House of the Day: 465 13th Street
The three-story brownstone just hit the market on March 11 but it’s already received an insta-price cut from $1,775,000 to $1,650,000. The house appears to have its details in place but it comes off as a far more modest pad than, say, last Thursday’s House of the Day at 601 6th Street. And while it’s…
The three-story brownstone just hit the market on March 11 but it’s already received an insta-price cut from $1,775,000 to $1,650,000. The house appears to have its details in place but it comes off as a far more modest pad than, say, last Thursday’s House of the Day at 601 6th Street. And while it’s a million bucks cheaper than the 6th Street House, the asking price is only about $50 per square foot cheaper. Given the difference in location, condition and grandeur, we’d argue that 6th Street is a more attractive deal. That said, on an absolute level, this is a decent way for some family to get an attractive brownstone in the Slope for not crazy money.
465 13th Street [Susan Breen] GMAP P*Shark
“In the last 4 such posts [Last Week’s Biggest Sales], at least two and as many as 4 of the ‘biggest sales’ have been under 1.6M. Right or wrong, perception as to what is a ‘lot’ of money has shifted dramatically in the last 2 months.”
You’re seeing the effect of low transaction volume. There are potential sellers with expensive houses, and potential buyers with fat wallets, but they’re all sitting on the sidelines. Maybe later in the year, if/when sellers get more desperate, you can point to the declining average of the “biggest sales” as evidence of a market decline, but right now it’s not.
I would really prefer that these prices are not referred to as “not crazy money”.
tybur6…this situation is easy street compared to the problems back then. Crime was a huge issue as well…its apples & oranges to compare the current status of NYC with that of the 70s and 80s.
Can I say… I was already amazed by the price tag *before* I just noticed the sentence in the description: Though this home needs work, it has “good bonesâ€
Wow.
sashae – Oh, for sure there is an NYC premium. I would consider this house of the day well worth $600-$800k, which for its square footage is way more expensive, again, than most of the US. But $1.6 million is just nuts. At some point you have to be like “You know what? Raleigh-Durham and Seattle have really nice bars, restaurants, and coffee shops too.”
DIBS – Unsure. I tried to go to an open house at 455 Macon a month or two ago but no one was actually there. With MrsCWB out of a job and my own employment beginning to look perilous, we’re not really in the market right now.
It IS a really nice block. I’m frankly surprised both of those have sat for that long. There’s a ton of real estate available in Bed Stuy right now at prices that seem almost reasonable even to me. 🙂
“NYC was coming out of practically bankruptcy in the early 90s.”
And wouldn’t that be now as well?! How is the current financial position of the city not “practically bankrupt”?
cw…you’re not going to get a much better block than that one in Bed Stuy.
Do they need much in the way of mechanicals???
@shillstoner — Yes, the 3.4% is the average annual appreciation for the last 100 years.
@daveinbedstuy — 1999 was the peak of the tech bubble, so if anything prices should be INFLATED at that point.
@cwbuecheler — I figure even considering the much greater bang-for-the-buck outside of NYC, you’ve got to pay that NYC premium to stay here. I can live with that, to some extent. To the current pricing? No thanks.
I agree — it’s morally important to keep in mind those folks that are losing their homes.
However, one very positive thing that will come out of the financial crash is that perhaps… perhaps… the absurd gobs and gobs of financial services cash that has overinflated the housing markets might be going away. $800k houses might start selling for $800k instead of $1.8 million.
(I also include the overinflated salaries that were required in other industries simply to stay in-line with the financial services cash.)