House of the Day: 143 Amity Street
We won’t dispute the listing’s claim that 143 Amity Street is a “timeless brownstone beauty,” because that’s certainly what the Cobble Hill house is, no doubt about it. But the asking price of $3,900,000 comes in at over $1,000 per foot which seems quite pricey for a 17-footer whose kitchen is “ready for a new…
We won’t dispute the listing’s claim that 143 Amity Street is a “timeless brownstone beauty,” because that’s certainly what the Cobble Hill house is, no doubt about it. But the asking price of $3,900,000 comes in at over $1,000 per foot which seems quite pricey for a 17-footer whose kitchen is “ready for a new touch,” no? We’re not even sure this house would fetch the ask if it were located on the Brooklyn Heights side of the tracks either. Thoughts?
143 Amity Street [Brown Harris Stevens] GMAP P*Shark
Heyelke the owner did not buy the place 20 years ago instead 5 years ago. I checked the city records. My estimate is this should not be more than 1.5 – 1.75 mil. They bought it for little over a mil.
I would think 22 Strong Place is a better comp (than 72 Hicks St) on a ppsf basis – it is a 25 footer and sold for $2.055 mil ($475/sqft)
went to open house. its not renovate folks..unless you consider installing new very cheap bathrooms. the kitchen is so terrible it ought to be knocked down. I particularly liked the well worn linoleum covering the entire staircase. I do not think the owner poured a dime into this house since they bought it almost 20 years ago. Honestly, they would be luck to get half and even that is too much considering the amount of true renovation that is necessary. Too bad brokers don’t have to live by truth in advertising or this one would be in jail.
But the tighter the market the more a single comp sets prices –and not even at the margin, but at the middle, too! OK, well, our disagreement has no effect on anything; so now we pull up a tub of popcorn and watch.
I also respectfully disagree, and because I think you’re missing the finer points of the Brooklyn Heights market in particular. Even in the recent boom times, only something like 12-15 house were sold a year. In this environment, there have only been 2 sales in the first 5 months of the year. I’m not sure how, in that sample size, you assume the lower of the two prices is the new “norm.”
As for the original ask – 135 Joralemon (a similar wood frame house) sold in December 2008 for $4.1 million. Clearly that buyer could have considered 72 Hicks. Whether the high listing price discouraged them or not is speculation, but I think it’s legitimate to think there were buyers in the market somewhere north of $2.9M but south of $4.9M.
The guy who bought 72 Hicks is a house investor, he for one thinks he’s going to get a nice return on his investment.
I still have to respectfully disagree. My assumptions are: in the next 6 months nothing changes to alter the selling climate, which is dismal; several houses will have to be sold, and they will be at prices normed to 72 Hicks, not 2007; and after 6 months you will have a recent history of sales with which to peg new sales going forward. No one is then going to say, “Oh, those previous sellers had to sell.” I know how I feel –I’m in the market for a house at exactly these prices. On what planet would I now consider a three million dollar house in anything but the very nicest parts of Brooklyn, in tip top shape…? I’d have to be pretty gullible to accept the thesis that, Oh, 72 Hicks was a distress sale. Mr. Market has spoken; and he doesn’t care whether or not you’re distressed.
NorthHeights — I think that Whuh’s point (with which I mostly agree at least as to the correct comp) is not that sellers’ motivations do not matter.
The point (I think) is that if the motivation is to sell in under 3-6 months, the comps are going to be in line with 72 Hicks. If the seller is able/willing to wait up to 12 months or more, you are right. If one assumes that more people are looking to exit in shorter time windows, that motivation is going to bring the price down from this ask by 25% or more.
I don’t get the idea that the initial aggressive listing of 72 Hicks caused the sellers to “pay” the price — it seems unlikely that there were many buyers out there willing to spend $4.1M on the house when it was first listed but were discouraged from bidding because the ask was at $4.95. (Does anyone know if there were bids on 72 Hicks above the final price? I am more than willing to be corrected on this factual point.)
Of coures the crazy thing is that even a 25% drop at this level only brings the house down to $2.95M or so. A 25% drop from the sq. ft. estimate you provided puts us at $2.7M — which is where I am willing to guess.
The funny thing about everyone assuming the kids will go to Packer or St. Ann’s is the assumption that there is enough space to take the kid (setting aside whether the school decides to take him or her.) I think in today’s NYC such assumptions are not warranted, and parents expecting private school attendance still need to keep their eye on the “fallback” PS nearby.
You’re focusing on one house. I agree that if there are a series of houses that sell at a 25% discount in a neighborhood, that’s a trend. But that’s a “what if” situation down the road. There’s no evidence *yet* of which way townhouse prices are going (at least in Brooklyn Heights), one way or the other. Two houses have sold in the past few months, one at roughly 2008 prices and this one last week. Two house sales are statistically meaningless. I would argue that the recent sale is the less representative one because they spooked the market with their ridiculous opening ask, but that’s my opinion.
As for markets, sellers’ motivation does matter. You can have all the buyers in the world lining up to get their brownstones half-off in Brooklyn Heights but that doesn’t mean they’re going to find many (or any) for sale.
All due respect, North, I don’t think that’s how markets work, even one as illiquid as brownstone Brooklyn. It’s true that only people who have to sell will sell now; but the motivation of a seller doesn’t alter pricing power. What will move prices up after we have six or eight places sell like the Hicks St place did? The sellers who waited will have to sell at the new comp-level, or wait and hope the bar doesn’t slip again. This is classic deflation.
I know if I’m looking to buy now, on Amity St., or in Fort Greene, or anywhere in the borough, and I know I could have purchased an historic charmer in prime heights for under three -well, I’m sorry, that’s my comp. You want to hold out that’s your business, Mr. Seller. But there are going to be more distress sellers then panic buyers going forward –many more. 72 Hicks has set a new bar, and set it quite low.