building at 4 East 95th Street

07/17/2005
Previous Sale recorded for $2,350,000.
07/06/2011
Listed by Corcoran at $2,850,000.
08/23/2011
Listing is no longer available.
09/06/2011
Re-listed by Corcoran.
09/14/2011
Price decreased by 7% to $2,650,000.
04/09/2012
Price decreased by 6% to $2,495,000.
05/08/2012
Listing entered contract.
06/28/2012
Listing sold.
07/25/2012
Sale recorded for $2,350,000.

seems like it's really a 6 into 7??

ouch. paid more per month than rent, then took a $250K loss with all the fees involved.

way to go.

but the guy felt good knowing he owned the place while living there...

Here lies the rub...some folks can just afford it.
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/491489-coop-1185-park-avenue-carnegie-hill-new-york

i guess they had better trades than this one

falco, pls explain

for now tho consider this 9d, for 9 mil, peak 07---ouchy poo

6D is for sub $6m too. that 9th floor better have some great views

Yikes, I agree. I think it's a six into seven. But the price differential between 2A ($2.5) and 9A ($1.6) seems extreme for two apartments in the same line, especially given that 9A is on a much higher floor.

I think both 2A and 3A are seven room apartments. Both have 3 bedrooms,dining room, plus the maid's room.
If you look at the 9A plan, it's obviously smaller than the other two, and has only 2 bedrooms plus maid's, which would account for the price differential.

Sellers of 3A moved into $6m unit at 1185 Park; carried both units for 2 years;. Nice detective work falco. They don't care about the rent vs buy calc.

PH41 The only reason that there are three bedrooms in 2A and 3A is because they divided one of the bedrooms. 9A is not "obviously smaller." Check the dimensions of the rooms and do the math. The apartments are in the same line and have the same layout. They are the same size!

I'll concede that some of the bedroom windows in 9A may be stepped back slightly, but this doesn't account for the large differnce.

They're not the same size. The ninth is the top floor. The front apartments, 9A and 9B, are set back from the building line and are also under a sloping roof. You can see the edge of that roof out the LR window, on the right side. Those north closets in the two bedrooms have sloping ceilings.

All that lost space accounts for the missing bedroom. All the other A & B apartments were built with three bedrooms. See http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015026793094?urlappend=%3Bseq=1195

Google's street view is blocked by trees, but here's a view of the setback: http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/4_east_95th_street.jpg?w=300&h=200

8A and 8B are also set back a bit in their bedroom wings.

So things that sell are things that are correctly priced by ppl that can afford it.

So I'll assume the 10k other manhattan listings that haven't sold are by people that can't afford it.

Mmmmmmmmmmm. I smell bacon. Mmmmmmmm. I like it crispy but not that crispy. You guys go on. I'll wait for the next batch.

w67th - I do wonder what percentage of listings that applies to; i.e., how many sellers literally cannot afford to sell at price the market will bear. For example, we looked at a great condo that is priced at 116% of what I think it should be priced at. It turns out the seller is stuck and cannot accept offer for a legitimate price b/c he would have to write a check to the bank that he simply cannot write. I am curious as to how many condos in NYC are underwater like the one we examined turned out to be. Does anyone know?

4,269

Yikes, the sellers that we are so unceremoniously pounding for their seemingly horrendous real estate plunder were simply in the process of trading up. To trade up they had to take one on the chin.
Considering the trade up, looks like a flesh wound.