186-Washington-Avenue-0908.jpg
It’s been a tough slog for 186 Washington Avenue, an attractive albeit narrow brownstone on a nice block in Clinton Hill. The listing started out with Aguayo & Huebener in the Spring of 2008 at $1,739,000 before switching to Corcoran with a new price tag of $1,670,000 last September. In November Elliman stepped in a put a number of $1,600,000 on the house to no avail. In June, the price was reduced to $1,500,000. How long can it go? This is a nice place.
186 Washington Avenue [Douglas Elliman] GMAP P*Shark
House of the Day: 186 Washington Avenue [Brownstoner]
Open House Picks 5/2/2008 [Brownstoner]



What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. What I want to know is who is the Emmy winner living in this house? (See mantle in living room)?

    Personally, I would move that statue outta there during open houses and showings. Just sayin’.

  2. “BHO, I’m curious as to how you arrived as 10-1 being the ratio of home price to annual rent in a “normal” market. That would make houses severely undervalued when compared to other investment vehicles…”

    That ratio is pretty common (can’t remember exactly where I got it from). Floor-through rents in Clinton Hill averaged $1,200 in the late 90’s. That made a four-family $576,000, even more than what they were going for at the time. Severely undervalued? Stop cheatin’, kim!

    “1991…$190,000”

    Nuff said.

    ***Bid half off peak comps***

  3. kimcheater,

    Obviously you’ve never been to Clinton Hill. Have you been to Brooklyn?

    That’s a beautiful block, and very far from the BQE! Nicely placed between St. Joseph’s College and Pratt.

  4. My daughter was friends with a kid who lived in the house with the blue siding. Please believe me when I say the siding was a big improvement. It was amazing–went up in 1 day! Also please believe me when I say that there’s a reason there are no photos in the listing.
    http://www.corcoran.com/property/listing.aspx?Region=NYC&listingid=1513967
    Definitely NOT HOTD-worthy.

    I remember when that house was for sale before–maybe 1991. They were asking $190,000; probably went for lots less. That was the last mutant asset bubble.

  5. BHO, I’m curious as to how you arrived as 10-1 being the ratio of home price to annual rent in a “normal” market. That would make houses severely undervalued when compared to other investment vehicles (e.g., P/E ration of 14 for equities over the last 100 years, closer to 18 or 20 over the last 10 years), when houses have traditionally returned far less than the equities market.

    That being said, no matter what condition the street is in, I wouldn’t consider anything north of Willoughby to be a “nice block,” unless you consider guaranteed childhood asthma and being sandwiched between two areas with some of the highest homicide rates in the city to be “nice.”

  6. While I’m at it, the often repeated phrase “rich sucker” is even more silly to me. Most people who have made good money and managed money wisely are not suckers.

    That doesn’t mean that people don’t spend impulsively all the time — so-called rich or not. It doesn’t mean people of all income levels don’t make mistakes with real estate. But this idea that some richer sucker will buy an overpriced house is silly. There’s no one looking seriously at real estate today who doesn’t know that it’s a buyer’s market.

  7. I don’t get this “sucker” “idiot” thing about rentals. Most people — anyone commenting on this board — is probably going to look at a lot of listings that meet or come close to what they want; they’re gunnna get a feel for current prices. If something’s under market there’s usually a reason, an unpleasant reason. Not always, but usually. What are we supposed to do? Poison some elderly person and move into their house?

1 2 3 7