Novo Takes a Nosedive

keep chopping maybe another 20% will spark some interest

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:04 AM

People are breaking their contract and bailing.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:07 AM

lets assume 10% downpayment for someone in contract, price decrease 15% => negative equity (and don't forget closing costs)

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:08 AM

this is great news. glad to see developers slashing prices to get them sold.

the fewer houses on the market here in nyc, the less we will feel the effects of the housing bust.

if everyone slashed and cut inventory, nyc could actually almost entirely avert the housing bust, in fact.

the low inventory so far is what has kept us insulated.

if there is nothing to sell, prices can't plummet so much.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:19 AM

11:19 I'm sold on your theory. Call me when the 3brs in Novo are down to $350k.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:23 AM

Keep going. Still needs another 25% cut to make it sell.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:26 AM

the best you can hope for is a 3 bed for 800K, 11:23.

this is still NYC afterall.

the novo might be ugly, but it's not in omaha.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:29 AM

i wouldn't buy one of these places, but i'd be happy to rent there and i've heard a lot of these units are going to be rentals. anyone know if rental listings are up and/or available anywhere?

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:34 AM

its true - people will rent no matter how butt ugly the place.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:36 AM

11:29:

"the best you can hope for is a 3 bed for 800K"

It's going to get much lower than that. It would rent for about $2500 a month. With a maintenance payment of $600 a month, that leaves $1900 to cover the cost of the interest, to be priced correctly.

$1900 in interest (AFTER a tax benefit) works out to a mortgage on $450K apartment.

$450K for a three bedroom in the NOVO is the correct price.

LOTS MORE TO FALL

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:37 AM

The Novodone!

Wow - some of these prices are still $740 and even $899 a foot! now that's what i call optimism...

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:38 AM

gabby commenting on the Novo. say it ain't so.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:40 AM

I broke my contract and got out - even at a loss :-( but now the price is way below what I would have ended up paying

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:44 AM

Your rental prices are a little out of whack 11:37.

I own a two buildings in Park Slope...granted a slightly better location than this, but to give you an idea my 2 bedroom duplex rents for $4200 a month and my 1 bedrooms rent for $2000 a month.

If you think you can rent a 3 bedroom in this location for $2500, you are mistaken. I'd say $3500 to be more accurate.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:45 AM

There are only 12 units left to sell.

All the naysayers can suck it.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:46 AM

Am feeling so relieved right now that we bought a house in an up and coming but more affordable neighborhood, instead of a condo at the Novo. We almost went for one of the 3BR's here. It would have hurt us financially with the huge delays in finishing this building, having to pay for several months to a year's additional rent before being able to close and move in. That sucks. I'd never consider buying pre-construction ever again. I have a friend who had to wait several months with nowhere to live after buying a pre-construction condo and they didn't finish it on time.

They just need to finish the thing so they can market it properly. As for prices, has anyone seen other 3BR condos in Park Slope in PS 321 district? They cost anywhere from $300,000 to $700,000 more than these and are the same size or just a little bigger. I always thought the Novo was pretty reasonably priced. I'm not saying that makes sense or we should all be happy about it. Just pointing it out.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:46 AM

You can't even get a 3BR in Windsor Terrace or South Slope which border Park Slope, for $2500 a month. Much less directly in Park Slope in PS 321.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:48 AM

I also have 4 studios in North Slope that each rent for between 1700-1800.

You underestimate prices in Park Slope.

This location is hot and only getting hotter.

In the next couple months, the owners of an East Village nightclub are opening a club here on 3rd and the Union Hall owners are also opening a club. Coffee shops, artist studios, restaurants. Lots of young people will want to live in this area so close to trains.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:49 AM

once the rooftop restaurant in Le Bleu opens up, NOVO apts will fly off the shelves!

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:51 AM

We pay 3000 for our 2 bed just a block from here. and it's a dump.

whoever said 3 bedrooms for 2500 are CRAZY.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:51 AM

The 1BR is still 565k after the cut?? How did they even manage to sell about 60 units with that price point? The unsold 80 or so apartments will continue to sit without further price reduction.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:52 AM

"There are only 12 units left to sell."

Aren't there about 150 units in Novo? And only 60 or less in contract?

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:52 AM

one idiot rents his studios for a retarded price and posts about it every day.

boring.

I have friends that rent a 3bed for $2800 down the street from the NOVO.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:55 AM

"I have friends that rent a 3bed for $2800 down the street from the NOVO."

Is it in a brand new building loaded with amenities?

apples and oranges.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:58 AM

11.52 - what the broker means is out of the 13 units he has to sell there are just 12 left to be sold.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:59 AM

you've been hockin that 3 bedroom for quite a while now marion.

still no takers.

big shocker.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 11:59 AM

Better buy now...looks as though things on Wall Street are doin just fine!

"Financial stocks roared back on Tuesday morning as a pair of better-than-expected earnings reports from Wall Street’s biggest firms spurred an opening rally ahead of a likely rate cut from the Federal Reserve."

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:01 PM

We live in "Greenwood Heights" (what used to be called "by the cemetery") and we have a 3 bedrooms, 2 baths for just over $2700 a month.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:01 PM

Even though I think the right rental price for a 3BR on 4th ave would be $2500-3000 a month (making the right sale price about $500K)--

If you want to say it would be $3500 to rent (the most anyone on this board said) -- then the MOST it should sell for is about $600K.

STILL LOTS MORE TO FALL.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:02 PM

umm too creepy. no thanks.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:03 PM

Thank YOU, 12:01.

It's obvious from everyone posting that a 3 bedroom near novo for 2800 is an anomoly. Not the norm. I love the way that dude knows one person's rent in the area and assumes every 3 bedroom must be the exact same.

My gf and I pay 2100 for a 1 bedroom on 5th ave. No way 3 beds are 2500 or we'd be in one.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:04 PM

i believe someone said they rented a 2 BED for 4200. how is 3500 the highest one?

my fiance and 2 roommates pay $4500 for a 3 bedroom on 7th and union. it's 2 floors, with 2 baths. definitely not glamorous though

definitely prime slope, but still...

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:11 PM

"We pay 3000 for our 2 bed just a block from here. and it's a dump."

Then you are an idiot. Enjoy your overpriced dump.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:13 PM

Marion you have to drop the whole "rent for one year then take ownership" thing. You're trying to benefit entirely from the tax benefits and giving none to the buyer. Plus how on earth do they lock down a mortgage rate that way.

I agree, stop hocking your damaged wares around here. Get real.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:14 PM

"looks as though things on Wall Street are doin just fine!"

A one day bounce, woohoo. The fundamentals are still in the toilet.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:15 PM

They said $2,000 a month for the 2BR nearby that's a dump, 12:13.

Not $3,000.

Nice way to attempt to negate a real actual comp that was presented.

Here's the point they made: $2,000 a month for a 2BR that's a dump means there's no way a brand new 3BR with good amenities would rent for $2,500 a month.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:17 PM

Actually 12:15....if you understood what happened today...yes...there might be a few other banks that might go under...smaller ones. But do you know what that means for the bigger ones who will gobble them up???!!!

HUGE profits and bonuses for people at Goldman, JPMorgan and a few select others which will TROUNCE records past.

This economy is all about the haves and the have nots. There will be people on Wall Street this year who lose their jobs, and their will be still others who will have record paydays.

The world is not over. Take a breath.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:19 PM

Read the posting 12:17:

"We pay 3000 for our 2 bed just a block from here. and it's a dump."

Not $2000. Nice way to make stuff up.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:25 PM

Oh 12:19, your naiveté is so cute.

It's not as if the few who will scoop up the big bonuses are buying in Novo.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:27 PM

Wow, sounds EDGY!!!!

"I also have 4 studios in North Slope that each rent for between 1700-1800.

You underestimate prices in Park Slope.

This location is hot and only getting hotter.

In the next couple months, the owners of an East Village nightclub are opening a club here on 3rd and the Union Hall owners are also opening a club. Coffee shops, artist studios, restaurants. Lots of young people will want to live in this area so close to trains."

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:28 PM

1. The exterior look of a building has little to do with the price of the apartments inside - sorry but the common exterior is very far down the list of things that the average buyer is going to be considering

2. The biggest issue for these apartments and ALL housing in NYC and countrywide - is financing - these will not sell if you cant get financing simple as that.

3. I for one am happy the prices are coming down - not because I rent - I actually own a 3br condo a few blocks away, nor because I get joy out of other people's (i.e. richer then me) pain (like many here seem to)But because the prices were not sustainable relative to incomes. - Markets can work - this is what is supposed to happen and in the long run improves housing for all.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:37 PM

Yep I made a mistake 12:25, I'd read it wrong. But whatevah. I have a friend looking for a nice 2BR in Park Slope and she can't find one for $2,500. So good luck with your search. Rentals on larger places become very in demand and only go higher when fewer families are buying. You know that, right? You should actually be hoping these units sell, not hoping they don't sell.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:40 PM

Please keep in mind that today's "bounce" comes at a price. The Fed's intervention was paid for through debt and a disregard for the inflation that everyone is feeling in daily expenditures.

Funny how yesterday, everyone was disregarding Wall Street's influence on NYC real estate and today's bounce in financials is resulting in announcements of "All is well in NYC RE".

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:42 PM

i am going to buy one of these units, then fill it with concrete.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 12:47 PM

Goldman's revenues were down a third, its profits were down by 50%. Lehman's profits were down 57%. Lehman is firing 5500 employees. How do you figure that Goldman's bonuses are going to be huge when, in its CEO's words, market conditions remain "clearly very weak"?

Oh, I forgot -- all news is good news for NYC real estate.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 1:18 PM

Wow, Park Slope co-ops tanking. Just like I said they would. And this is only the beginning. Hold on to your strollers Slopers, its going to be a bumpy ride.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 1:23 PM

"Please keep in mind that today's "bounce" comes at a price. The Fed's intervention was paid for through debt..."

Yes, which will ultimately come out of everyone's pockets through taxes.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 1:26 PM

"Wow, Park Slope co-ops tanking."

Condos.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 1:32 PM

Actually the Fed's intervention does not necessarily add to debt - it depends on how the market values the securities that the Fed is assuming over the next few years - I may be mistaken but the Resolution Trust Corporation that was formed to deal with the last housing bust/S&L crisis actually made $ for the treasury.

That being said- there is no question that in totality, the Fed/Govt moves are inflationary. But even if so - inflation will help housing prices (although not home owners)

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 1:34 PM

What are you talking about? Inflation raises long-term interest rates. Higher long-term interest rates do not help housing prices.

Do you mean that inflation will make it look like the price of houses has risen even though, in inflation-adjusted terms, they've stayed flat or fallen? If so, it's a pretty stupid definition of helping housing prices.

You've actually got this exactly wrong. Inflation hurts housing prices, but helps home owners -- at least ones with fixed-rate mortgages, since they get to pay off their debt with cheap money.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 1:39 PM

yes - I am talking about appearance - I do not welcome or encourage inflation - it was essentially an aside (b/c here people are talking about nominal prices in condos), not an economic analysis arguing the benefits of inflation.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 1:44 PM

I've been saying it for two years now.

Co-ops will fare better.

Condos will do more poorly.

We already saw how condo maintenance fees are skyrocketing.

While people in co-ops have 6 months to a year of money in a savings account (a prerequisite for most co-ops) and have seen almost ZERO zo-ops fall into foreclosure because of it.

The old standby, your friend and enemy the co-op will prevail.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 1:51 PM

1:51 -you can say it for the next 100 years it won't make it true.

Housing prices move together in a single market - with only small differences related to the ownership structure.

In reality housing crisis in the past have seen coop failures (and if not outright failures, then huge problems related to refinancing the underlying mortgages).

Some condos will do better then the overall market and others will do worse and the same will apply to Coops - it depends on the building you are referring.

However, there is nothing so inherently better about one ownership type over another that would prevent substitution should the spread between one or another develop. As for maintenance fees - both coops and condos have faced huge increases in recent years because of 1st the run up in insurance costs and now b/c of fuel costs.

I assume you live in a coop and therefore want to believe that you are somehow more immune to the market forces then your condo friends - but it just isnt true - no one is going to pay 25% more to live in a coop (or a condo) simply based on the structure - people search for a home and then buy what they like and can afford.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:05 PM

zo-ops alwayz fair bedder

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:07 PM

The important thing here is that it is located in Park Slope, which is clearly showing signs of pricing strain. I think these prices need to take another big nose dive to find their selling point.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:10 PM

yez, tru dat.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:11 PM

Here is an example of what a smart person does with the economic news and what a not so smart person does with it.

1. The not so smart person whines and cries on an anonymous blog about how bad the economy is and how the world is coming to an end and that all homeowners are stupid.

2. A smart person buys stock of Bear Stearns for $2 on Monday morning and sells on Tuesday afternoon for $6.80 (it's current price).

I'm so glad I'm in category number 2.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:11 PM

you managed to buy the stock??

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:20 PM

I did. Just made 400K in one day.

Those who say the world is coming to an end, just need to think a little more creatively.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:30 PM

yes, except bsc never actually traded as low as $2. so you must be in category 3 (the most populous one): liars.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:31 PM

Oops. I mean I bought it for $2.54.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:34 PM

try again. all time low was 2.84. you must have a badass trader to time that trade.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:38 PM

I do in fact have a badass trader.

It's called my boyfriend.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:40 PM

Okay, so here's a question for you finance savvy types. I have a 30 year fixed second loan for $480,000 at 7.1% and I have the option to convert this to a variable rate loan at prime minus a quarter, which would make the interest rate 5%. This would save me around $650 a month. Of course prime will eventually rise again and if I wanted to switch back to a 30 year fixed again there is no guaranteeing at that time that I would get 7.1%. Any advice? Snide comments?

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:44 PM

Your boyfriend trades badasses?

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 2:45 PM

Please. Let's return to bashing Novo and ignore the lying BSC trader.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 3:32 PM

The "trader" has been disproven on another string on this site.

Trader is a liar.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 3:44 PM

the trader makes more than everyone on this thread combined.

with or without the bear stocks.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 3:48 PM

i thought trading bear hide was banned?

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 4:17 PM

Novo sales in slo-mo.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 4:57 PM

12 left.

that's not too shabby.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 5:10 PM

Park Slope is so fringe.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 5:43 PM

80+ left.

Shabby.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 5:47 PM

Novo contains 151 apartments.

63 appear to have sold.

Looks like there are quite a few more than 12 left.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 5:56 PM

12 are left.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 6:01 PM

I like Trader Vic's.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 7:04 PM

If we add the one in contract to the 63 sold units, and subtract that from 151, we get 87 units left to sell.

Math is fun!

Unless you are a broker for Novo.

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 7:15 PM

Seriously, no one will ever move in to Novo. What kind of building takes 78 years to build?

Posted by: guest at March 18, 2008 7:50 PM

Be careful of the skewed math-- the ones that are being discounted were overpriced to start (because of a lot of outdoor space). They are now in line w/the original ones. It's about 650 a square foot-- still way under the 900 a square foot in ps 321.

Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 9:38 AM