Condo of the Day: Prices Cut at the Fusion

Sweet, Gabby, thanks for saving the day.

Your vigilance on the condo-price-cutting front is a massive public service. I, for one, could never get around to checking all of this shit on my own. And I need to know.

Furthermore, your meta-point about all of the bad buildings and evil developers is well supported by your tireless reporting.

Keep up the fabulous work. Love it!

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 12:45 PM

Need more reports on falling condo prices. Not enough evidence yet. Need more info. I need to read more reports of Condos. Condo-sitings and the like. I need more of that.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 12:51 PM

not everyone can:

a. afford a house
b. need to be wasteful - lots of singles and young couples in the south slope have no need for a house

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 12:58 PM

Condo (pre-war AND new) prices are dropping like crazy, BUT IT'S BECAUSE they were insanely overpriced to begin with. Everyday I get the Streeteasy and Natefind updates with the latest batch of price cuts, and in DESIRABLE neighborhoods.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 12:59 PM

"ho-hum interior finishes" is code for "cheap"?

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 1:01 PM

I haven't been inside but the bldg. actually looks pretty good from the street.
The problem might have to do with the location. 20th St. has 2 way traffic & it's a designated truck route. So if you're spending up to a $ million, you may not want to live on a block where you'll never open your windows because of the incredible noise and soot. There are too many South Slope/ Greenwood condo options on nicer blocks.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 1:01 PM

the interior finishes are VERY cheap and already showing wear in the models. that and the location are why these aren't selling.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 1:07 PM

I don't think the point is evil developers, it is about stupid and/or greedy developers. Not just Brownstoner, but the NYT has published articles about the large number of condos with sloppy finishes and unhappy owners. Why do builders think that people will pay $$$$$ for cheap and shoddy work? This is a capitalist society, people who produce the best product will be rewarded. Unfortunatlely these ugly buildings, once build stay around a long time.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 1:07 PM

gimmie another 100k off

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 1:09 PM

keep on chopping, we're almost halfway to the sweet spot

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 1:17 PM

actually what is happening now with the price chops are not what's going on in the pre-war market.

there is VERY little inventory of nice pre-war homes for sale.

not the case with new condos.

i've been sayin it for years. give it another 2 years and pre-war will once again be the preference of most new yorkers.

not only are these places ho-hum to start with...imagine what they'll be like in 5 years???

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 2:06 PM

if these get to $400 psf, they'll be a better deal. they are over priced for that location, that's all.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 2:24 PM

Please 2:06 keep deluding yourself, the prices of pre and post war housing move in tandem. The reason why you can so easily see the price drops on the condos is because the owners cant delist them, since they are vacant.

Pre war preference or not, the overall housing market (except for maybe some fringe stuff at the real bottom and extreme top) move together and while a nice pre-war apartment may get a premium, the spread will remain fairly consistent so that as the new stuff falls, the old stuff will be bound to follow.

Sorry but except for a couple of freaks here, most people are pragmatic enough to realize that when shopping for a home for their family, a 30% premium for some pre-war detailing just isnt worth it.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 2:41 PM

Agree about the negative aspects of 20th street.

I'll bet these would have sold already if they had been on 21st, which is a very nice quiet block w/ a good mix of new condos, in both new and old buildings.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 2:41 PM

Interior finishes, sure... also, maybe people don't want to pay half a million or a million bucks to live in a "not so bad" building" on an "ugly duckling block."

Plus, psychologically, those price cuts are basically meaningless. The low end is still about $500k and the high end is still a little over a million. Why not take it to $450k even, and $999k? And, in one price cut rather than three? It would attract buyers much more effectively, and given how long these have sat on the market, probably end up saving the seller some money.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 2:51 PM

pre-war = bergdorf goodman
new construction = walmart

you choose

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 2:53 PM

Once you cross 15th or 16th street, pretty much everything is ugly in "South Slope."

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 3:12 PM

so much pre war is just so boring. it is so obvious. not everyone loves pre-war.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 3:20 PM

no, not everyone loves pre-war you are correct.

but almost no one loves homes where the floors buckle, moldings crack and drywall heaves within months of purchase, either.

like 75% of all new construction.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 3:35 PM

3:35,
i looked at property in brooklyn for 2 years before buying, and really did not see these problems in the condos i looked at. in fact, the real crap i saw was prewar. ridiculous cut up rooms, bad kitchens, horrible baths. just stupid layouts. almost everything needed to just be gutted, it was so tasteless and horrible and in bad disrepair.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 4:06 PM

2:53 PM = clueless

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 4:24 PM

Agreed with 4:06. The old apartments in the old housing stock throughout brownstone neighborhoods made it very hard to find something that you could actually see yourself living in. So much ancient junk. I used to think, 'well that's just the way it is with these old neighborhoods'. Regretable. But then I discovered this website where people celebrate this stuff?

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 4:56 PM

apparently you not only discovered this website, but also decided to post ignorant comments on it as well.

outdated decor is completely different than poor construction.

you don't find the latter in most maintained pre-war buildings.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 5:13 PM

I've seen this comment about 'poor construction' before applied across the board to new buildings? Where is there any substantial evidence for this other than 'I know someone who's apartment...'

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 5:18 PM

5:13. I've seen this blanket claim before, that new buildings are categorically poorly constructed. Apart from the question of how you could know this, do you have any evidence at all? Other than 'I know someone whose apartment...'

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 5:40 PM

5:40 -there was an article in the Times about it.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 5:59 PM

there was indeed.

very recently, in fact.

and rewording your comment a half hour later, 5:40 really didn't make it any more effective the second time around, btw.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 7:51 PM

Ah, yes. The Times. Then it must be true. Guess you have your case made, one article in the NY Times.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 8:25 PM

The reason they aren't selling is that these are the worst layouts I have ever seen. Whoever designed this place should loose their architects license.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 11:18 PM

I have looked at a good number of these new South Slope/Greenwood Heights developments. One thing that I alway find a little disturbing is that all seem to be using "the view" as a selling point,but when you actually stand out on one of the balconies or look out the window you see nothing but old silver coated tar roofs. Seven flights up is not high enough to get past that incredibly depressing landscape. Twenty maybe. Looking east you see the back ass side of all the new 12 story construction on Fourth Ave up until 23rd Street. After Prospect Avenue every street is a jumbled mishmash of aesthetically challenged buildings. That includes the small scale stuff that's being built right now. By the time 20th Street comes around, if ever, their 421-A will have expired and the original buyers will have bailed out.

Posted by: guest at November 29, 2007 11:54 PM

that condo building on 23rd street by the cemetary has 1 bedrooms for $400k.

there's a 2 bedroom condo with a private rook deck on 21st street for $415.

thus, a 1 bedroom in this area at 458k seems ridiculous to me.

Posted by: guest at November 30, 2007 10:42 AM

I have seen plenty of new construction throughout Brooklyn and for me, I did not like what I saw. I was shopping for 2BD/2BA condo and my major complaint was the low ceiling heights and thin party walls separating adjacent owner units. I passed on condos being offered in townhouses because that is what I currently live in and the floors and ceilings and walls carry noise as if they are paper. I moved into a pre-war building with the interior redone. Nice thick concrete floors and ceilings and high ceilings. The party walls are still there but I'm thinking about "Quiet Rocking" it.

2:53 I agree with your view, as far as when it comes to Brooklyns 2BD/2BA stock.

Posted by: guest at November 30, 2007 2:54 PM

FYI...Corcoran just lowered prices AGAIN!...lowest price condo is now $439K...

Originally, one of the units (3A) started at $599K in April of 2007...was then reduced in September to $549K...then in November reduced to $494K...and is now listed at $449K...

Only about $100K more to go before these units are listed at fair market value (should be in the mid-$300Ks)

Posted by: guest at January 15, 2008 4:23 PM