Halstead B'kln Report Shows Booming First Half
So, the big Halstead report on the Brooklyn townhouse market is out and chock full of interesting numbers. The biggest thing that jumps out at us is that the average sales prices for the first half of this year are way below the real market prices of the type of brownstones we focus on around…
So, the big Halstead report on the Brooklyn townhouse market is out and chock full of interesting numbers. The biggest thing that jumps out at us is that the average sales prices for the first half of this year are way below the real market prices of the type of brownstones we focus on around here (must be those pesky new constructions draggin down the numbers!) Beyond that, the huge percentage increases in Clinton Hill (+82%) and Fort Greene (+71%) are probably the most noteworthy data (big jumps in Red Hook and Williamsburg can’t really be counted given an extremely low sample size). Curbed has already gone to the trouble of posting many of the charts and graphs from the report, so we won’t repeat the effort, but encourage you to check them out. The report is not on the Halstead site yet, but should be shortly. The marketing fluff in the report includes this summary of the market: “Nowhere has the law of supply and demand demonstrated its true nature more than in Brooklyn. While more and more buyers are being lured to Brooklyn great neighborhoods, fewer and fewer Brooklyn home owners are looking to move. In those rare instances when houses become available interest is keen and sales often result in bidding wars.” For how long is the question.
Sassy Price Jumps [Curbed]
Market Reports [Halstead]
Also, an argument could be made that the housing stock is also of a fairly high quality and consistency in CH and FG, i.e. not a lot of crappy new shit going up (or in place for that matter) to throw off the numbers. Therefore a lower sample size would be less of an issue in those hoods than in ones where there was a greater range, especially at the low end. That said, it’s hard to say why the numbers are so low.
I would love to find a house in any of these neighborhoods for the prices listed in this report, wouldn’t you?
What a bunch of hooey!
Thing is, Clinton Hill and Fort Greene are very small neighborhoods, so it is likely that the number of townhouses sold in a year is never going to be very high.
I guess Corcoran didn’t send out a press release about their midyear report (seems impossible) and Halstead did so Halstead gets the press. Garbage in, garbage out. I think the Corcoran report is better.
Or did we discuss the Corcoran midyear report sometime after the midyear? This is November, right?
is their report only the properties they sell?
Right, but that 577k number are based on 12 frickin sales. I wonder how they figure that. I know my 2004 refinancing shows up as a $1 sale on property shark. Is that counted?
I don’t know where they get those numbers but they make no sens to me! If we could have found a townhouse in Clinton Hill in 2004 for $577K we would have jumped on it for sure, given that there was nothing under $1M!
That would indeed be interesting.
I guess, but the number of sales in Ft Greene and Clinton Hill are rather low too. 15 homes in FG and 28 in CH. Low enough that you almost wish you could see the actual, individual sales.