Why isn't this selling???

Maybe because
1. there will not be a view when the parking lot got developed by Extell. After all, it is just on the 7th floor.
2. it faces the ConEd building and that huge chimney
3. the apt is painted yellow and not to everybody's taste. New owner has to renovate.

4. There are lots of other apartments exactly like it all over the city.
5. There are a lot more apartments just like it going up in buildings currently under construction.
6. Most of the target-demographic is worried about keeping their jobs or having their bonuses cut.
7. A lot of people can no longer get the mortgage needed to buy this apartment.
8. Smart buyers know that prices have more room to fall.

I have been warned by my broker to steer clear of this building, as there are a number of issues with it, including flooring problems, the area is desolate, the distance from everything, the views could be lost, etc. Those significant shortcomings plus it being in a lousy school district, meant that for us 10 West End was not a good option.

I have an idea. It's over priced for this market. Or perhaps no one can get a 90% loan. Or the actual squar footage is about 200 less then listed. It could be anything. What's clear is that there are no takers at this price.

credit is gone. even with great credit scores. some banks have started to ask for 30% down on properties over 1m.

I think many sellers/developers have underestimated the extent of the softness in the market. Sure, the ultra-luxury market ($10MM+) might still be okay because those buyers don't have to worry about financing and there are relatively few properties in that space. But run-of-the-mill cookie-cutter units like this in the $1.5MM-$2MM range are plentiful and still relatively over-priced.

Avataram - In a lifetime on the West Side, during which I have spent a lot of time in that neighborhood, I can't remember ever hearing the words, "When I make my first million, I'm going to move to 60th and West End."

I've never been inside the building, but what does the location really have going for it? Western Beef? John Jay College? Roosevelt Hospital? The Honda dealership? Does it offer anything to people with kids? We have friends who rent a couple of blocks away; the wife volunteers at the elementary school just so she can keep an eye on her six-year-old daughter and make sure she's safe.

How a building like yours fares in a downturn could be a good test of the Manhattan market's "specialness". And probably not in a good way. Sorry, that's just how I see it.

I know the area well and yes, horrible school district. There's a few new buildings in the area and based on it's location I think it's overpriced. For that money you could go up to 200 WEA and get a more residential neighborhood with a great school district.

I have also now heard that a number of buyers are really quite unhappy with the developer and the managing agent over how the floors and large number of issues on people's punch list items have been mishandled. This building is sounding like a real dud.

Interesting feedback. I think some of the comments are spot on, others not quite.

The view will absolutely be blocked by whatever comes up across the street, no doubt about that. And that is indeed one ugly smokestack that will be permanent eyesore as well. 60th/WEA is a desolate block without any amenities - but then again, I thought the price reflected as much. Who knows what type of amenties will eventually arrive out here as a result of the Extell developments and the other condos being built on 60th street but whatever it is may well be years away. To the extent that higher downpayments, job concerns, broader economic issues, people waiting for prices to go down are concerns (and they are absolutely very real concerns) it probably effects this unit just as much as others in the market.

The comments about the floors are true. They are very nice but they scratch and dent way too easily and that has been the universal complaint. As for punchlist, I know people were complaining that things were taking too long to address but I haven't heard that the issues are still unresolved or were done unsatisfactorily.

In my mind, if I was to pay around $1100psf for a condo in Manhattan I'd be limited to Harlem or the Financial District and not much else. So to pay that same amount for a new condo (not a conversion but ground up construction), with fantastic appliances, a pretty great layout and floor to ceiling windows I thought this would be an easier sell than what's been proven out. Maybe there were interested parties but they couldn't get financing. Maybe people are still waiting for things to bottom. I guess we're all just waiting to see. I do know that along with the price reduction the agent re-shot several of the photos in the listing because previously there was so much furniture clutter it looked my like an Ethan Allen ad than a RE sales listing. Nevertheless, I've been following this one closely because it's the first re-sale in the building and will keep you posted.

Maybe because you can rent a 2-bedroom apartment 2 blocks away in West End Towers for $4,300 a month, and a 30-year fixed mortgage alone would cost you $8,760 + $1,179 common charges + about $1,000 property tax when the abatement ends = total payments of $10,849 a month, when you can rent someplace similar for 1/3 the price and not have to worry about losing all that money.

That is one of the worst places in the city to buy, not only because of all the construction about to occur over the next 25 years related to the redevelopment of the West Side Rail Yard, but it's full of rental buildings. I count 74 rentals available in the general vicinity (nybits.com), the most expensive of which is listed at $7,200 a month for the penthouse in Trump Place, which being 20 blocks up is in a much nicer neighborhood, close to the IRT.

Therefore, I would hazard a guess, the apartment needs to be listed for approximately $500,000 for it to be able to compete with what's around there: mortgage $2,796 +$ 1,179 common charges + about $500 property tax when the abatement ends = total payments of $4,475. A 2-bedroom at the Helena is currently listed for $4,890, and a) it's a brand-new building with fabulous views, and b) the Lexus dealership is right across the street.

Sorry to all, but I've said it before, the disjoint between rents and owners' carrying costs are waaaay too big. You have an apartment listed for $1,550,000 that the rental competition values at $500,000, with no risk.

That's why it's not selling.

stevejhx - I've enjoyed your posts on other threads but I think you're off here. Not every question on these boards can be answered using the historic equilibrium. There are many other factors involved, aside from the economics of rent/buy, which you seem to ignore.

This building has many larger apartments (2,3,4 bdrms) which are meant to appeal to families. The priority for families is having a good elementary school, which is missing here. Everyone wants amenities, close proximity to transportation, etc, and that's all missing here too. In the end, it sounds like this is new construction with some shoddy construction issues and poor location, with a relatively low initial ppsf, with flips priced unrealistically.

Now look at 505 W47th. It's located in arguably just as bleak, if not a worse location. It has the same ppsf but is nearly sold out. The difference is the 505 has many smaller units (studios and 1 bdrm) and my guess is most of the buyers there don't care about schools, or have to worry about the safety of spouses and children they don't have.

Steve, you're happy with renting, that's great. Some people aren't and want to own, even if it costs much much more.

wyndcliff, this is no different from what I've said anywhere else. Of course there are micro differences between buildings and units: views of the hudson vs views of a smokestack. But on the macro level, it is true.

"The priority for families is having a good elementary school, which is missing here. Everyone wants amenities, close proximity to transportation, etc, and that's all missing here too."

You're right. They'll pay more to rent there, too. There's no difference between the two. Under normal market conditions, they would even need the same income.

"The difference is the 505 has many smaller units (studios and 1 bdrm) and my guess is most of the buyers there don't care about schools, or have to worry about the safety of spouses and children they don't have."

That may be true. It doesn't affect the fact that they can rent smaller units too.

Your arguments were much more valid in a time when NYC was dominated by co-ops and rent control and stabilization. That's no longer the case. The case is lots of free-market rentals, lots of condominiums that allow renters. Now - in 2008 - there is direct competition between the two. And more coming online.

For a more apples to apples comparison, it's also worth noting that there are rental listings for 2BRs in this same building for $6K-$6500/month, which is significantly less expensive than the cost of purchasing. And, it looks like they may be having trouble renting at that price.

JohnDoe, you've got it. Compulsive that I am, I've checked out multiple samples and they all show the same thing. I haven't fond one exception.

And BTW comparable rental buildings are a better comparison, because they're professional property managers who know the market, not owners trying in vain to limit their losses.

And so you know, if wages increase annually at 3.5% compounded, it will take about 20 years for them to double. Property currently costs about twice as much to buy as to sell. (Except this one that's special and costs 3x as much!) Rental prices increase in line with wages: you know 40x earnings. Therefore, if property prices stay the same it will take 20 years for wages and rents to catch up with them. And rents are currently falling because they're too high for incomes.

So do you REALLY think that being 20 years ahead of incomes is where properties should be priced? Who can wait 20 years to sell their property?

Stevejhx - Again with the rent/buy. Yes, there are "micro differences," and that's what I think the OP was asking for. You've covered your macro lesson, endlessly, for weeks now. I think everyone gets it. You're going to wait until we get back to 2004 prices. Great. In the meantime, life will go on, people will buy, people will sell. There are people on these boards telling you they are considering buying because they can't find comparable rentals in their desired neighborhoods or with the finishes they want. You tell them they can. I could understand this if you were trying to give out investment advice, but you've said yourself you'd never buy real estate as an investment. I don't get it.

Did you buy your Lexus new? Do you pay to park it? If so, please let me know why (ego, acceptance, comfort, joy, other?) because I know it can't be because it made the most economic sense. I'm not sure why you have such a hard time applying this to something larger, like let's say... a home.

wnydcliff, I have no problem with what you're saying and never have. If it's affordable, people will buy it. If there is no material difference in price, people will buy it.

Yours is a different example. First, to answer your questions, a) I bought it new when I moved to Miami where I needed a car. b) I do pay to park it because I live where there is no street parking & even if there were I'm to lazy to get up and move it & since it's an expensive car its safer where it is. c) I keep it precisely because I paid for it in cash and since it has barely 20,000 miles after 6 years, and I don't know what the future holds and if I sell it it would be much more expensive to get a new one than it costs me to keep the old one, which except for a minor injury received when a taxi backed into it, is in excellent condition.

Plus I use it every weekend from May through September.

But you're talking about two different things. First, I lived in Miami and wanted a hard-top convertible, and only Lexus and Mercedes made them at the time. Second, I paid all $65,000 of my car in cash. Third I bought what was widely considered at the time (and still) one of the most reliable cars on the market (SC420) with the slowest depreciation (I could still get around $30k for it 6 years later).

And here's why I chose that particular car: because the Mercedes SL550 - a comparable car - didn't get as good a write up and cost twice as much, and a friend of mine worked at Mercedes and said it wasn't worth the price, they were always breaking down, and the Lexus was a better car at half the price.

So I made (and am making) a perfectly rational decision buying something I can clearly afford. And there are definitely people who need to make a decision now and only want to buy and if they have the money good for them. But not everyone is constrained like that, and since you can get plenty of apartments right near THIS one - which is what we're talking about - that's what I said. I didn't say to rent; I said that nearby rentals - nice ones, too, like the Helena, and Trump Place - would indicate that it's 3x overpriced. A huge difference.

who on this board has said they are considering buying "because they can't find a comprable rental" I have not seen that statement anywhere.

why don't you relax Wyndcliff. I know you hate the decent counterarguments that people like Steve, Malreauz, etc are making. I'm sure you'd prefer that people kept saying things like "hurry up or you'll be priced out forever" or "they aren't building anymore land" but you're going to have to deal with people who have different opinions. What is gong to happen will happen irrespective of anyone's opinion on this board

Don't worry, Steve will be going on vacation soon and you'll be able to share your opinions on the market without anyone countering it

flmd- I'm relaxed. You haven't seen the statement anywhere, but they exist on other threads. If they didn't Steve would've called me on it. You should read them, and while you're at it, you should read this one... where earlier, I told Steve I've enjoyed his posts on other threads. I just think his going around to every single thread and posting his rent/buy argument is getting tiresome. So what is it you "know [I] hate" and "what [I'd] prefer?" You're an idiot.

flmd, spunky has convinced me to take my computer with me on vacation. I could always post from blackberry, but the screen is too small. Nothing better than sitting poolside in Palm Springs, drinking a mai-tai and watching spunky's ponzi scheme collapse around him.

wyndcliff, you're right - you did say you enjoyed my posts. I also didn't intend to post too much on this thread, but really, that price seemed astronomical to me. If you hadn't answered me, I wouldn't have made a second post.

For the most part I stick to my own threads, but ones like this, and that horrible layout from last week, I find irresistible.

Wow wyndcliff...I'm an idiot...yeah you sound real Relaxed. Go take a valium

be nice, be nice! some people made some of my threads so personal and nasty that some awful things were said. Unnecessary....

I didn't say anything insulting. I do find it hilarious how cliff says "he's relaxed" and then proceeds to show he is the complete opposite of relaxed by calling me an idiot, all in the same post.

flmd - You assume because you haven't seen something written on these boards, it doesn't exist. When in fact, it does. You claim to know what i "hate," when the truth is that I already said I enjoyed Steve's posts. You claim to be "sure" what I would "prefer" people say, when it's clear you haven't read this thread from the beginning, or carefully read any of Steve's recent threads. Who needs to relax?

maybe a nap would help your bad mood...

Just FYI, according to StreetEasy, it went into contract May 8th.

Last week my neighbor told me the unit was under contract so I'm glad to see that it's true. Can't wait to see what the price is.

stevejhx - I've always respected your knowledge, insight, and thoroughness of your analysis (and agree with much of it but not all of it). When I re-read this thread and saw that you thought this should be valued around $500k I've got to say I was shocked. Sub-$400psf for a brand new condo seemed to be way, way off. We certainly may be in a bit of a bubble but I don't think anyone ever thought anything in Manhattan was going to go down 65%.

Despite the location and potential for obstructed views facing west, the top floors have commanded some pretty decent pricing. $1500psf for some of the high floors is certainly pretty respectable. 14A and 14B were closer to $2000psf but those units have massive terraces.

With the combination of new inventories coming into the market and more office buildings in Manhattan converting into condos, I see the supply will definetely impact the price in a negative way. My office building is going to be converted into a condo next year. My dentist who has his office a few blocks from me told me his building is going to be converted into a condo as well. I have no doubt in my mind that prices for these new development condos will come down significantly. If you think otherwise, you are just dreaming.

BTW, where is spunky?

Didn't Spunky say he was off to Europe for a bit?

manhattanguy- don't you know Manhattant real estate NEVER GOES DOWN.............I have been predicting and still am a 20-30% deline in the next 9-12 months. Can you give me a %?

dco, now really, 20% in 9 months? If you want to maintain some credibility, maybe try for 5-10% over the next year and then a continued decline up to 20% over the next few years, or 5% decline and then flat for some xx years. But 20% in 9 months? 30% in 12 months? Ain't gonna happen. Real estate just isn't that liquid.

With about a year's supply on the market, VVerain, it sure is possible.

But wait! The commutative property of multiplication says 20% * 9 months = property prices rise forever, right?

Or, if the switch to rentals, the fall will be slower, but much, much deeper.