200 Rector Place #35E
2 beds•2.5 baths•1,174 ft²
Condo in Battery Park City
2 South End Avenue
1 bed•1 bath•768 ft²
Madison Square Park Towerаt 45 East 22nd Street
Condo in Flatiron
Closed in end of 2009 @ $2.4M and maintenance at the time $600 cheaper. Maybe a little redecorating but no major renovations done since then (all had been done already). So please explain the $1.3M increase in price today? I understand they got a steal at $2.4M when the "World was about to end" but still this is absurd and pretty much all that is wrong with the inefficient real estate market.
What do you want from us? Didn't mommy or daddy teach you that the world is not fair?
Let the market do it's work.
There's always http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/761423-coop-300-east-74th-street-upper-east-side-new-york a half-block away, asking $100,000 less and with maintenance $1000 lower, but that doesn't have any fireplaces.
Do you think the apt will actually trade at that price? 3rd floor, light-challenged, $1500 ppsf. This is 3BC, 7B & 7C recently sold for $2.46M between the two of them. And I don't see how one can pass up NWT's place at this same price. Lower maintenance, 19th floor, views, etc.
If you want to talk inefficiency, this is mice nuts. For this kind of money directed at rent, you can find high-floor, highly-renovated places on Central Park with 80 feet of direct park views:
That place is gorgeous, while the two buy examples are just ho-hum combos.
It's shy a bedroom and bath, but can easily accommodate three or four kids. If a kid can't show a W2 (in West81st's immortal words) it can share and like it.
225 East is between 2nd and 3rd, but 300 East is past 2nd, 2nd avenue subway construction is a pain. Some people prefer prewar buildings, 300 East is post war and the apartment needs work and new kitchen appliances. I'm not saying 225 East 74th is a bargain, but an apartment that has already been "tastefully" decorated or staged will have a bigger appeal to buyers than a bland apartment that needs some work.
3.2mm+ is my guess. 2500 sq ft, fully finished apt. South exposure probably blocked by trees.
Many people would not consider the postwar. Not sure what the celing height in 225e is. Assume higher than 300 east. Also, 300 east is probably 10 percent smaller but views should more than make up for that.
So 300, the renovations and most decorating had been done prior to the previous sale of $2.4M so the $800k gain/difference is all bc of "timing"? Sure things were pretty bleak then but tough to say we are that much better off today.
Nycrejunkie, Only a real sale will tell the price of this one but there is nothing wrong with price up 30 percent from the bottom. I posted several examples in my other posts.
Truth, no denying between Lex and Third is a beautiful block but this apt is between 2nd and 3rd. With that said even btw 2nd/3rd is a beautiful block with the trees lit up etc and there is no denying that the apt in question is a beautiful apt. The issue I have is it was purchased (basically exactly as it is today) in 2009 for $2.4M and now 3 years later they are reoffering it for up 50% ($1.3M gain). I understand 2009 was a rough year with a ton of uncertainty and they definitely got a good deal by sticking their necks out to buy it but 50% gain over the following years is ridiculous. And contrary to 300's comment about nothing wrong with trying I disagree. I think it is mismanaged by seller broker and seller. Not an efficient (in price, speed, time) market if lofty expectations are set full of emotion.
Actual sale price will tell the truth. In the meantime, wannabe buyers will naturally call it overpriced - nothing wrong with that.
I can't afford even the 2009/$2.4M price so not even close. Just making an observation that I feel seems quite obvious. You also seem to defend it quite strongly so are you the owner or useless broker that advised the price?
Neither. I am not even saying that it will sell for the asking price. I am just giving an estimate 10 percent below ask. Fell free to estimate your closing price expectation.
$3,695,000 / 2,400 sq ft = $1,539.58/sq ft. That seems reasonable? 2007 mkt top prices for new construction.
$3,325,500 / 2,400 sq ft = $1,385.625/sq ft. Is your "down 10% from ask" price.
They paid $1k/sq ft in 2009.
I could easily argue it should be $1k/sq ft for low floor, high(er) maintenance, no W/D in family sized apt. East of 3rd ave. But i'll take into account 2009 was a trying time. So $1,150/sq ft = $2,760,000.
I'm so far off according to you i'll even throw in another $50k-$100k b/c the size of apt is its best characteristic. Should trade at/below $2.9M and that's being generous. Down 20%+ from ask.
I will watching the closing price with interest (make take some time due to the high per sq ft price). Sq footage is bit more than 2400. If you measure like most new condos do, you will probably get 2600-2700 sq ft (include all exterior walls, part of the hallways etc).
If you believe the listings, 7B listed at 1600 sq ft and 7C listed at 800 sq ft, so 2400 sq ft total. Including exterior walls, right around 75x32 which would put it at 2400 sq ft.
In contract within a month of listing!!
Sold for 3.5mm!!
I agree that the pricing is steep. I think it just goes to show that 3+ bedroom properties presented in mint, move-in ready condition, will sell at very high prices in the current market. However, everything on the market in move in ready condition moved very rapidly, despite flaws (like dark, low floor in this case). I'm not suggesting that it's sensible but it seemed like there were definitely people who were easily willing to pay $250+ psft over market to find a place they could move their kids into before the school year. I think this is a case in point. If it needed a new kitchen or bathrooms, I would have guessed it would have traded closer to $3mn.
I think this is the same for the new development pre-war redevelopments or pre-war style new builds. Here's a comparable in the Philip House. Pretty comparable but smaller, too far north vs. too far east, and more expensive. $3.995. Close to $2,000psft.
200 East 79th Street. Smaller and higher monthlies. Master bedroom overlooking a very busy street with bus traffic etc... Entered contract last year. I'd imagine it would be close to $3.5mn if marketed today.
Oxy: I'm not sure that I agree with some of your comparisons. I don't think that 73rd street was in mint condition. There are some odd features and bad finishes, but ultimately people are buying the space.
Inventory is so tight that I think the buyers just wanted an apartment with 3+ bedrooms, which is hard to find. Have you seen anything else really comparable? 9A at 955 Lex for $3.5mm is a similar combination, but it's a better building that is further west and is unrenovated. (http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/999988-coop-955-lexington-avenue-lenox-hill-new-york) The two apartments that you mentioned don't seem like good comparisons because they're essentially new build.
So I don't agree that this apartment is $250psft "above market". I think that tight supply pushed the prices up at this is the new market.
jsw. I'm not sure I agree. I think there is a not-insignificant segment of the market looking for a "mint" move-in ready apartment. I did visit the open house on this unit and it ticked that box. It didn't tick a lot of other boxes for us such as light or flow or storage space but we wouldn't have wanted (not needed) to redo any bathrooms, kitchens, knock down walls or replace windows / floors. i
I think the number of apartments checking this box is only around 10%.
I'm suggesting that this 10% "mint" sector of the market trades closer to new development than the remaining 90%.
Here's another example. This included a gut reno but this property traded at above ask for over $1mm more than prior sale in 2009.
I am not sure why the 2009 price is relevant. the market is between $1500 to $2000 psqf. Why would you pay attention to what someone paid for the unit?
1 day ago
Member since: Oct 2007
!!!, have you stolen fSteve's re pompoms?
I agree! with Aboutready!!!