House of the Day: Stretching It in the Slope
Is it just us or does $1.8 million seem like a lot of dosh for a three-story house of nice, but certainly not extraordinary, quality? We’re sure the block is a good one as the ad says, but both the scale and finishes of the house look modest by Park Slope standards. Or maybe this…
Is it just us or does $1.8 million seem like a lot of dosh for a three-story house of nice, but certainly not extraordinary, quality? We’re sure the block is a good one as the ad says, but both the scale and finishes of the house look modest by Park Slope standards. Or maybe this is one of those cases where it would be worth it to hire one of those consultants to touch up the interiors–the Ikea furnishings certainly detract from the necessary gravitas needed to pull of this price (especially with the top two floors leased through the end of 2006!). Are you folks who know the Park Slope market with us on this one or is our lack of sleep starting to show?
10th Street [Corcoran]
I think this thread is played out, folks.
Let’s move on.
Respect.
Brownstoner
Before further this deteriorates further… I apologize for calling you “names”.
The fingers type faster than the brain.
Okay…. you’d rather lose 100k on your 400k coop on 4th ave/17th rather than lose a $1MM on a $4MM bldg.
Wow, I thought you were an idiot, now I know you’re a moron too.
I don’t disagree with you at all my friend. This point is fairly obvious. However, I wouldn’t blink an eye if the mansion on berkely (not sure of the one you’re speaking of) which is priced at 4.25 million is suddenly back at 3.25 million where it sold only one year ago. Losing a million in a crash is nothing to scoff at. I personally would rather lose a 100k on my 400k coop on 4th ave/17th. Percentages are funny that way. I’m sorry, bubba had no legitimate point and if this is what he was trying say, GOD help him.
If we can cut through all the verbiage — Bubba was making a very simple point, which is that a brownstone on Prospect Park West will hold a greater percentage in a downturn than an apartment in a marginal area that’s only now gentrifying. He’s right. It was true in the last bad market and it’s such a universal truism that I can’t believe we’re arguing it — more desirable and more rare properties hold their value better. That landmark mansion on Montgomery Place just is not going to take the same percentage dive as the small co-op at 4th Avenue and 17th Street, whether or not they’re part of the same real estate ecosystem.
Not saying the market won’t drop, but if you sold and are sitting on your nest egg waiting for the return of the sub-$1M landmarked brownstone, good luck to you, my friend.
I’m sorry. I didn’t know I had to connect the dots for a two year old. I thought you, “understood markets.” Please, if you’re best response is that you don’t understand what I’m saying, please save us all from your stupidity and stop engaging in arguments you obviously can’t keep up with.
What’s the point. I’m really not trying to be nasty – but for the life of me, I just cannot follow most of what you are saying. You take my words and twist it into something I did not say and you jump around all over the place blending topics and arguements into one totally incomprehensible babble.
So, in the interest of saving us both some time, I’ll call it quits on this thread.
Big Bubba,
I think you might want to re-read your response. You’re saying exactly what my criticisms are of your underlying premise.
#1/2 The rich are not affected by interest rates and brownstones are somehow not comparable to rest of the market (i.e. the price of a two bedroom in manhattan won’t affect a brownstone in brooklyn). You said it yourself that Park slope prices have been driven by ex-manhattanites. It stands to reason it works in the reverse as well. That’s the norm I’m referring to, that even the highest priced brownstones will be affected by average two bedrooms and one bedrooms decreasing in value. As for your comment on Park slope sliding back into poverty. Park slope in 1996 was not in poverty, but since then when a brownstone broke the $1 million mark, the highest prices now are in the $4-5 million range. The price increases have nothing to do with poverty and crime in the slope over the last 10 years.
#3 So you’re telling me that mommy and daddy take care of the demand for studios and one bedrooms for their sons and daughters. Stellar economic argument…you should try and get that one into a Goldman Sach’s newsletter on what’s holding up the lower end of the market.
#4 Again, you’re situation or perspective is not what we’re arguing about. I’m sure you can find others like yourself who don’t hold a lot of debt on their house, but the average in the U.S. is now running at a 70% debt to equity ratio and I would argue the more creative financing is done by more sophisticated buyers in metropolitan areas. Your point about a 40% drop and you would buy as an investment is laughable…do the math. Take your $2.1 million brownstone and it drops to $1.360 m and you buy it and put down 20%. Now you have a mortgage of $1.1 million ( give or take a few bucks). My thesis is that interest rates have risen to their historical averages (say 8%) to cause the 40% drop in value. Your monthly cost on your mortgage is approximately 8K. The best duplex in the slope is around $3500 so you’re getting 7K a month and paying 8K out the door plus maintenance. Where’s the return on that investment, not to mention the monthly loss.
Sorry Bubba, your arguments are rediculous at best. And Yes we all have our own perspective and interest, I have chosen to sell, hold my cash, and buy in a better market. Again give me some type of reasonable argument other than the rich are rich and that’s your demand on the higher end of the market and mommy and daddy support the lower end of the market with purchases for their children.
Hey anon, now you’re putting words in my mouth.
1) I said that somebody spending decent dollars (let’s say $2MM) on a PS brownstone probably has $1MM to put down – we are talking people with substantial financial means. And I stand by that – either they are cashing out of Manhattan or they are in a business where they can amass that type of wealth, or they have family wealth, or all of the above. I’m not saying these people are the norm for the population. They are not – then again most people in NYC rent don’t they. So, what norm are you referring to.
2) I never said PS would hold up better than Manhattan. IMO, Manhattan prices are definately helping drive PS prices. However, I do think PS will hold up much better than most other Bklyn nabes, save Bklyn Hts and Cobble Hill. I also think certain types of properties will hold up much better – for example single-fam brownstones will do much better than studio apts. There is a rarity issue – the more brownstones get chopped up into apts, the rarer the 1-2fam species becomes. Zoning limits construction in historic districts. There are only a few hundred b-stones along Prospect Park. They are rare, and will continue to be rare and highly sought after. PS already has a well-developed infrastructure – we are not waiting for it to “happen”. There is no risk of sliding backwards into the abyss of crime and poverty.
3) I agree that 1st time buyers have it toughest. But, mommy and daddy have been coming to the resue in droves. Take those blinders covering your eyes off.
4) If my property dropped 40% in value, I’d still have substantial equity – nearly 40% equity remaining. At a drop like that, I’d be shopping around to buy another building or two – and I know plenty of people with that sentiment – which is exactly why it’s unlikely to drop anywhere near that magnitude.
You are so obviously praying for the big bubble to pop, so you can cheer from the sidelines. Get a life.