes, bravo putnam-denizen and clinton hillbilly for not objecting to putting the sweat in sweat equity. I've lived in my house in CrnHts for 5 years, and am now having my bathrooms done, the first real renovation in my part of the house since I bought it. I just haven't had the money before, or my monies went into the tenant's part of the house, or last year, to a new roof and boiler. I worked out a deal with my contractor, who is a saint, and they are doing the roughing in, and I'm doing all of the finishing (tiling, painting, etc).

The house is a true fixer-upper, and I wouldn't have been able to afford it otherwise, and I really wouldn't have had it otherwise, as I really love restoring, and putting my mark on the house. While I certainly love the really expensive houses, like this one, they are really only eye candy for me, I don't play anywhere near that ballpark. But the HOTD is like going to a house museum - it's always fun to look.

Posted by: Brower Park at May 16, 2006 5:51 PM

Dear Anon in PH, Unless you have reason to believe that your income and/or salary are about to move rapidly south, I say buy the most house you can afford and resign yourselves to living in a less than perfectly renovated home for a while. Just painting and refinishing the floors will give the place a new freshness. If, 2-3 years from now, you just can't bear it, sell and buy an apt. Brownstones appreciate in value based on several factors that go beyond condition, eg. size, not having to deal with a coop board, outdoor space, detail (even unrestored detail) and, perhaps most importantly, rarity -- there are simply never enough on the market to satisfy demand. I live in PH and love the neighborhood. I would, however, be careful about buying too close to the AY development since you don't want to be impacted by construction noise -- and nor does the next person to buy the place, if that's within the next 10 years.

Posted by: Anon at May 16, 2006 5:57 PM

05:45 PM

"...which direction do you want Brooklyn to move in?"

To answer your question - in the long run I want Brooklyn to go BOOM! But as a buyer, I want it to dip in the short run and then bounce back after I close on one of those brown babies. One of those archived 80's/90's NY Times articles mentioned that Clinton Hill (for example) boomed after it became landmarked in 70's/80's then busted slightly in the 90's. Now it has picked up where it left off. I believe it's a trial and error process that spans market cycles. Isn't this what happened to Park Slope? But if I already owned or could afford to buy at the top of the maket, I would dread a dip.

Anybody with me?

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 6:14 PM

Anon in PH, based on 20 years of work on a 3,000-square-foot frame "Victorian," I can inform you with a high degree of accuracy that the cost of your renovations will be in the range of one gazillion-skillion dollars. Hope this helps your planning. Clinton Hillbilly, glad to hear we're not alone in living through it...I do so love those NY Times real estate stories about the couple who stay in a resort during their Xtreme home makeover...hahahaha!

Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at May 16, 2006 6:37 PM

its complete bull that firefighters, teachers, etc... cant afford brooklyn. coney island, east new york, brownsville, and canarsie many other areas are still dirt cheap!!! just those people dont want to buy into those areas. there is a price for everyone!

Posted by: armchair warrior at May 16, 2006 7:19 PM

anon brokers: the sky is falling. pessimists are ruining it (and our percentage fees) for everyone. Brooklyn is doomed.

anon home owners: at some stage between denial and acceptance. Post accordingly.

anon gleeful poor: at last I get to see some pain in the pocket books of the paper wealthy!

reality: prices should continue to move back to a place that better represents the income producing value of the asset. Home prices are out of skew with too many things (salaries, mortgage affordability, rents, investment property prices).

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 7:53 PM

"in the long run I want Brooklyn to go BOOM! But as a buyer, I want it to dip in the short run and then bounce back after I close on one of those brown babies."

Anon 6:14 -- I am with you, with you, with you. Perhaps someday we will be neighbors. : )

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 8:13 PM

This house will sell for around $2. mil.. Corcoran always overprices to get the listings. Minette Stokes did just the same thing on 589 Third Street; pricing it at $3.25 for a $2.6-2.7 mil. house

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 9:09 PM

This house will sell for around $2. mil.. Corcoran always overprices to get the listings. Minette Stokes did just the same thing on 589 Third Street; pricing it at $3.25 for a $2.6-2.7 mil. house

Posted by: marc g at May 16, 2006 9:09 PM

Armchair Warrior, the cheapest Canarsie 1-family clocks in around $335K these days, and the "cheapest" 2-fam around $435K. Cheap? I guess it's all relative...or relatively insane. It amazes me that anybody actually buys these ratshacks on the far side of the moon for those kind of $$$...often, I suspect they do it through predatory lending policies and "0% down" shyster tactics. It's hardly a bargain-priced distant shire of happy real-estate hobbits out there.

Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at May 16, 2006 9:55 PM

anon 4:31, email me directly and i'll give you the name and number of the company we are using, they come highly recommended from an ex-coworker of mine who lives in ditmas and she was extremely anal so i figured he must be good. her house is done beautifully and my husband can be picky and was happy with his work. of course we'll see how ours goes shortly. oh, yeah, it's a frame, unfortunately we were already priced out of the brownstone market when we bought. i can tell you the owner is extremely professional, always returns calls and got us a quote, on a few different jobs we inquired about, right away, unlike anyone else. he has been a pleasure to deal with so far and hasn't even started the job yet.

Posted by: ANON at May 16, 2006 10:11 PM

Armchair warrior, you may very well be right about the housing in the areas you mentioned, but the fact that teachers, firefighters, et al are relegated to the edges of the universe in the city they protect,serve, and educate, really sucks. So they are good enough to risk their lives, protect and teach in our beloved city, but not paid well enough, therefore not good enough, to live in that city, except for the outer reaches, now that is truly criminal. The inherent indifference to that fact, and the dismissive *well, they can move to East New York* kind of attitude in your statement, is also rather frightening, as well.
Not to mention elitist and condescending.

Try as we might, we can't all be rich. Is there no room in brownstone Brooklyn for the rest of us?

Posted by: Brower Park at May 16, 2006 11:54 PM

Is there room for lower-middle-income folks in Manhattan?

Posted by: Ed at May 17, 2006 12:20 AM

If you want to afford an area that has become prime real estate, you have to start looking for middle-income housing.

The solution is not devalue brownstones.

Posted by: Ed at May 17, 2006 12:23 AM

Ed,

If you can't win a debate, you have to look for better arguments.

The solution is not devalue reason.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 17, 2006 1:10 AM

Brower Park- perfect!

Anon 1:10- priceless!

Posted by: Anonymous at May 17, 2006 10:03 AM

Quick question: the listing says that the house was recently used as a two-family, with a two-bedroom rental. But I looked at the floor plan and cannot figure out where the rental unit is. The top floor has a bathroom and three bedrooms (so I suppose you could use the large bedroom as a living space) but where's the kitchen?

Posted by: gretchen at May 17, 2006 10:37 AM

i
I own a limestone on woodruff ave. Is it considered PLG or Ditmas Park?

Posted by: anon at May 17, 2006 11:20 AM

I was just wondering about that 11:50 point myself the other day. I was thinking "What if I hadn't been able to find anything in Bklyn?" Would I go to Queens or the Bronx? What are prices and neighborhoods like there? And oh yeah...Staten Island.

Posted by: Yente at May 17, 2006 12:21 PM

Unfortunately even the so-called cheap neighborhoods are becoming more and more expensive. It's easy to say go find a cheaper neighborhood, but there is a social and economic impact the city will pay that will effect everyone, at all levels. In an earlier thread someone posted quite wonderfully about the city as an organic whole, and how each part affects the other. Maybe we get too caught up in the money and real estate aspect to the point where we forget that the city is greater than the sum of its parts. If nothing else, cities exist, not as parasitic entities, but as symbiotic ones.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 17, 2006 12:30 PM

"Try as we might, we can't all be rich. Is there no room in brownstone Brooklyn for the rest of us?"

So who is it exactly that *deserves* to live in non-brownstone Brooklyn? What would your criteria be? A Goodness Committee, maybe?

Maybe it could just be a matter of choice! Maybe the teachers, firefighters, etc. who like beautiful period townhouses could have places made for them in the brownstone belt. And then the ones who prefer ugly small apartments in Coney Island -- why, they could have their choice too! And everyone could be happy!

The bottom line is, we're in the situation we're in because more people want to live in Brooklyn than used to. This is a happy circumstance with bad side effects, but I don't see how you equitably solve it -- other than simply paying civil servants, cops, etc., more money.

Posted by: linusvanpelt at May 17, 2006 1:40 PM

Who is the troll who keeps addressing me personally with trashy, empty comments? I know I probably read you to filth in the past for co-opting my identity, but would you mind trying to contribute to this blog in a valuable way please?

Posted by: Ed at May 17, 2006 3:52 PM

Linus- I don't think that Brower Park was saying anyone deserves to live wherever they want. But they are saying that there has to be some way of being fair- no one wants to live in a falling down apartment with roaches and the ceiling hanging down, in a neighborhood that is marginal, and lacking amenities. But as gentrification spreads, it seems the folks with money seem to think on they deserve to line in beautiful neighborhoods and tough on the rest of us. We should just get out the way quietly, without complaining, so as not to hurt your property investments. Which are driving us out. Somehow there has to be a middle ground. And as far as firefighters, cops and teachers- we all depend on them. They deserve more money, but some kind of housing program set up for them would be good too. Amalgamated Housing was originally set up for teachers, and one of the buildings was going to be for firefighters. The City used to do this to help them. And they deserve it.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 17, 2006 4:30 PM

Ed Ed Ed,

Your comments on this thread have been empty, vacuous, and devoid of reason. They deserved no better in reply.

But to contribute to the debate, in the discussion on teachers/firemen/police officers/etc. being priced out of markets, I read some time ago about a hitch that developed once it came out that a developer had misrepresented. Apparently he had received a special zoning waiver from the city to build larger housing under the condition that some or all of it (I forget which, but it was a defined %age) be sold to teachers. And then once he obtained his permit, he built large, and sold to whoever wanted to pay.

So, the city is attempting somewhat to deal with the issue. There was also a bit about inclusionary zoning a couple of years back that I'm not sure where exactly it went. Also, New York does offer new teachers up to $14,000 to defray housing expenses.

However, before we do turn all maudlin, it does bear keeping in mind that neither police officer nor firefighter is as dangerous of a job as being a cab driver (you can look it up). But nobody ever makes noises about honoring them or worry about what part of town they get shuffled off to.

But, the broader point about affordable housing is a meritous one and a salient fact that makes the housing market pricing definitely seem out of whack. That, for all the brouhaha over housing as an investment and a market and your livelihood if you're a broker, at the end of the day housing is a place to live. And if your places to live are too expensive for the people who you have to live there, then you're going to have a problem.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 17, 2006 5:01 PM

Ed,

p.s. Don't put up nonsense posts and they cry foul when you get nonsense in return. It really does smack of the children who killed their parents and then cried mercy on the court because they were orhpans.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 17, 2006 5:06 PM

I guess I don't see too many cab drivers making a job out of rescuing people. I've been thrown out of too many cabs because they didn't feel like crossing the Brooklyn Bridge to be sympathetic.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 17, 2006 5:41 PM

Ideally,(and sadly, probably not in this reality) most neighborhoods would be a mixture of incomes and occupations, especially in Brooklyn. The most vibrant neighborhoods are those with a variety of all kinds of people with all kinds of occupations. I don't think we as adults or especially as children are well served by being around nothing but rich people, or nothing but poor people, or nothing but whatever income in between. The same goes for racial, ethnic and religious groups. When the world works right, we all learn so much from each other, and all benefit.

On the flip side, when we feel that we are entitled to whatever we want, including neighborhoods, just because we have money, and our *I have mine, screw you, there's always East New York* attitude is the song of the day, we've really gotten off the path.

I never have said, and don't believe, that we can all live where we want- that's absurd. As is linus' rather obnoxious "Goodness Committee". To say that teachers, firefighters, cab drivers, and thousands of other kinds of workers should have the opportunity to either stay in or move into more central parts of Bklyn, should be one of those Duh! moments - so obvious that one shouldn't even have to say it. There shouldn't have to be set-asides, or special buildings, or laws passed, or some kind of housing apartheid. There should be quality housing, both old and new, for high, middle and low income levels available in most of Brooklyn. I don't see that happening, but that should be a goal to work for, not a further excuse for the status quo.

Posted by: Brower Park at May 17, 2006 6:05 PM

"Your comments on this thread have been empty, vacuous, and devoid of reason. They deserved no better in reply."

How about backing your argument, pendejo.

Posted by: Ed at May 17, 2006 9:38 PM

Stop, Ed. Let it go already- we don't need anymore threads being ruined or people dropping out because we can't stay on topic.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 18, 2006 1:09 AM

Hey Ed Expletive,

Here's the sum total of what you have, "contributed" to this thread. Basically you've accused Mr. B. of trying to undercut the value of Brooklyn properties. And then insinuated it was so that he could then afford to buy a brownstone in Brooklyn. This, DESPITE THE FACT THAT HE OWNS A BROWNSTONE IN BROOKLYN!

You just don't make one lick of sense. I mean, that's even ignoring the deeper substance of what you're saying which is that the housing market is better off with less information. That markets would function better the less people knew. AND it ignores the reality of this entire blog. Mr. B. does not post things vindictively. He posts things that interest him, and, by the amount of traffic, I guess interest others. But it's never malicious. And if you want to impute any sort of agenda I would say, if anything, it is the promotion of Brooklyn Brownstone living, not the degragation of it.

Sorry you asked? Or do you have some other smart-assed comment to make, pendejo?

-----------------------------

I wouldn't be proud in the least if I used my clout as a frequently read blog to help devalue Brooklyn.

What has been gained, really?

Posted by: Ed at May 16, 2006 01:09 PM

Is there room for lower-middle-income folks in Manhattan?

Posted by: Ed at May 17, 2006 12:20 AM

If you want to afford an area that has become prime real estate, you have to start looking for middle-income housing.

The solution is not devalue brownstones.

Posted by: Ed at May 17, 2006 12:23 AM

Posted by: Ed at May 17, 2006 03:52 PM

Posted by: Anonymous at May 18, 2006 10:12 AM

Oh brother! You're misreading me completely. I said nothing about Brownstoner's personal real estate pursuits whatsoever. Frankly, that's none of my business.

Yes, I do think that this site is interested in undermining the trajectory of the Brooklyn market - why else have they initiated a gazillion threads stating that particular properties are "overpriced". That's not neutral language - so it's naive to call it mere dessimination of information for the good of the free market. It's pushing an agenda of price containment and using this blog to further that agenda.

I merely question the value of such agenda. Why is that so pernicious?

Posted by: Ed at May 18, 2006 11:59 AM

« Condo of the Day: Half a Brownstone in the Slope Tuesday Photo of the Day »

May 16, 2006

Price on Former HOTD Slashed Almost 20%

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions