Printed from StreetEasy.com at 09:07 PM, Dec 18 2009
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/12649-awesomely-psychotic-listing-building-at-301-east-62nd-street
I have an essentially unlimited capacity to think bad thoughts about brokers, but even I can't believe that a broker could come up with this one This has to be the owner.
I appreciate one of these every once in a while. Comic relief in a tough market.
Duh, if you put a wall up it makes another room and TOTALLY adds a few hundred square feet. It's magic! Based on the number of converted jr-4s marketed as "huge 2-bedrooms" right now, I figured this was standard practice.
Someday I'm going to buy a studio apartment and transform it into a "sprawling 5 bedrooms, 4 full bathroom residence" by putting up lots of walls - who cares if you'd barely be able to live in it if you were the size of a Barbie doll. The ceilings get a lot higher that way too, so they'll be at least 20 feet. I'll make a fortune.
The main problem with that theory is that they didn't. The 2007 listing is still live on Corcoran's web site and the floorplan is identical to the current listing.
#5BCD
So, as we all agree this place changed hands at the top of the market 'Q1-07' for a hair over 2M. That seens like a very low price for the space given the date of the sale. There is more here than meets the eye. That being said, This is priced to sit....4ever. It's is an unrealistic price considering the comp of #9C which is a studio smaller.
Prehaps they have installed central vacume with a 'special attachment' that can only be procured through a clandestine North Korean operative. I could tell you what that 'special attachment' does but, then I'd have to kill you.
falco - thanks, very interesting point about 9BC. Your post made me look closer at the building history. I agree that the 5BCD price seems low for the location and time period, I'm not sure there is more here than meets the eye, at least with respect to in-building comps. Maybe there is something that makes the building trade low vs. others. If so, the new 5BCD listing is even more psychotic.
6B, 6C and 6D all sold between Sept 2006 and Feb 2007 (to different buyers, so not someone buying to combine) for a total of $2,200,000. This is the same aggregate space one floor up for basically exactly the same money as 5BCD, which sold for the full ask of $2,195,000. Obviously with 5BCD you get the combination for free, which makes that apt a bargain for someone looking for space, but it isn't in a different zip code from the comps.
On your 9BC point, if you add the most recent D line sale, 10D for $537,500 in Nov 2007, to the 9BC ask, you get a little under $2.3mm, or about 4% above the 5BCD sale price. Again, in the zip code of where 5BCD sold, and potentially below 5BCD by the time 9BC actually sells.
As an aside, what's REALLY wierd is that 6D resold in April 2007 for $446,000, a loss of almost $200k (30%) in well under a year, which would bring the 6th floor comparable sum-of-the-parts to $2mm from $2.2mm. It looks as if this is not indicative of the building overall as there were several other 2007 or 2008 sales that were up from same unit 2004, 2005 and 2007 sales. Overall, it just doesn't look like this building ran up as much as many others from 2004 to peak, although the exception to that rule would be the same unit resale of 14CD in mid 2007, up 45% from mid 2004.
Here is another interesting feature.
9BC is 2000sq/ft as listed on SE
6D is 580 sq/ft
Now I'm going to get a little fancy here...2000+580=2580
See where I'm going with this 'hint-hint'.
In 5BCD (3000sq/ft) the normal time-space continuuum does not exisit as we know it. They have a 'special-attachment' that allows the occupant to subvert all the laws of physics.
NOW, do you think it's still over priced?
Since it last sold in 2007, this apartment grew 1.5 rooms and 500sf and the ask went up by almost $2.7mm. Who knew? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/385426-coop-e62nd-lenox-hill-new-york
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/24761-coop-301-east-62nd-street-lenox-hill-new-york
Do you think the broker is clueless, or scheming? Are they just taking whatever the owner says and putting it in the listing??
I have an essentially unlimited capacity to think bad thoughts about brokers, but even I can't believe that a broker could come up with this one This has to be the owner.
I appreciate one of these every once in a while. Comic relief in a tough market.
i do note that they painted the apartment... perhaps that accounts for the feeling of the extra 500 sq ft...
Duh, if you put a wall up it makes another room and TOTALLY adds a few hundred square feet. It's magic! Based on the number of converted jr-4s marketed as "huge 2-bedrooms" right now, I figured this was standard practice.
Someday I'm going to buy a studio apartment and transform it into a "sprawling 5 bedrooms, 4 full bathroom residence" by putting up lots of walls - who cares if you'd barely be able to live in it if you were the size of a Barbie doll. The ceilings get a lot higher that way too, so they'll be at least 20 feet. I'll make a fortune.
Maybe they bought a studio next door?
The main problem with that theory is that they didn't. The 2007 listing is still live on Corcoran's web site and the floorplan is identical to the current listing.
#5BCD
So, as we all agree this place changed hands at the top of the market 'Q1-07' for a hair over 2M. That seens like a very low price for the space given the date of the sale. There is more here than meets the eye. That being said, This is priced to sit....4ever. It's is an unrealistic price considering the comp of #9C which is a studio smaller.
Prehaps they have installed central vacume with a 'special attachment' that can only be procured through a clandestine North Korean operative. I could tell you what that 'special attachment' does but, then I'd have to kill you.
falco - thanks, very interesting point about 9BC. Your post made me look closer at the building history. I agree that the 5BCD price seems low for the location and time period, I'm not sure there is more here than meets the eye, at least with respect to in-building comps. Maybe there is something that makes the building trade low vs. others. If so, the new 5BCD listing is even more psychotic.
6B, 6C and 6D all sold between Sept 2006 and Feb 2007 (to different buyers, so not someone buying to combine) for a total of $2,200,000. This is the same aggregate space one floor up for basically exactly the same money as 5BCD, which sold for the full ask of $2,195,000. Obviously with 5BCD you get the combination for free, which makes that apt a bargain for someone looking for space, but it isn't in a different zip code from the comps.
On your 9BC point, if you add the most recent D line sale, 10D for $537,500 in Nov 2007, to the 9BC ask, you get a little under $2.3mm, or about 4% above the 5BCD sale price. Again, in the zip code of where 5BCD sold, and potentially below 5BCD by the time 9BC actually sells.
As an aside, what's REALLY wierd is that 6D resold in April 2007 for $446,000, a loss of almost $200k (30%) in well under a year, which would bring the 6th floor comparable sum-of-the-parts to $2mm from $2.2mm. It looks as if this is not indicative of the building overall as there were several other 2007 or 2008 sales that were up from same unit 2004, 2005 and 2007 sales. Overall, it just doesn't look like this building ran up as much as many others from 2004 to peak, although the exception to that rule would be the same unit resale of 14CD in mid 2007, up 45% from mid 2004.
Here is another interesting feature.
9BC is 2000sq/ft as listed on SE
6D is 580 sq/ft
Now I'm going to get a little fancy here...2000+580=2580
See where I'm going with this 'hint-hint'.
In 5BCD (3000sq/ft) the normal time-space continuuum does not exisit as we know it. They have a 'special-attachment' that allows the occupant to subvert all the laws of physics.
NOW, do you think it's still over priced?
<< Entrance gallery leading to a grand living room with graceful curves and shapes.>>
Unless you think round is funny.
no studio acquired -- not enough increase in maint. re: same