House of the Day: 100 Lefferts Place
Why anyone would even considering paying over $2 million for a three-story house on Classon when they could pick up a five-story place on Lefferts Place for $1.8 million is beyond us. Granted there are no interior pics and the Lefferts Hotel is just down the block, but we’re willing to take this BHS broker’s…

Why anyone would even considering paying over $2 million for a three-story house on Classon when they could pick up a five-story place on Lefferts Place for $1.8 million is beyond us. Granted there are no interior pics and the Lefferts Hotel is just down the block, but we’re willing to take this BHS broker’s word that the 6,100-square-foot house is chock-full of period details. Given that it’s been chopped up into five floor-through apartments, though, we also bet it’s far from in perfect shape. Nonetheless, this could be an interesting condo conversion play. Agree?
100 Lefferts Place [Brown Harris Stevens] GMAP P*Shark
1.4 for 5 floors in a rare brownstone, or 1.4 for a white box in PS?
The choice is yours.
Just incase you newbies dont know, there’s a similar hotel on Lincoln and 7th ave and in its prime it was just as sleazy as the one on Lefferts. Times change.
Why is everyone assuming the rental ad is for this building and not the one next door. I think it would be very odd to try and rent an apartment in the building right before you are selling it. Wouldn’t that just decrease the sale price?
Even in NYC, people spending $2m for a single family home with no appreciation potential expect a minimum quality level. Especially if they are giving up most of the reasons to live in the city without getting any of the compensating advantages of the suburbs.
In this price range, this place needs LOTS of work for a single family owner. More than for condos.
The bitter rents need to go to rentsarelosers.com and get posting.
Since when is asking price the final sale price you idiots.
This is a great price for a huge space in a good area. As noted earlier, the hotel will be gone in 5 or fewer years.
The owner can get some bitter renters to move in and pay for the mortgage while the place is slowly redone.
Btw: Why do you asshats always assume you MUST do all the renovations before you move in?
Your lack of vision, balls and need to put up a million conditions keep you from ever owning a home. Go back to Iowa.
Buyers strike! Yah!
That’s commie talk. If you have money, you must buy, regardless of price.
Get over the serf mentality. If you lose your shirt on this one, there will be always be more. Uncle Ben will take care of you.
it would only have to be gutted if it was going to be converted into condo’s. if this is being purchased for rental income then the price is a little steep. if you put some work into the place( but keep the original details) i am sure you could increase the rent by 200 a month. There are not a lot of building that you can still purchase that would support the mortgage on rental income. this is not a purchase for someone looking to be a landlord. this is a purchase for someone to convert into a single family or condo’s otherwise the price is not justifiable (yet).
“Looks in fair shape to me.”
Why should I pay $10,000 per month for “fair shape”?
Just because I have lots of money doesn’t mean I want to give it away so that I can live like I don’t have shit.
Montrose: Sellers aren’t obligated to lower their prices to accommodate buyers. But no law says that buyers need to pay twice as much to buy as to rent, either.
For the last few years, buyers have overpaid because they’ve assumed that however much they overpay, someone else will be willing to overpay even more next year. Or as some people on this blog put it “in the long run prices always go up”.
If you believe that prices always go up, you should pay as much as you can afford (or more, if the banks will lend it to you), without thinking about rental value, comps or price per square foot.
But eventually prices get so high that no one can afford them, or the banks won’t lend the money, or the wealthy notice they are being overcharged and they have other options (Greenwich is now cheaper than CH), including renting.
Then, the market slows down and, as the message gets through to buyers that the number of suckers is not infinite, buyers start to use rational methods of valuing. Like, is this house a good deal relative to its rental value (no, it’s about double what an investor would pay) or relative to what a buyer could get renting (no) or buying in another place (for the same travel time from NYC, there are plenty of beautiful older street car suburbs with town centers, and several safe ultra-urban areas with lower prices if not quite so much woodwork).
If you might lose 10 or 25% of value in the next few years on top of $10k/month expenses, the alternatives start to look pretty nice. For 10k you could rent a triplex in Brooklyn Heights or a 2000 sft apt in a new Manhattan building with a doorman, without risking an additional quarter or half million dollar capital loss.
Montrose,
That is definitely not what sketchy means.