A Pair of ProHi Price Cuts
After last week’s carnage, you’d think there would be price reductions left and right, but it appears that more of a wait-and-see bunker mentality set in in the short run. Corcoran did take out the axe, though, on two of its townhouse listings in Prospect Heights. The four-story house at 368 Park Place (left), which…
After last week’s carnage, you’d think there would be price reductions left and right, but it appears that more of a wait-and-see bunker mentality set in in the short run. Corcoran did take out the axe, though, on two of its townhouse listings in Prospect Heights. The four-story house at 368 Park Place (left), which started out at $1,850,000 in April and had already been trimmed three times, got another $75,000 nudge down to $1,525,000. The professional-looking makeover at 210 Prospect Place (right) had its first cut since coming on the market in July at $2,495,000; it’s now testing the waters at $2,250,000.
368 Park Place [Corcoran] GMAP P*Shark
210 Prospect Place [Corcoran] GMAP P*Shark
House of the Day: 210 Prospect Place [Brownstoner]
I disagree – actually, my numbers are not as random as you think. They are based on examples I know (mine, friends of mine, brokers I know etc). I don’t want to get too specific since I want to protect privacy so I am throwing the numbers more generally but I could, if I did not care about privacy, provide specific addresses, what was paid to buy, renovate and comps for the current value. There is only so much specificity I’m willing to offer on an anonymous blog but I can assure you that my analyses are based on fact, not on “craven motivation”. I’m fine with you activating your miss-muffett-bot, but there are certainly many others on this blog who post just as much if not more. Sorry that you find my analyses irritating, but is it just because my views are different than yours?
And I ain’t just talking about FIRE Island!
SnarkSlope, you are on FIRE!
…Halve the game..
Bravo Snark! One of your best yet!
miss muffett – but that’s exactly my point! i would welcome the type of analysis you suggest, and in fact do welcome it, if and when it is based in fact or, at least, rational supposition. but when you don’t have anything to offer about how much these sellers paid for these homes, what it cost them to keep or renovate them, what are their needs are or goals for the proceeds, to assume the math as you do, and a craven motivation to go along with it, doesn’t add much to the discussion. these kinds of posts are “obviously random” in connection with any of these houses, and that randomness coupled with the explicit or implicit accusations of greed (see, e.g., “but no, that’s not enough for them,”) and the tones you tend to adopt (which range from the pontificating – “and fall it will” – to the condescending – “they are only hurting themselves,” etc.) means that these types of posts are the double-insult of being both useless from an analytical perspective and presumptuous and judgmental from an atmospheric perspective.
if it were only a couple of posts like this i might not care. but it’s just about every day, in multiple comments on multiple threads. maybe i should have my own response-to-miss-muffett-comment-bot activated!
Ringo – yes, we have seen a LOT of places, and actually, quite a few places did NOT sell, and were then just taken off the market. I suppose these were cases where the sellers clearly did not need to sell immediately, and hoped that by waiting it out, they would get a better price. Well, I think they will now have a lot longer to wait. For those places that did sell, I’ve been following the gap between ask and close carefully (by going on property shark to see the final closing prices), and what I’ve observed is that increasingly, there is a significant gap between ask and close. There are indeed exceptions, but that seems to be the trend, and of course I think that will only increase. Mind you, we were not trying to “time” the market in our search, and we have certainly bid on a few places – some of which we were narrowly outbid on (we’re talking this past spring), some of which fell through for other reasons (two places were taken off market by sellers due to family reasons). But I now actually feel fortunate that we did not earlier get any of those other properties since I see now that we’re in a much better position as buyers than we were just a few months ago. We’re still aggressively looking and will buy the right thing at the right price when it comes along, but we are indeed choosy and patient – time and market forces on our side, as they are for other buyers in this climate who do not need huge mortgages.
“Don’t have the player…”
Halve the game.
I’ve been reading your posts for a long time Miss Muffett. Sounds like you’ve seen a LOT of places in this recent search. You can say the whole market has been overpriced, but don’t you agree that most of the places you saw sold eventually? For more than you wanted to pay (obviously or you would have bought them)? I mean, the market is what the market is.
Don’t have the player…
If the Brooklyn market were to tank a full 50%, it would still be a lot higher than it was in 2000. There’s plenty of room for it to fall, and fall it will. Properties in NYC, like just about everything else in this asset bubble, have been over-valued and require a significant correction. Does that mean NYC will plummet? No, since a fall to, say, 2003 levels would still leave it very high, and over time, NYC will hold up and eventually take off again – though I suspect not for many years. I think many people are in denial about the long-term repercussions of what we’re seeing now – despite a short-term rally in the markets, folks have to understand we’re experiencing a watershed moment that will impact us for years to come.