150 Bond Finally Sells—For a Loss
The sale of 150 Bond Street, which was a House of the Day a number of times, was recorded in public records yesterday. The price: $1,400,000. The property, which was pitched as a gutted blank slate that would allow its new owner to “build your dream house in Boerum Hill,” first hit the market asking…
The sale of 150 Bond Street, which was a House of the Day a number of times, was recorded in public records yesterday. The price: $1,400,000. The property, which was pitched as a gutted blank slate that would allow its new owner to “build your dream house in Boerum Hill,” first hit the market asking $2,495,000 in March ’08. The price was cut several times until it was asking $1,595,000 this summer. The seller purchased it for $1,725,000 in September ’07. This one seems like it was a victim of unrealistic pricing from the get-go and a down market in which fixer-uppers are a tough sell.
House of the Day: 150 Bond Street Revisited GMAP P*Shark
Open House Picks: Price Cut Edition [Brownstoner]
Houses of the Day: A Couple of Price Cuts [Brownstoner]
House of the Day: 150 Bond Street [Brownstoner]
150 Bond Price History [StreetEasy]
Antidope!!! Acknowledge me! PLEASE!!!
Posted by: stevieb at November 19, 2009 12:37 PM
Forget it stevie. That’s the type on non response you get from a lot of people here when they can’t admit they are wrong.
I’m waiting for Pierre right now on the “flipper” question.
At best i expect further argument without a definition forthcoming.
Antidope!!! Acknowledge me! PLEASE!!!
Pierre, wake up. Something obviously went very wrong with his finances for the original plans.
Yes, he listed it an unrealistically high price. Tell me what price it would have had to be listed at for you to not call him a “flipper.”
Like I said, it’s quite obvious that the original intent was not to do a renovation and flip. It was to construct a single family home.
If the intent was to flip the property, you would make far more money by condoing it and turning it into 3-4 units.
Perhaps that’s what the new buyer wants to do. Perhaps not.
I made 229% on my original manhattan condo over 10 years. Am I a flipper just because I made so much money?
Your definition is flawed. Admit it.
> Flippers don’t buy houses, gut them and put them on the
> market in that condition.
Flipper don’t. Floppers do.
“Flippers don’t buy houses, gut them and put them on the market in that condition”.
Hey DIBS guess we have different definitions given the subjectivity of the term but to us “flippers” in RE would buy homes and try to make massive irrational profits in a short amount of time…gutted, renovated, or as is.
The fact that he tried to get as much as he originally listed it for once the whole thing fell apart is not the definition of a flipper. The original intent was to construct a one-family home.
DOB application approved 12/31/07.
If any one of you can point to solid evidence that the buyer intended to flip it (other than a ridiculous asking price after he apparently ran out of money to proceed any farther), then I’ll say he was a flipper.
HERE ARE THE FACTS:
On 12/12/2007, the following was issued:
Propose to remodel existing 2-family residence into single family residenc
I don’t care about this guy one way or the other but he got permits to make it into a single family home. if you think that’s evidence of being a flipper, you don’t really have any grasp on the market.
Dave, I know. That’s why my first course would be to buy, then borrow, then destroy and remodel