« Open Thread Eva Daniels Shutters Fulton Storefront »

January 23, 2009

712 Degraw Sells for $1,150,000

sold
Six months and one price cut after it hit the market, the three-story house at 712 Degraw Street in the Lower Slope closed for $1,150,000. The listing said that the interior was in "great shape" and had "lots of detail," in which case it sounds like a decent deal. Most interesting of all, the deal was struck "post-Lehman," on November 6, 2008 to be exact.
House of the Day: 712 Degraw Street [Brownstoner] GMAP P*Shark
712 Degraw Street Listing [Leslie J. Garfield]

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/8080

Comments

Funny to go back and read all the comments from the naysayers when something actually sells. That said, I hope they didn't pay the broker more than 2-3% for that shoddy piece of crap ad.

BHO, cornerbodega, Miss Muffett????? Hellllooooooooooo???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 9:38 AM

Sold for $245,000 below ask. Score one for the bears.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at January 23, 2009 9:44 AM

Jesus... 2%. Even at that rate, the broker pulled in $23,000. That ad (and the whole website for that matter) is absurd if that's the sort of return they get on a sale.

Not saying brokers shouldn't make money -- just that $23,000 is an enormous chunk of change for ALL THE WORK they put into the sale.

Posted by: tybur6 at January 23, 2009 9:47 AM

Another one for Team Bear! Not bad. Congrats. Sometimes I pull for the underdog.

PS Dave - you coulda got this puppy for what you overpaid in the Stuy.

(Team Loon)

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 23, 2009 9:47 AM

"...Team [Bull] BXeXaXrX..." - 'scuse me.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 23, 2009 9:52 AM

BHO...I didn't pay anywhere near that in Bed Stuy. You obviously have no clue whatsoever about real estate prices.

As a clue, my house was HOTD once. It did not go for the asking price.

Why do I continue to engage the loons?

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 9:53 AM

Wait, the house last changed hands for $667,000 in 2003, and you're telling me that selling for $1,150,000 five years later demonstrates the bearish quality of the market? Huh?

Posted by: squaredrive at January 23, 2009 9:54 AM

Squaredrive... 183% return on investment in 5 years is average, no?

Posted by: tybur6 at January 23, 2009 10:00 AM

Folks;

I happen to know the person who bought this home. He sold a condo in the complex where I live and bought this place to acommodate his growing family.

He is in the entertainment industry. I mention this because there are other industries in NYC beside Wall St., you know. One of the strengths of the NYC economy is that it is diversified, though it is true that Wall St. came to be outsized (especially wrt wages). This diversification may help the housing market, as we see here.

Posted by: benson at January 23, 2009 10:01 AM

The salient thing about all the recent sales - even this one, which is still a very high price - is that they point to the direction of the market, which, like the stock market and economy in general, is trending down, down, down. Mark my words: 2008 was the last hurrah for NY real estate for a long time. 2009 will see the steeper discounts really start, and will continue for quite a while, perhaps years...

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 10:04 AM

Benson... the housing market doesn't need any help. In fact, I think it's actually going in the right direction now. (i.e., down) 183% increase in 5 years was not right. Hopefully this property stays at somewhere around the $1.2 million value for the foreseeable future.

I think your friend made a fine purchase - obviously he can afford it. But if in 5 years he turns around and sells this property for $2.1 million... well, that would be "interesting"

Posted by: tybur6 at January 23, 2009 10:08 AM

Benson, the realtor's site listed no interior photos. Do you know what the interior looked like? Was it in good shape or did it need some TLC?

Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at January 23, 2009 10:18 AM

Nice buy ... the questions is ... how much reno will it need?

Floor plan shows a top floor rental plus a bathroom in the kitchen on the first floor ... that usually means that this isn't a recent reno or fixed-up single family.

Even with the down market, I think the nicer blocks between 4th Ave and 5th Ave are really coming into their own as a nice part of Park Slope. 5th Ave shops/restaurants and the new condos on 4th Ave seem to be helping.

Personal Note: I don't know why but I can't stand Miss Muffett ... I'd rather have The What back.

Posted by: Mr Joist at January 23, 2009 10:21 AM

Mr. Joist - no one likes to hear painful truths, maybe that's why.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 10:23 AM

So $1.15 is a 'trend down' from comps between 4th and 5th for an unrenovated house? Really?

(The original HOTD suggests that the place was not renovated from the original 2003 purchase.)

Posted by: squaredrive at January 23, 2009 10:26 AM

Snappy and all;

I haven't seen the interior myself, but I do know that it needs work, as the purchaser has hired a GC to do a makeover.

Posted by: benson at January 23, 2009 10:37 AM

Trending down from asks, and yes, from peak comps. As I've said, the trend barely started in 2008, but it did start - classic end of a bubble, beginning of a reversal. Price declines will accelerate moving forward.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 10:37 AM

Or, maybe not.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 10:39 AM

DIBS - the evidence is all around us - what do you mean, maybe not? Ah, denial.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 10:40 AM

Team Bull of course...
wow - 1.15 I'd say is pretty damn good considering that HORRID ad with no interior photos. I think we can all assume the inside was pretty much a mess. I am still in shock though over that ad - wow wow wow.
I also recall when I was in the market looking for houses in 2003 that I was shown this house and it was VERY small inside and frankly a mess. The kitchen was old and outdated and the top rental was occupied by someone who should have been on Oprah's show about hoarders......

Posted by: gemini10 at January 23, 2009 10:42 AM

Maybe they wapn't accelerate. Maybe prices will bottom in 2009. Maybe, maybe not. It's called an alternative viewpoint. It's what makes markets work. For every deller there is a buyer. We don't deem to have an overhang of inventory in brownstones.

Condos are a different story.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 10:44 AM

What goes around, comes around. Everyone thought the trade deficit was the No. 1 problem a year or so ago. Now it has narrowed significantly.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 10:46 AM

These prices don't go up in a vacuum. You can't compare living between 4th and 5th today to doing the same 6 years ago. For the people who bought this place, the relative quality of life may have increased 183% as well.

On the other hand, I think this was a surprisingly good price for the seller--1.15m for a 3 story, 18-footer with an unfinished basement that probably needs some work. And if the listing sq footage is right, $577/sqft is probably as much as this could have ever gone for.

Posted by: deen at January 23, 2009 10:46 AM

The simple fact that Shillstoner and the shillettes are trying to make hay out of the fact that one house actually sold "in just 6 months and with only one price cut for only 245K below asking" says it all. In reality what this tells you is that person made one decision.

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 10:47 AM

spelling difficulties today, sorry. Beer headache.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 10:48 AM

MM, how are you so confident that it's evidence of trending down w/o seeing the condition of the interior? (especially given benson's comment above.) Price reduced from asking doesn't mean too much, because the asking may have been way off given it's condition.

It seems like you want to see it as evidence for your position, so you do. I'm more interested in facts, as I'm not so familiar with house prices comps here.

Posted by: squaredrive at January 23, 2009 10:49 AM

Miss Muffett, I will buy you a house if you refrain from posting for 6 months.

My take on this house and other between 4th - 5th Aves in the North and Center Slope: if you have the cash for a reno (and admittedly, its a lot of cash), there are GREAT buys out there. Get a place for ~$1.2MM, spend some real cash on a reno, you've got 2,500sf+ in a nice part of Park Slope for about $3,400/month after-tax.

Posted by: Mr Joist at January 23, 2009 10:50 AM

shill...houses are selling every day, literally.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 10:50 AM

Condos tanking will inevitably eventually impact the brownstone market. As Benson pointed out, buyer of this house financed it with proceeds from his condo sale. As those go down further (and they are indeed suffering more now) buyer pool for brownstones will shrink. Yes, many people still have jobs, but many are losing them, having wage freezes/cuts or general uncertainty, plus losing equity in other assets that they have otherwise tapped to finance home purchase. Not to mention lending strictness, overall psychological shift of buyers, etc.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 10:53 AM

And birds go "tweet."

Posted by: SnarkSlope at January 23, 2009 10:54 AM

Squaredrive - no, I haven't seen this particular house, but I've seen plenty of others, including some still on market suffering price cuts now, unable to sell.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 10:55 AM

"shill...houses are selling every day, literally."

Then why so excited about his one,dibs? If bstones are selling in the 1 million and up category on a daily basis I would think the market would be in a very different place than it currently is. And we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 10:55 AM

Look people (Team Bear) just chill and relax. This is what you want! Let the Dumbasses go out there and become Debt Slaves it's OK! 2009 is a very different year and just get some popcorn and sit back and watch...

Homeowners See No End to Falling Home Values

http://www.cnbc.com/id/28812462

Nearly two of every three U.S. households said their house price fell in 2008, double the number who said that a year earlier and up five times from 2006, and they expect prices to fall faster this year, according a Reuters/University of Michigan survey on Friday.

I remember a year ago I said the the major banks was insolvent (Go pull them up) and the Asshats said that "I was lying and spreading rumors" and you know what happen after Bear Sterns, Lehman Bros, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Citibank, Merrill Lynch and AIG. So just chill baby.. Obama will save us..

With all the bad news around us and the Asshats still insist "Everything is fine". Let them make bad financial decisions this will be better for you in the long run, it's like Darwinism.

Oh BTW The U.K. Banking system is insolvent!

Buh Bye Asshats, nice knowing ya..

The What

Someday this war is gonna end..

Posted by: Return of The What at January 23, 2009 10:56 AM

Mr. Joist - and the pool of people will "lots of cash" is shrinking too.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 10:56 AM

7% unemployment means that 93% are still employed.

I'm not excited about this one shill just reacting to all the naysayers from the original HOTD post. The fact that it sold 17% from original ask is no death knell for the market. For one thing, every seller overprices their house to begin with by at leat 10% above what they expect and usually more like 20% to leave room for negotiation. The fact that this sold so quickly just point to a seller that was not unrealistic, not overly optimistic or not just plain stupid.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 11:00 AM

as I've said, nothing but a brick to the head for the last vestiges of the delusional cheerleaders. Until then reality will just be an illusion to these chosen few. Any person with half a brain knows whats going on in nyc...

ps just curious dibs, whens the last time you stepped foot in Manhattan?

Posted by: cornerbodega at January 23, 2009 11:01 AM

"Nearly two of every three U.S. households said their house price fell in 2008, double the number who said that a year earlier and up five times from 2006, and they expect prices to fall faster this year, according a Reuters/University of Michigan survey on Friday."

Yup, and the VAST majority of these are in California, Florida, Arizona and Nevada. To use your cut and pasted snippets about the National Housing Market and apply it to Brownstone Brooklyn (btw, only 5% of the housing in Brooklyn is Brownstones) shows once and for all how completely out of touch you are.

Posted by: 11217 at January 23, 2009 11:03 AM

Hear, hear, cornerbodega. The powers of denial are staggering.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 11:03 AM

I already couldn't stand Miss Muffet, and now that she's agreeing with Cornerbodega, I feel that my feelings are now justified.

Posted by: 11217 at January 23, 2009 11:05 AM

Miss Muffet;

Your comment about condos is not correct. The person who bought this Degraw St. house purchased his condo at around $650K (pre-construction) in 2004. He sold it for $1.03M last month. The price he got for his place is just slightly below the peak price we have seen in my complex, which was $1.05M in late 2007.

You may well eventually prove right in this contest - time will only tell. However, for the present, please stick to the facts.

Benson
(Assistant captain - Team Bull)

Posted by: benson at January 23, 2009 11:07 AM

But at the end of the day that block is ASS.

Posted by: Prodigal_Son at January 23, 2009 11:08 AM

Every day cornerbodega. The condo market there differs from the townhouse market as well. Should be pretty obvious unless you've had too many bricks to the head already.

11217, "birds of a feather..."

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 11:09 AM

That's pretty expensive for what looks like an ugly house on an ugly block.

Posted by: Maly at January 23, 2009 11:14 AM

Not to upset the Bears but Brooklyn condos and coops continue to sell. I personaly closed 2 purchase deals last week that went to contract post Lehman. One 1 condo and 1 coop. First time home buyers of below 500k units. They got rates below 5% on 30 yr fixed loans. I think that they will be pretty happy 5 years from now when inflation kicks in and interest rates shoot to 8%-9%.

That brownstone half off is going to cost you double in interest payments.

That's how I see it, in the mean time my rent isn't going up, I'm no longer getting kicked out of my rent stable place, I can decorate and personalize my place as well as pay down my loan.

Different strokes for different folks.

Posted by: Adam Dahill at January 23, 2009 11:14 AM

"Squaredrive - no, I haven't seen this particular house, but I've seen plenty of others, including some still on market suffering price cuts now, unable to sell. "

I keep forgetting this is the "all-spin, no facts zone".

Why would you cite the sale price of a house you've never seen as evidence of market trend down? No answer necessary, it's just typical of the bullshit thrown around on both sides.

Posted by: squaredrive at January 23, 2009 11:15 AM

Benson - what facts did I get wrong? I simply stated that the buyer of this house used proceeds from his condo sale to buy the house, and that condo prices are declining. All true.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 11:15 AM

And live rent free in your later years!!!!

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 11:16 AM

Sometimes things are simple, Location, low supply. SOLD.

Posted by: billyboomer at January 23, 2009 11:18 AM

Again Miss Muffet...there are tens of thousands of condo owners that still have huge profits, HUGE. There are not tens of thousands of brownstones for sale, not even throughout the year!!!!!

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 11:18 AM

"Yup, and the VAST majority of these are in California, Florida, Arizona and Nevada. To use your cut and pasted snippets about the National Housing Market and apply it to Brownstone Brooklyn (btw, only 5% of the housing in Brooklyn is Brownstones) shows once and for all how completely out of touch you are."

Lets recap shall we...

Bear Sterns, Lehman Bros, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Citibank, Merrill Lynch and AIG.

These major Banks/Insurance companies war gone or will be dean in a couple of months. The whole US housing making is having an Aneurysm. The UK Banking system is on life support. Unemployment is skyrocketing and you think this has nothing to do with our beloved "Brooklyn Brownstone" neighborhood?

See folks (Team Bear) this is RETARDED! So ether 11217 is a Asshat living in the Ghetto and is trying to justify his/her decision or will be a future debt slave. Leave them along and just laugh at them..

The What

Someday this war is gonna end..

Posted by: Return of The What at January 23, 2009 11:19 AM

11217 - a while back, you said you did not harbor such nasty feelings towards me - what's with the change of heart? We even wished each other happy holidays, and if I wasn't so consumed on Inauguration day, I would have wished you a Happy Obama Day!

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 11:20 AM

Muffie;

Would you really consider a price decline of less than 2% evidence of a bear market? You were trying to imply that the condo market was tanking, and hence stories like that of my neighbor would be an increasing rarity. Not so at all (at least, so far). As I discussed above, the selling price in my complex has declined by less than 2% in 1.25 years. During this time, my neighbor propably paid off that much towards his equity with his regular mortgage payments.

Posted by: benson at January 23, 2009 11:20 AM

"Another one for Team Bear!" BHO

"Wait, the house last changed hands for $667,000 in 2003, and you're telling me that selling for $1,150,000 five years later demonstrates the bearish quality of the market? Huh?" --Squaredrive

BHO--how do you reconcile these two statements?

Posted by: wasder at January 23, 2009 11:21 AM

God, the shills get so nasty as the market collapses. Dibs and 11217,instead of b--ing at people why don't you just go back to the open thread and waste the day posting witty bon mots to each other?

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 11:24 AM

IF you intend to live in your house for a long, long time, VALUE is mostly based on opportunity cost and carrying costs (not purchase and sale price). Like a stock's value is based on it's stream of dividends.

For example, if it costs $5,000+ after tax to RENT a house but $3,500 after tax to own AND you intend to stay in the house for a long time (15 years say), the capital gain or loss on sale in 15 years is almost irrelevant. $100 in 15 years is worth $24 today @ 10%.

Sure, if you think the market is going to crash or really go down in 2009, it makes sense to wait to try to "time the market."

My point is, if all Team Bear said was true now, rents would be crashing. Yes, they're coming down and yes, they may crash but I don't think you can say that renting a townhouse is cheaper NOW than owning a house on a monthly basis.

Show me a comparable townhouse renting for $3,000 in a comparable area and then (I promise) I'll believe the bear hype. Plus, if prices crater but rates are back up to 7% you're screwed on carrying costs.

If you're in for the long haul, it's all about monthly cost of ownership, not purchase price.

Posted by: Mr Joist at January 23, 2009 11:24 AM

Benson,
Why would anyone pay $1.03M when you have just dipped you toe over the mansion tax line?

Posted by: jasetheace at January 23, 2009 11:25 AM

Benson, as I've said repeatedly, the cuts have just begun, and this would be consistent with your neighbor doing fairly well selling a condo that presumably went into contract pre-meltdown, or perhaps early enough in the meltdown that people hoped it was a blip, and not the major, long-term problem that is now becoming clearer to us. The declines on condos will accelerate faster than houses, mainly due to inventory, but those declines will impact the house market too.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 11:26 AM

Please show me where the market is "collapsing" shill. Please. Necvada, California, Florida?? No, here.

Please add something to the discussion or go to the Open Thread and get your sorry ass PWNED over there.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 11:28 AM

Mr. Joist, how are you getting that this house costs 3K to live in per month? As a prospective buyer, purchase price DOES matter. I work my ass off to help support my family and high asking prices translate into more pressure to earn more income = less time with my kids. Purchase price *impacts* monthly cost of ownership since, obviously, it impacts the size of your mortgage and your monthly mortgage payments. Hell yes, I'm going to wait as I see the prices come down.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 11:32 AM

Miss Muffet and all;

Gotta go - I'm painting today. I'm sure we'll pick this up again. Jasetheace: I cannot say why they went slightly over the $1M line, considering the tax ramifications. I wasn't privy to the negotiations between the parties.

Posted by: benson at January 23, 2009 11:33 AM

Team Bull = boiled frogs.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at January 23, 2009 11:33 AM

dibs, you are such a child, it is pathetic.

Collapsing, not collapsed yet.

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 11:34 AM

Also Joist, we're lucky to have cash reserves and actually are seeking to minimize our mortgage so higher rates won't affect us as much. But from what brokers are telling me (and they are courting us now), buyers with cash are an increasing rarity, and one must factor in opportunity costs for how that cash is spent (i.e. will I squander an additional few 100K now by buying now or bide my time and have that extra cash as a financial cushion/smaller mortgage)?

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 11:36 AM

Is the market really "collapsing" shill. Where's your evidence please.

Childish, yes.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 11:42 AM

Dibs, Where is your evidence that it isn't?

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 12:00 PM

"Not to upset the Bears but Brooklyn condos and coops continue to sell. I personaly closed 2 purchase deals last week that went to contract post Lehman. One 1 condo and 1 coop. First time home buyers of below 500k units.

Eh Adam there is one thing you forgot to mention. FHA is pouring money into the housing market. That deal was at 97% LTV. You can close this crap all day long!

But Dumbass what about JUMBO's???!!! Where you need to put down 25%???!! That's most of Brownstoner Brooklyn you Dumbassed moron!!!

" I think that they will be pretty happy 5 years from now when inflation kicks in and interest rates shoot to 8%-9%."

Yeah real happy when that Condo is worth 50% of what they paid for it. Remember higher interest rate lower house price..

The What

Someday this war is gonna end...

Posted by: Return of The What at January 23, 2009 12:01 PM

Talk about a childish response. You are a jackass shill. Look at the sales.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 12:09 PM

"lower slope"? how is this anything slope?

enough with the pre and post lehman in every other post. it's getting annoying.

Posted by: BrooklynLove at January 23, 2009 12:16 PM

I am looking at the sales--and all of the unsold properties. And can't you respond without calling people names?

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 12:18 PM

Sorry What but you are mistaken. Just because you spend all day selling 97% FHA loans to deadbeats doesn’t mean the rest of us do. You know people that resort to profanities do so because they can not come up with a valid argument. Your lack of intellect is showing

The condo was 20% down Full Doc. Client is just starting out lawyer

The coop was 25% down Full Doc. Client is music producer for TV shows.

I think I have done 1 FHA loan in the past year and it was at 90%. And the reason was to get MI in an area that was redlined as a declining market.. Newark NJ. Most of my clients are purchase clients with high income, great credit, and assets. The majority put 20% down. A few have put 10% down. None have done 97%. That just isn't my business.

I'm sorry but most clients buying are either conforming/agency jumbo. Those that require loan amounts above that can secure them through the various smaller portfolio banks that have programs that go upwards of 3 million.

Individuals purchasing properties of that caliber SHOULD be able to put 25% down at least if not more. If they can't they should not be buying properties that expensive. It's not that complicated. Why don't you understand that?
.

Posted by: Adam Dahill at January 23, 2009 12:24 PM

I think you started the name calling shill at 11:24. Jackass.

I am looking at the sales too...nothing is "collapsing." Show me that the levels of brownstone inventory are significantly higher than a year ago.

You haven't cited one bit of factual evidence.

Why do I continue to engage this loon???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 12:24 PM

Is Miss Muffet the one who doesn't know how to actually buy a house and is now telling all of us how the market works? I read you once before on this topic. Don't make me do it again.

Posted by: Miss Chiff at January 23, 2009 12:29 PM

My 11:24 post:

"God, the shills get so nasty as the market collapses. Dibs and 11217,instead of b--ing at people why don't you just go back to the open thread and waste the day posting witty bon mots to each other?"

No name calling there, dibs--unless you're counting "shills".

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 12:29 PM

calling people who disagree with you "shills" is kinda name calling shillstoner.

Posted by: wasder at January 23, 2009 12:33 PM

Sorry, meant 11:34...that would be the beginning of the name calling. Apologies.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 12:34 PM

Miss Chiff - as I recall, I was not the only one to point out to you that for many buyers, standard procedure is to wait for an accepted offer before bringing in inspector, etc. I know you did the opposite but that does mean I "don't know how to buy a house". I'm not a neophyte. And I agree, let's keep the conversation civil please - perhaps our new President can be a role model here.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 12:41 PM

OK, I called you a child and referred to your behavior as "pathetic." Mea culpa. Hardly on par with what you call everyone, but nonetheless...

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 12:47 PM

everyone?? Hardly. Just those that start it. Mea culpa accepted.

happy faces :)

But you're still wrong about it "collapsing" There are three examples of it not right here today on this thread and above on Six months later.

Lets define collapsing. I say its when virtually everything is down 30% or more. People didn't use that term in the stock market until about 40%.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 12:53 PM

DIBS: a collapse - or big decline - when represented graphically, always starts with a line pointing in a direction - down. Even before it gets to its destination (30-40-50% whatever it winds up being), the direction is clear. The direction of that line is what is becoming clearer with each passing day.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 12:56 PM

"Lets define collapsing. I say its when virtually everything is down 30% or more. People didn't use that term in the stock market until about 40%."

I buy that definition. And that is what is currently happening. We're 10% to 15% down and on our way to 30%. Maybe 40% in some areas. I call that collapsing.

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 1:01 PM

I just don't understand all the anger at Miss Muffett. She thinks prices will continue to fall, which is a perfectly reasonable supposition given this economy. You guys can argue forever about whether the decline will be 1% or 50% but I sure wouldn't bet my money on the Brooklyn housing market getting any stronger in the next year or two. So there's very little downside in waiting. Are there some posters here seriously arguing that prices are only going to get higher over the next year? Is Brooklyn somehow immune from economic forces that have historically always meant that the real estate market was cyclical and the many years of boom will of course be followed by a decline? I don't mind some reasonable argument to the contrary, but having lived through previous real estate boom and busts in NYC, I highly doubt that we aren't about to experience some sort of decline. Hopefully it won't be too bad and the recovery time will be short, but anyone who thinks we've already hit bottom is simply living in denial.

Posted by: CGfan at January 23, 2009 1:02 PM

"BHO--how do you reconcile these two statements?"

9:52, wasder.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 23, 2009 1:03 PM

'but that does mean I "don't know how to buy a house"

Miss Muffet admits she is overwhelmed with the process of purchasing her dream home.

'perhaps our new President can be a role model here.'
I thought he now lived in a White Box Schlock Washington D.C., maybe he'd rather have a brownstone!

Posted by: bayridgegirl at January 23, 2009 1:03 PM

"Lets define collapsing. I say its when virtually everything is down 30% or more. People didn't use that term in the stock market until about 40%."

I buy that definition. And that is what is currently happening. We're 10% to 15% down and on our way to 30%. Maybe 40% in some areas. I call that collapsing.

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 1:01 PM

ONE JUST CAN'T ARGUE WITH THAT KIND OF LOGIC.

Q.E.D.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 1:04 PM

What gets me is people who post here and just KNOW what the real estate market is going to do. Here's the thing, Miss Muffet and everyone: no one knows!

I own a modest apartment and I do think sale prices in NYC are likely to continue to drop for a while... Maybe they will lose half their value over the next 10 years... or maybe they will just level off and stay flat for years. Maybe interest rates will soar, or maybe they will stay low.

Please, can we stop with the evangelizing already?

Posted by: Kris at January 23, 2009 1:05 PM

"Is the market really "collapsing" shill. Where's your evidence please."

With comments like this can you really have an intelligent discourse with Dibs? I mean, Dibs, really? You really are that oblivious? Look dibs, I'm sorry that you speculated in Bed-Stuy and psychologically its tough to accept. At some point you just have accept that you made a bad call, its good for the soul.

Posted by: cornerbodega at January 23, 2009 1:06 PM

BRG - no, that was just a typo - what I meant to say was: that does NOT mean "I don't know how to buy a house". I *do* know how to buy a house, thank you very much.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 1:08 PM

cornerbodega, if DIBS bought a brownstone he loves in a neighborhood he wants to live in and expects to be there long term, why was it a bad call?

Posted by: Biff Champion at January 23, 2009 1:09 PM

"...if prices crater but rates are back up to 7% you're screwed on carrying costs."

Nope. Savings don't stop/won't stop (and it goes up faster than interest rates, unless of course my wife AND I get laid off). More money down on a cheaper house. Carrying costs the same or less.

Next! (don't have time right now for your "comparable townhouse" project, Joist, but I'd love to take a crack at it when I can)

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 23, 2009 1:12 PM

Kris, theres a thing called bubble. Do you at least acknowledge that? When bubbles burst it goes back to fundamentals. When nycs Price to income ratio gets back to "norms" then you might be able to argue some stability. This is not difficult unless you're ignorant and/or delusional.

Posted by: cornerbodega at January 23, 2009 1:13 PM

"PWNED"

Dave/What - Please define. Thanks.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 23, 2009 1:14 PM

Yes, Dibs, my logic is flawless. I agree.

I bought a brownstone in an area I adore and I will always be happy with that decision--even when it is worth 40% less than it was last summer.

Posted by: shillstoner at January 23, 2009 1:14 PM

cornerbodega...if you'll agree with shillstoner that collapsing means that virtually everything is down about 30%...PLEASE pull your head out of your ass and show me where this is true.

Buying your primary residence is always a good call, cornerbodega. When you grow up you will learn that.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 1:15 PM

"cornerbodega, if DIBS bought a brownstone he loves in a neighborhood he wants to live in and expects to be there long term, why was it a bad call?"

because its clear from his posts that Dibs main concern is the valuation. Thus, valuation falling off a cliff = bad call for dibs.

Posted by: cornerbodega at January 23, 2009 1:16 PM

cornerbodega, I should have also qualified that with, "that he can afford to carry through this economic collapse", which I suspect he can.

Posted by: Biff Champion at January 23, 2009 1:17 PM

I don't see where any brownstone valuations are "falling off a cliff." cornerbodega

Please cite some examples. Try looking in the other threads today.

What is it with your constant fatheadedness????

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 1:21 PM

cornerbodega, I do agree with you and others that anyone who bought in the last couple of years with the intention of flipping, especially in fringe areas, might be in a lot of trouble. But, again, those who bought, can still afford to pay their mortgage and other expenses, and are planning on living in their homes long term (something it appears both shillstoner and DIBS have in common - maybe the only thing they have in common), should have far fewer regrets.

Posted by: Biff Champion at January 23, 2009 1:22 PM

"Buying your primary residence is always a good call..."
That was the ideology pushed by the previous administration and certain financial institutions over the last decade or so, and it's actually been proven wrong. In fact, some economists are now saying that people should not have been pushed into buying property they could not afford, and that there's nothing wrong with more people remaining renters. If you look at stories of low-income families in Florida, Arizona, and other places where the housing market has truly collapsed, you will see how they were told exactly this, and why it was not a good decision and merely pushed up housing prices to levels that could not be sustained.

Posted by: CGfan at January 23, 2009 1:22 PM

Brooklyn Prices Are Falling Down...Falling Down...Falling Down

Brooklyn Prices Are Falling Down...My Fair Asshat

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 23, 2009 1:24 PM

CGfan...people buying properties they can't afford is another story. I'm not a proponent of that.

I hope you're happy paying your rent in your retirement years while all the homeowners are living rent free by then. Get it now???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 1:27 PM

DIBS - Why do assume CGfan will be paying rent in retirement years when (s)he could snap up a great deal sometime in the next few years (when prices return to sane levels, and instead, have paid off the mortgage in a shorter amount of time and/or with lower payments to allow savings for other things in life?

Posted by: Miss Muffett at January 23, 2009 1:30 PM

Asuume all you want Miss Muffett. All very plausible.

If you're positive that's the way things will pan out.

Try doing some comparative calculations using current interest rates and higher ones as well as currrent home prices and lower ones. See where the math takes you on the monthly payment amounts.

Please do the after tax calculations as well.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 1:33 PM

cornerbodega, yes, everyone has heard plenty about the real estate 'bubble.' As I mentioned, I believe that prices are declining and I think they will continue to do so for at least a while. However, there are many, many diverse factors at play here. So, again, no one - including you - knows what is going to happen.

A couple of points: The price/income ratio is always higher in NYC than in the country at large. The average income is also high here. Also, about 80% of NYers rent and aren't even in the sales market. Another important thing to remember is that real estate prices in NYC did decline for most of the 1990s. In that time, they lost 40% of their value... Interest rates were high, and lending was tight. Many have argued that prices in the late 90s and early 00s were quite low by historical measures, as a result of the 90s decline.

Just because I don't share your egotistical belief that you are omniscient does not make me ignorant or delusional.

Posted by: Kris at January 23, 2009 1:36 PM

One more thing, looking at the real estate market day-by-day doesn't prove anyone's point, bear or bull. It's looking at the trees instead of the forest.

Posted by: Kris at January 23, 2009 1:40 PM

Kris, re: nyc price/income ignorance on your part:
"From 1969 to 1986, Manhattan per-capita income averaged 2 times the national average, with no clear trend. Over the next two decades, however, it grew to 3 times the national average. If incomes fell back to the pre-1986 level of 2 times the national average—and if national per capita income remained unchanged—prices would need to fall as much as 58% to return to the 1995-1999 price/income ratio." gs

Check this out, the income portion of this equation is decreasing as we speak. SCARY STUFF And THIS IS MANHATTAN. Well you say we're talking about brooklyn. Here you go,

"Prices are declining citywide as the protracted U.S. housing slump belatedly reached New York following upheaval in the financial sector. Cheaper, outlying sections of the city like BROOKLYN ARE AT RELATIVELY MORE RISK than is the commercial and cultural center of Manhattan during such times, said Jonathan Miller, CEO of appraisal firm Miller Samuel, who wrote the report with real estate brokerage firm Prudential Douglas Elliman."

Posted by: cornerbodega at January 23, 2009 1:51 PM

We bought a brownstone more than a few years ago and at the time, I thought we were buying at close to the peak of the market. On the other hand, even putting only 10% down, the rental income (at a time when rents were declining) still subsidized a huge percentage of our mortgage and meant our monthly payments were far lower than buying a very small co-op or condo or even renting an equivalent apartment. But I look at the market now and it seems out of whack. It only makes sense if you have sold a Manhattan apartment and have a mortgage that's only 50% of the purchase price. Otherwise, even after rental income is figured in, the remaining mortgage payment is often far more than renting a larger apartment with none of the hassles or risks of being a landlord. If I were looking now, I'd save my down payment money and rent instead of taking on a huge monthly mortgage that we might be able to afford, but not if we had any kind of financial setback. So, Dave in Bed Stuy, if your mortgage is affordable even if you lose your job and have to take a lower paying one, and you plan on staying for the long run, I do agree with you that buying a home is a wonderful thing. But lately, prices of Brooklyn brownstones have been so high that the monthly payments would be a stretch for everyone but the richest NYers.

Posted by: CGfan at January 23, 2009 1:58 PM

Miss Muffet: You don't know how to buy a house. Yes, I brought in an inspector before I had to (as well as a contractor), but I did it for my piece of mind and to ensure that teh bid I eventually made woudl be one I could stand behind.

You placed a bid on a house before you brought in an architect and then recinded your offer after you finally found out how much it would cost to fix up the house you wanted. That is unprofessional. You did not bargain in good faith. You do not know how to buy a house.

I think you are ill today. Mentally ill.

Posted by: Miss Chiff at January 23, 2009 1:58 PM

Jonathon ASS Miller has never been to Brooklyn. Give me a brownstone in Park Slope anyday over some 2 bedroom near NYU. Sorry your co/op will drop faster than my 100 year old brownstone. Dick.

Posted by: billyboomer at January 23, 2009 2:02 PM

CGFan...I can't disagree with you on that.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 23, 2009 2:04 PM

Cornerbodega, What makes you think incomes in Manhattan are going to precipitously drop? Your quote does include the word "if" -- as in, "if" incomes drastically drop. Personally, I don't see that happening. Sure, the Wall Street fiasco will dip the average for probably 2 or 3 years, but I don't see it just crashing through the floor. I'm sure you hold a different opinion and will no doubt call me names for not sharing your beliefs.

As for your second quote, I'm not even going to bother. Re-read my earlier posts.

Posted by: Kris at January 23, 2009 2:06 PM

Ummmm, re: Manhattan income dropping - Is this a serious question? You can't be real...

Posted by: cornerbodega at January 23, 2009 2:11 PM

Kris - Wall St is 1/3 NYC economy and bonuses were reported to have dropped 50%. That's a crash through the floor and proportional to home prices and rents. We'll see come February.

If you didn't get that crash, get the NYS unemployment server crash. It did. Manhattan incomes, as in all other parts of this city and state, are falling/have fallen off a cliff.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 23, 2009 2:36 PM

Of course I agree that incomes are falling - we're in the great recession after all - but I've seen no evidence yet of them crashing through the floor. Time will tell.

Posted by: Kris at January 23, 2009 2:47 PM

Wall Street might make up 1/3rd the income of the city, but you aren't factoring in that only 1/3rd of the city own homes and the rest rent.

We are talking about a very small percentage of people who might lose their jobs or have a decreases in income who own real estate. By numbers, Wall Street makes up very few jobs in the city overall. Then you need to roughly say 1/3 of those are homeowners, although in general I'd say Wall Streeters (the young ones anyway) do not in fact own property so the numbers might be even less than 1/3rd.

The city's economy is more diversified than it's been in quite a well.

Posted by: 11217 at January 23, 2009 3:03 PM

Seriously, 11217 you're sounding like an idiot. And I assume all is rosy across the nation because 90% are employed right?

Posted by: cornerbodega at January 23, 2009 6:31 PM

I am not saying PS is immune to the economy, but rents are not coming down. This affects brownstone economics because in a multi family, the rental portion is critical to making the mortgage. In the boom years, a lot of potential renters elected to buy condos instead, and that took some wind out of rentals.

With fewer condo buyers these days, the rentals should continue to see modest increases (single digits, but still...). This is happening nationwide, where apartments have weathered the economy better than for sale product.

Second point is that PS is still a cheaper alternative to Manhattan, so we may see Manhattanites "downsizing" to the Slope.

Just my speculation, don't jump all over, please. Newbie here.

Posted by: Parks at January 23, 2009 7:12 PM

"only 1/3rd of the city own homes and the rest rent"

Read what I wrote a little more slowly. I said the bonus crash is proportional to sales and rents. They are both tied together and are both declining.

"Wall Street makes up very few jobs in the city overall."

Absolutely, if you just count heads. But if you count the income of those heads for the last several years, Wall Street circulated 1/3 of the city's revenue stream from taxi's to restaurants, etc.

"The city's economy is more diversified than it's been in quite a well."

Absolutely, now that Wall St has collapsed. Those overleveraged, Madoff, masters of the universe types are disappearing like those kids in that Charlie Brown spelling bee. Poof! Poof! Poof! Now we have doctors, non-Street lawyers, engineers, teachers, firemen/women, etc., representing a larger percentage of the city's tax base and home price fundamentals (Hey prices! We're dooooown here!).

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 23, 2009 8:47 PM

and this is the reason why I can't respond to idiot posts such as the one by 11217. The guy makes points that contradict his very intention. Its like trying to debate a mental midget...

Posted by: cornerbodega at January 23, 2009 10:13 PM

Wow a whole day of debating retarded people! Look guys leave the Asshats alone (Trust me on this one). Let them go ahead with their dreams. Very soon the whole thing will be crashing around their heads.

Cornerbodega 11217 is a Asshat living in the Ghetto and he needs someone (Dave) to go along with his BS, so let them be..

Brownstones Half Off I'm so proud of you! The way you PWNING these Asshats is great but please for your sake leave them alone. Go play with you kid or just hang out. The idiots and brownstoner is toxic to your system. I willing to bet that Brownstoner is on it's last legs. The whole Mutant Asset Bubble is dead and the Assholes who believe in it.

To the A-Team (You know who you are) Have a wonderful weekend...

The What

Someday this war is gonna end...

Posted by: Return of The What at January 23, 2009 11:29 PM

CGfan, you are a breath of fresh air. Please keep posting!

Posted by: ajaxclorox at January 24, 2009 6:10 PM

"...for your sake leave them alone. Go play with you kid or just hang out. The idiots and brownstoner is toxic to your system."

You are so right.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 25, 2009 11:16 PM

« Open Thread Eva Daniels Shutters Fulton Storefront »

January 23, 2009

712 Degraw Sells for $1,150,000

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions