Last Week's Biggest Sales: Bay Ridge on Top
1. BAY RIDGE $1,900,000 8025 Harbor View Terrace GMAP (left) In its listing, this 3,274-sf one-family house was described as being in “the Beverly Hills of Bay Ridge.” It was asking $2.3 million. Entered into contract on 6/28/09; closed on 9/18/09; deed recorded on 9/28/09. 2. BAY RIDGE $1,570,000 7801 Narrows Avenue GMAP (right) This…
1. BAY RIDGE $1,900,000
8025 Harbor View Terrace GMAP (left)
In its listing, this 3,274-sf one-family house was described as being in “the Beverly Hills of Bay Ridge.” It was asking $2.3 million. Entered into contract on 6/28/09; closed on 9/18/09; deed recorded on 9/28/09.
2. BAY RIDGE $1,570,000
7801 Narrows Avenue GMAP (right)
This house sold under foreclosure pressure, according to Property Shark. Two foreclosure auctions on the 3,074-sf, single-family house were scheduled this year. Entered into contract on 7/6/09; closed on 9/16/09; deed recorded on 9/30/09.
3. BAY RIDGE $1,300,000
120 85th Street GMAP
This 3,190-sf house was listed for $1.49 million. Entered into contract on 9/18/09; closed on 9/18/09; deed recorded on 10/2/09.
4. PROSPECT HEIGHTS $1,300,000
50 Plaza Street East, Unit 11 GMAP
Size of this unit, which is in one of Prospect Heights’ most prestigious co-ops, is unknown. Property Shark says the unit last sold for $960,000 in 2004. Closed on 9/3/09; deed recorded on 9/29/09.
5. PARK SLOPE $1,265,000
133 Sterling Place #5A GMAP
If StreetEasy’s info on this unit is accurate, it commanded far less than what the sponsor was fishing for: The 1,758-sf condo in the Vermeil was originally listed for $2,300,000 in January ’07 and last asking $2,100,000. Sale included a parking spot. Entered into contract on 3/20/09; closed on 6/4/09; deed recorded on 9/28/09.
Photos from Property Shark.
I think I really like Antidope (I’m not sure of the name though…where did you drum that name up from?).
At least you’re honest and not chest-pounding. It seems you’re open to the idea that things are much worse than they appear but your arguments are well-reasoned and I like that.
BHO is needlessly nasty. Frankly, if the sky really IS falling, than why not be kind to everyone? No point going around slapping people. Okay, okay. So the sky is falling. We’re all going to lose it and no one will be saved. The system is in collapse and we’ll all be scratching the bare earth for a bite to eat in a couple of years so let’s browbeat everyone and make them pointlessly miserable on the way down. Sure.
Look, if “it” happens, it happens and all the hilltop yelling and nasty side comments won’t make any difference.
Goodnight All!
Do it do it do it, finally finally finally.
“finally i think arguments that prices have to revert to a certain year are absolute nonsense”
Quite the contrary. The year is merely a label for a particular average or mean. In ’01 Clinton Hill brownstones went for about seven hundred and fitty grand. We goin’ back there yonder. Please explain why that doesn’t make sense.
***Bid half off peak comps***
really though who knows?
i started commenting in this space in march/april when i felt the negative / bear view was monolithic and didn’t reflect actual reality but rather a thoughtless groupspeak that pointed to an unavoidable depression. thank goodness that view is at least delayed if not totally avoided; at best, it was just plain wrong.
“huge almost immeasurable amount of equity in ny real estate built on the back of 60 years”
Myth. They’ve refinanced up to peak comps and now they’re snorkeling under the surface. It wasn’t just a purchase boom.
***Bid half off peak comps***
if you talk in ratio terms i am with you, but we are talking price/rent or price/income, specifically price/income with respect to the multi-million dollar home buying ny subsegment. i think that group of buyers expanded at virtually the same pace as the market price rises (minus 20%?). would love to see data. absolute price returns to 2004? why not 2003? why not 1492? what’s the metric.
btw, u r correct re investors etcetera, but in the meantime banks will start writing and holding the paper and make nice margins to earn back lost capital. then early next year with national price stabilization (you will see 6-9-12 months of flat c-s by then), rmbs secondary market already snapping back … and away the investors go. file this and shove it in my face in March.
ttfn.
I’ll sign up for i, iv, and viii.
I don’t think jumbos open up. the non-agency mortgage securitization market will be on a respirator until investors want to put their money at risk to securitized pools of jumbo loans. that happens after prices stablize, not before.
as far as reverting to a certain year, I think you have to ask why the values are double, say, 2004 levels, and if you can’t answer it, reversion is a totally legitimate argument.
parking spot way more convenient and valuable than stated above vs. renting. one problem in the slope is that there are so few spots to rent! i was at the place on union for years and sometimes it would take forever to get my car. it’s a hassle. having to first go to your place, unload car, then drive over to lot where you have to wait to even park it, is of course, do-able, but not fun. i would put a premium on having a spot where i lived.
also, down the road, could be a big income producer if needed, or just make the sale of your place more attractive.
on the whole though, to many buying a parking spot might not really be a financial decision as much as something people just want to have.
“volume is very thin”
Shadow inventory is thick like Serena. An uptick in volume precedes capitulation.
***Bid half off peak comps***