If you can demonstrate market movement with comps, please post here.

333 CPW, "6" line (no park view):

--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ...... #56...................... |↓$4,200,000 4 beds 2,700 ft²
02/13/2008 #36 $4,650,000 -5.1% | ↓$4,900,000 4 beds 3 baths

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/333-central-park-west-manhattan

Same footprint, both renovated. The current listing is two floors higher. It's now almost 10% below where #36 traded. Both started at absurd asking prices: $5.8MM for #36 in August '07, $5.2MM for #56 in June '08.

515 West End Avenue, "A" line (4.5 rooms; 2BR/2BA):

--------Recorded Sales------------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ...... #10A............................ |↓$1,195,000 2 beds
08/09/2006 . #8A $1,160,000 -7.2% | $1,250,000 2 beds 2 baths 1,250 ft²
03/28/2005 #14A $1,300,000 .......... |

No additional data available for #14A, so can't confirm it as a comp. #10A and #8A are the same apartment, except #10A is two floors higher and might be in slightly better condition than #8A was two years ago. #10A was just reduced for the fifth time, after opening at #1.395MM. The asking price is now just 3% over the 2006 comp in nominal dollars, and the progressive price cuts of $40-50K don't seem to be working.

Isn't the reduced price of 515 WEA / 10A actually $1,095,000. If we're talking about the same apartment, it seems that nothing is doing the trick for the sellers. The apt is being offered at a lower nominal price than the 2006 (lower floor) comp. Even fresh and decluttered pictures don't seem to be leading to any interest.

aptometrist: Thanks. Clearly, I need an OPTOMETRIST. I started typing that post thinking, "OK, this one is now below its 2006 comp." Then I went to check the price - but I took it from the old broker sheet, not the current listing. Serves me right for surfing while overtired. Let's try again:

515 West End Avenue, "A" line (4.5 rooms; 2BR/2BA):

--------Recorded Sales------------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ...... #10A.......................... |↓$1,095,000 2 beds
08/09/2006 . #8A $1,160,000 -7.2% | $1,250,000 2 beds 2 baths 1,250 ft²
03/28/2005 #14A $1,300,000 ......... |

No additional data available for #14A, so can't confirm it as a comp. #10A and #8A are the same apartment, except #10A is two floors higher and might be in slightly better condition than #8A was two years ago. #10A was just reduced for the fifth time, after opening at #1.395MM. The asking price is now 5.6% below the 2006 comp in nominal dollars, and the progressive price cuts of $40-50K don't seem to be working.

2000 Broadway.... Say bye bye to the downpayment...

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/344141-condo-2000-broadway-lincoln-square-new-york?email=true

A couple more:

4 East 82nd Street #3F (1 br, 1 ba)
10/20/2004 Previous sale closed for $1,162,500
06/02/2006 Previous sale closed for $1,393,750
12/29/2007 Listed with Brown Harris Stevens at $1,795,000
03/31/2008 Price decreased to $1,600,000
08/13/2008 Price decreased to $1,499,000
09/09/2008 Price increased to $1,500,000
The question is, why don't people want to stay in the apartment more than 1.5 years?

Ariel West at 245 West 99th Street #7C (2 br, 2 ba)
01/10/2008 Closed for $1,558,000
05/03/2008 Listed with CBHK at $1,620,000
06/13/2008 Price decreased to $1,595,000
09/09/2008 Price decreased to $1,575,000
The ad goes like this: ASKING PRICE REDUCED--SERIOUS SELLERS--LET'S MAKE A DEAL!!!FIRST RESALE...never occupied...SELLERS PAY TRANSFER FEES TO BOOT!!!
When all is said and done, between taxes, carrying costs (assuming a traditional mortgage),transfer fees and brokers' fees this "investment" will have cost the owners in the neighborhood of $200,000+.

229 east 24th street -- correct me if I'm wrong, but 1) that's not gramercy and 2) it's pretty dingy over there. Some homeless shelters and 2nd ave is simply not pretty for those couple of blocks.

Yes, big px redux. Looks like someone has to liquidate fast.

771 West End Avenue, "A" line (classic seven with a massive DR that can be split to create another BR):

--------Recorded Sales------------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ....... #7A ........................... |↓$2,600,000 3 beds 2,100 ft²
CURRENT ..... #12A .......................... |. $2,600,000 3 beds 2,000 ft²
07/11/2006 #3A $2,600,000 -1.9% | $2,650,000 4 beds 2.5 baths

All same footprint. #3A had undergone a recent renovation that converted the apartment to 4BR. #7A was redone in the 90s, keeping the 3BR floorplan. #12A is in estate condition.

What interests me about this data set isn't so much the pricing vs. the low-floor 2006 comp as the looming competition between the stale listing for #7A and the new one for #12A, which could push the prices for both even lower - especially if #12A is an estate sale. BTW, those listings happen to be with the same broker, a resident of the building who does a lot of business there. Is it possible for her to represent both sellers effectively, when they are basically offering the same thing to the same pool of buyers?

Actually, the renovation of #3A may have been less ambitious than I thought. Although the living and dining rooms were merged, the fourth bedroom - referred to as the "family room/guest room" in the listing - might just be the maid's room.

West, as always great data/fact based reporting.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/185965-condo-225-e-34-st-murray-hill-new-york?email=true

StreetEasy History

09/16/2006
Previously listed with Elliman for $795,000
02/08/2008
Previous sale closed for $(insiders only)
[b]02/11/2008
Elliman listing Sold at $735,000 [/b]
02/27/2008
Listed with Sotheby's at $849,000
03/11/2008
Price decreased to $829,000
04/25/2008
Price decreased to $820,000
05/09/2008
Price decreased to $800,000
05/12/2008
Price decreased to $799,000
06/13/2008
Price decreased to $785,000
08/11/2008
Price decreased to $775,000
09/11/2008
Price decreased to $760,000

Here's a 3 bed 3 bath pre-war coop on the UES offered well below its 2007 sale price:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/61839-coop-225-east-79th-street-yorkville-new-york

Sold for $1,735,000 in May 2007 (after initial listing price of $1,900,000)
Went on market for $1,799,000 in January 2008. Price was reduced to $1,600,000 and taken off market in July 2008.

This link does not yet show that the apt. just went back on the market for $1,670,000.

Here's a 3 bed 3 bath pre-war coop on the UES offered well below its 2007 sale price:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/61839-coop-225-east-79th-street-yorkville-new-york

Sold for $1,735,000 in May 2007 (after initial listing price of $1,900,000)
Went on market for $1,799,000 in January 2008. Price was reduced to $1,600,000 and taken off market in July 2008.

This link does not yet show that the apt. just went back on the market for $1,670,000.

How about this one in our favorite building The DeSoto...I check in occasionally to see how Ron Lense is doing with that listing that has been price chopped nearly a million to $1.589 mil.

Here is a new one....215 W. 91st St, #31

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/345576-coop-215-west-91st-street-upper-west-side-new-york

It says it previously closed for $900K back in 2004, but if you check the sales you can see that it sold again in May 2007 for $1.225 and is now listed at $1.25 mil. So if you factor in closing costs, etc., the current owners look set to take a loss on this one.

I have nothing useful to add to the thread, but thanks for reminding me about that lovely Ron Lense listing.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/112058-coop-215-west-91st-street-upper-west-side-new-york

It's overdue for another price drop - I bet it either gets one by the end of the month, or gets taken off the market.

mazdamp - is that seller negotiating against himself in the mirror?

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/185965-condo-225-e-34-st-murray-hill-new-york?email=true

I can't believe Sotheby's would let him nickel and dime himself like that so many times. Granted the place is obviously overpriced, but you lower price a few times in larger increments. How can anyone take that ask seriously? Maybe his broker used to work at the Grand Bazaar in Turkey...

newbuyer, the sellers on the Ron Lense have no choice but to sell. They have already purchased something else. I supposed they could try to rent it for a year or two, but my guess is they need to sell to finance the next property. It either gets another price chop or they switch brokers when the exclusive is up in October, hoping to "freshen" the listing.

Special_K: this unit will go for $700k, at most.
prob worth $600 by mid 2010

just my feelings

"Maybe his broker used to work at the Grand Bazaar in Turkey..."

Special K, i've been to the Grand Bazaar in Turkey, and I suspect that the carpet shills and others there would be very insulted to be compared to a US real estate broker!

When we reach 2003 prices, give me a buzz. I've been predicting it for nearly a year now - we can see we're down to 2005-2006 prices, and Lehman Brothers has yet to collapse.

Of the bulls, only petrfitz & LICComment & houser are still posting on this site. Where's spunky now?

2005-6 prices?
Where
Please oh please take me there
Still not seeing even 2007 early summer prices on the UWS /Morningside heights/ Harlem 3br

106 Suffolk Street

3B $699,000 (reduced from $725,000) Current Listing
5B $712,500 8/8/07 Recorded Sale

Plus, this is a walkup building. As I mentioned in a previous post, I’ve found the pricing of walkups above the 2nd or 3rd floor to be reduced about $20-25k per floor (at least for this size apartment), so the asking here could be as much as 9% below last year’s comp. That said, with no listing for 5b, it’s hard to compare condition.

drg/Newbuyer99: Just for the record, Lense wasn't responsible for the original price on that white elephant at the DeSoto. He inherited the listing from another Elliman broker after the third or fourth price cut. Lense is playing the Harvey Keitel "cleaner" role on this one - without much success, it seems.

Thanks West81, I knew Lense wasn't the one who originally listed the DeSoto apartment at that egregious price. I think I refered to the "sellers of that Ron Lense listing..." simply as a way to identify it. And of course he has to deal with the fall-out of the original ask, cluttering up his listing.

FWIW, I think his exclusive expires soon (or did expire). Will be interesting to see what happens. I am sure the couple who lives there has a very low cost base. I also understand he is the Board president, so if he has to take a below-comp offer, he likely will be able to push it past the Board more easily than a regular shareholder.

It's going to be interesting to see how these co-op boards deal with apartments under contract that are below recent comps. I think a lot of Boards got used to the high flip taxes that have lined coffers at many buildings and kept the pressure off of maintenance increases.

1185 Park Avenue in Carnegie Hill down from a year ago.

5H just listed for $200,000 less than where 3H traded 7/31/2007.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/348809-coop-1185-park-avenue-carnegie-hill-new-york

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/closing/124186

But do not take this as an indication that prices are down. This is simply a strategy to invoke a bidding war.

1 east end avenue. Beautiful building on the East river.

Previous sale closed 2/9/2005 for $3,045,000. On the market for 362 days. Priced dropped today to $2,800,000.

9A

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/109298-coop-1-east-end-avenue-yorkville-new-york

Wow. Even the UES family sized pre-war coops are getting whacked!

Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner. The Ron Lense listing at the DeSoto entered contract today...will be interesting to see what it closes for.

155 West 70th Street, "D" line (investor-heavy condo, all same footprint, no condition/listing info available):
--------Recorded Sales------------|--------Previous Listings----------
09/04/2008 #12D $1,265,000 | No listing 1,306 sq.ft.
05/01/2007 . #6D $1,435,000 | No listing 1,306 sq.ft.
04/04/2005 . #4D $1,345,000 | No listing 1,306 sq.ft.
04/01/2005 #11D $1,520,000 | No listing 1,306 sq.ft.
12/01/2004 . #9D $1,500,000 | No listing 1,306 sq.ft.
11/22/2004 . #9D $1,500,000 | No listing 1,306 sq.ft.

The drop is striking, though it's possible that #12D has unique issues, or that it wasn't an arm's-length sale. Anyway, if the bid-ask deadlock starts to break, we should see it first in condos, since they generally close much faster than coops.

Forgot the building link: http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/155-west-70-street-manhattan

Since the Coronado is a 1990 building, I think there's a limit to how bad the condition of #12D can be.

Another decrease at the A Building.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/425-east-13th-street-new_york

Recorded Sales:

09/03/2008 #6C $1,175,000
04/18/2008 #7C $1,300,000
01/22/2008 #5C $1,280,000
03/19/2008 #4C $1,270,000
01/17/2008 #3C $1,260,000

Following the $10k per floor pricing of the C line, which shares a floorplan on floors 3-7, 6C should have sold for $1,290,000. Instead it went for 9% less.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/350372-condo-236-east-47th-street-turtle-bay-new-york?email=true

2 bed, 2 bath. 1200 sq feet per listing, 1123 sq ft per property shark which seems to be more accurate from what I can see.

All the doom and gloom merchants say that prices will drop down to 2004 levels.

Well this was sold in July 2004 for $929k and is now for sale for $1.39m so will be interesting to see what it sells for. This is 1,237 psf based on the Property Shark square footage

Apt 37F which is 1263 sq ft per Property Shark sold for $1.41m in April 08 or $1,116 psf

Here is a list of chops and bargains from one of the papers...

http://nymag.com/realestate/vu/2008/09/50493/

From ny times article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/realestate/21deal2.html?_r=1&ref=realestate&oref=slogin

158 West 130th Street harlem townhouse. Bought 3/07 for $1.9mm, back on market for $2.375mm 3/08. 4 price drops laters, sells on 7/08 for $1.5mm.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/190833-multi-158-west-130th-street-central-harlem-new-york

444 Central Park West #11H. This one looks like a distressed sale. Just reduced $346K. At the current ask, the sellers would take a 20% nominal loss, plus transaction costs and inflation.
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/228712-coop-444-central-park-west-manhattan-valley-new-york

--------Recorded Sales------------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ..... #11H ..................... |↓$1,249,000 2 beds 1,400 ft²
04/02/2008 ..#8H $1,495,000 ....... |. $1,495,000 2 beds 2 baths 1,500 ft²
08/27/2007 #11H $1,565,000 +2.6% |. $1,525,000 2 beds 2 baths 1,400 ft²
07/17/2006 #11H $1,100,000 ....... |. $1,100,000 2 beds 2 baths 1,400 ft²
11/15/2004 #10H $975,000 ....... |. No listing available

The prior owners renovated this apartment and flipped it after a year for a big profit. The current owners may have overpaid, or their timing may have just been rotten. Probably a little of both.

W81, keep 'em coming. I find your postings about as valuable as it gets on this board...

What is wrong with this listing:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/232836-coop-241-west-108th-street-manhattan-valley-new-york

05/10/2007 Previously listed with Stribling for $1,285,000
07/31/2007 Stribling listing sold at $1,190,000
12/19/2007 Previous sale closed for $1,200,000
05/09/2008 Listed with Wohlfarth at $789,000
06/16/2008 Price decreased to $699,000
09/23/2008 Price decreased to $659,000

Is this the same apartment that closed for $1.2 million in 2007 (http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/88383)?

OnThe Move: It looks like the living room may have been carved off so that the new listing -- although it still may be called 5B -- is for a much smaller footprint. Very strange.

kas242 - Ah, that makes a lot of sense. Especially when you look at the address of the buyers in 2007: 5A. They must have added part of the original 5B to their apartment and are selling off the rest.

Another $20k drop in asking - plus supposed improvements to the unit - for 106 Suffolk St., mentioned above. Could be a double-digit percentage drop from comps at this point.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/326975-coop-106-suffolk-street-lower-east-side-new-york

Not sure if this has been posted already

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/211252-coop-543-broadway-williamsburg-brooklyn

This is not in Williamsburg. It's actually on Bdwy between Spring & Prince.

The Manhattan Valley place is still overpriced:

Total Monthly Payment: $4,633

Did you see the size of the "bedrooms"? You can't even put furniture in them. Master bedroom 9'9 x 9'9, "second" bedroom little more than a closet with a bathroom.

If it sells for $350,000, it might be worth it.

245 West 99th (Ariel West) #7C. Distressed flippers from Jersey sending out an SOS:
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/229434-condo-245-west-99th-street-upper-west-side-new-york

--------Recorded Sales------------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ....... #7C ..................... |↓$1,500,000 2 beds 1,320 ft²
01/10/2008 #7C $1,558,000 |

"ASKING PRICE REDUCED--SERIOUS SELLERS--LET'S MAKE A DEAL!!!FIRST RESALE...never occupied...SELLERS PAY TRANSFER FEES TO BOOT!!!"

After two rounds of transaction costs, they'll lose 10-20%, even at the current ask.

But West are you incorporating the the tax benefit??

Then there is the leverage. If the buyer put 20% down then the % loss on their capital invetsed is more like -50%. If they put 10% down (as was possible late in 2007) this could be a total wipeout.

Who sang "Wipeout"? I think it was The Ventures.

Prices back to 2005 levels - 136 E 64th 10F - was listed for 1.575 originally without specifying the apartment number. Kitchen circa 1950.
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/353217-136-east-64th-street-lenox-hill-new-york

07/06/2005 Previous sale closed for $1,300,000
09/30/2008 Listed with Fenwick Keats Goodstein at $1,295,000

Jake: For what it's worth, the owners only appear to have borrowed $600K (less than 40%), though there may have been some private financing that doesn't show up in the public records.
http://a836-acris.nyc.gov/Scripts/DocSearch.dll/Detail?Doc_ID=2008011400093004

Not your typical distressed sale. Maybe the Sternfelds concluded that it wouldn't look good for a rabbi to move into a luxury condo when the world is teetering on the brink of financial meltdown.

Agree West. Not your typical flipper. I cannot help but think there will be many more flippers in trouble with asking prices below recent purchase prices in the coming months. And the transaction costs on getting in and out of real estate in this city are very high on top of the mansion tax and mortgage tax.

Maybe streeteasy could add a feature to show all listings that closed in the last 24 months but are back on the market with an asking price below closing price.

Thanks, brodie! I knew I had seen that apt. listed recently. Quite a chop in list, but nowhere near a reasonable selling price in this climate.

Would be interesting to see if price cuts by resellers end up forcing the developer to lower prices as well.

670 West End Avenue, "C" line:
--------Recorded Sales------------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ..... #11C ........................ | ↓$1,650,000 2 beds 1,600 ft²
07/11/2007 #8C $1,725,000 +8.2% | $1,595,000 2 beds 2 baths

http://www.prudentialelliman.com/Listings.aspx?ListingID=1033854&rentalperiod=&SearchType=newestproperties&Region=NYC
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/670-west-end-avenue-manhattan (Streeteasy still shows an old price.)

The apartments appear to be in similar condition. Same agent too.

10 West 66th Street, "D" line (excluding high floor units, which have different footprints):
--------Recorded Sales------------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ....#16D ........................ | .$2,300,000 3 beds
CURRENT ...#20D ........................ |↓$2,150,000 3 beds
CURRENT ......#5D ........................ |↓$1,700,000 3 beds 1,600 ft²
08/04/2008 #12D $2,000,000 -16.5% |↓$2,395,000 3 beds 2.5 baths
05/20/2008 #16D .......................... | ↓$2,995,000 3 beds 3 baths
12/14/2007 #19D $2,500,000 +13.9% | .$2,195,000 3 beds 3 baths
04/07/2005 #10D $2,040,000 .......... |

I'm pretty sure these apartments are all the same shape and size. Obviously, a higher floor is better, but I don't think any of these units get more than a glimpse of the park. Condition may vary too, though I've seen a couple of the on-market units and they were neither strikingly well-appointed nor notably decrepit.

#19D appears to have nailed the top of the market. #12D knew when to settle for a half-full glass. The owner of #16D has to be in a world of regret. The new asking price is $800K below the old listing, and with so much competition, $2.3MM isn't going to get it done either.

51 Charles Street, #4. Currently asking $1.439m. Approaching late '05 pricing, though I'd say the buyer overpaid. Those bedrooms are pretty awful.

Recorded Sales Previous Listings
11/29/2005 #4 $1,352,000 $1,295,000 2 beds 1 baths 900 ft²

Sorry, let's try again:

2 beds 1 baths 900 ft²

Recorded Sales
11/29/2005 #4 $1,352,000

Previous Listings
$1,295,000

Here ya go. 320 CPW

6DE just lowered to 1.425

4DE sold 8/08 for 1.685

9D and 9E were sold 08/07 together for 1.460 before a breakthru.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/190825-coop-320-central-park-west-upper-west-side-new-york
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/closing/747832

Looks like 9 D,E and F in 320 CPW were all sold together.

Here you go, 332 Union Street in Carroll Gardens
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/house/332-union-street-brooklyn

#3 listed in July for $749,000 and is "In Contract" now with a listed price of $699,000
#2 just put up for sale for $675,000

This is a good one....

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/252615-condo-145-east-48th-street-midtown-new-york

Here's one we looked at when it was first listed:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/206429-coop-7-east-35th-street-midtown-south-new-york?email=true

It was a good day in the East Village/LES for price chops below comps on 1brs.

504 East 6th Street:

#6
04/30/2008 Listed with Halstead Property at $675,000
10/10/2008 Price decreased to $599,000
#5
08/23/2007 $640,000 Recorded Sale

#5 is on the same floor w/ a mirror image floorplan in similar condition (I talked about it in an open house report back in May).

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/504-east-6-street-manhattan

507 East 12th Street:

#2A
06/06/2008 Listed with Halstead Property at $495,000
09/02/2008 Price decreased to $475,000
10/10/2008 Price decreased to $455,000
#1B
04/25/2008 $505,000 Recorded Sale
#2B
07/11/2007 $465,000 Recorded Sale

The A line is a mirror image of the B line. If anything, 2A looks to be in better shape than 1B was. The difference between 1st and 2nd floor in a walkup facing the building’s garden may be a wash, though to me the 2nd floor would be a better value, above the eyes of your neighbors grilling. 2B was in worse condition than 2A. This building was homesteaded, so if the owner of 2A is the original, he/she can keep cutting and still make a very nice profit.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/507-east-12-street-manhattan

Part II...

106 Suffolk Street #3B:

This is the third chop I’ve mentioned for this unit, putting it as much as 17-18% below its comp.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/106-suffolk-street-manhattan

Over in the West Village (this one’s a studio)…

61 Horatio Street:

#1D
03/07/2008 $535,000 Recorded Sale

3D was a FSBO in early 07, then a Corcoran listing, and now it’s a FSBO again, asking $525,000. The 3rd floor in an elevator building is WAY more valuable than the 1st floor in or near Meatpacking.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/61-horatio-street-manhattan
http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/reo/874902703.html

Here's an interesting story line - one the principals would probably rather not dwell upon.

About five weeks ago, at the top of this page, I posted the following comp pair from 333 CPW:
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ..... #56 .......................... | ↓$4,200,000 4 beds 2,700 ft²
02/13/2008 #36 $4,650,000 -5.1% | ↓$4,900,000 4 beds 3 baths
#56 is lingering at $4.2MM, so the market seems to be below that. Anyway, note the buyers of #36: http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/closing/712375

Now consider the following sequence from 50 West 96th:
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
09/05/2008 #16A $2,450,000 -7.5% | $2,650,000 4 beds 2 baths
04/04/2008 #16A . - ........................ | ↓$2,725,000 3 beds 2.5 baths
07/29/2005 ..#4A $2,450,000 ......... |

The connection? Check the sellers of #16A: http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/closing/754759

What we have here, I think, is a cautionary tale about trading up. When the Siegels bought their new place, they thought they had sold #16A for about $3MM. Unfortunately, that deal fell through, and they wound up settling for a 2004-2005 price after carrying both apartments for six months. In the end, they paid a price difference of $2.2MM, plus commissions and other costs, for an extra bedroom and a bigger master on a lower floor at a more prestigious address three blocks away. Seems like a pretty rough deal.

There's no information available on the condition of #4A when it sold in 2005; I would assume it was very nice. But I can say for a fact that condition was not an issue with #16A. I saw that apartment when Fox still had the listing, and it was beautiful. I also got to eavesdrop on the Fox broker complaining about the "buyers from Hell" who had blown up her deal.

fascinating stuff, west81st & good catch - I'm curious - how do you find out the names of the involved parties?

mrsbuffet: In this case, the Fox broker made it easy by blabbing on her cell phone during an open house. Even without clues, though, Streeteasy makes it pretty simple for "insider" members. If you don't want to spend the extra $10/month, ACRIS offers similar information but doesn't present it nearly as well.

Property shark gives out this info as well.

863 Park Avenue, "E" line (classic 7): #12E was just reduced from $3MM to $2.5MM, after twelve days on the market.

--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ..... #12E .......................... | ↓$2,500,000 3 beds + maid's, 3 baths
05/14/2008 #2E $3,100,000 -8.8% |. $3,400,000 3 beds, 2 baths (maid's converted to office/laundry)
06/21/2007 #5E $3,502,000 +6.3% |. $3,295,000 3 beds + maid's, 3 baths
06/02/2004 #2E $1,825,000 ......... |

#12E is in estate condition - lots of detail, but appears to need a ton of work. #2E and #5E were both renovated, though the 2004 sale of #2E probably predated the renovation.

Forgot the shortcut to the Elliman listing for 863 Park:
http://www.prudentialelliman.com/Listings.aspx?ListingID=1036111
I should also note, on behalf of my fellow Westsiders as well as downtowners like ccdevi, that Park Avenue is a hellhole unfit for human habitation. ;o)

Perhaps that's why nobody actually inhabits Park Avenue. People keep 2nd and 3rd homes on Park.

418 Central Park West #22. Just sold 13% below its 2005 price:
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
10/10/2008 #22 $860,000 -4.3% | ↓$899,000 2 beds 1 baths 850 ft²
05/26/2005 #22 $975,000 ......... |
04/20/2004 #22 $430,950 ......... |

The 2004 sale seems to have been a sponsor sale to a Long Island investor (possibly with the apartment still occupied). The 2005 sale was a flip to a California investor. Considering the big price jump, the apartment must have been vacant by that point. In any case, the drop from 2005 to 2008 is striking.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/418-central-park-west-manhattan

Check 16 east 96th, 7d. Good price here, realistic seller. -17%

Steve, since you seem to be the patron saint of the bears, I will direct this to you, but curious for any thoughts all around. Say you're 34, with baby one on the way. You just decided to rent a 2 bed, rather than buy. Figure baby two will be in 3 years, and you will want about 1,500-1,600 square feet by then, maybe a classic 6 or a small 3 bed. Best guess, what will you pay and when should you buy? I am thinking $1.2-1.4mm for the $2.1mm apartment (peak price) some time in mid 2010.

PS: I haven't read this whole post, but the common theme seems to be, the realistic motivated sellers are showing themselves, and cutting prices aggressively to get it done. Either already owning their next apartment, or retired, or moving out of the area.

wow west. and it looks like #32 closed in 2005 for $1.175mm and has gone to contract with a last asking price of $920,000. That's down 22%! If they get the ask!

jake give me a link

Jake: #32 is the same investor as #22 (Gottesman): http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/closing/31473

Thrinald: re. 16 East 96th: -17% relative to what? As for your hypothetical family, the plan you laid out is reasonable, but it's a long way from a sure thing, either in terms of timing the bottom or the risk of catching a knife that might still be falling.

Jake: Since #32 and #22 were offered together, it's possible that the same buyer(s) took both. It would make sense to close on them separately to evade the mansion-tax snoops.

16 e 96: Relative to the original ask, which was reasonable in my view in the Spring.

Nothing is a sure thing, but I am thinking through the best most reasonable course of action. In the end, all decisions have to be made under uncertainty. It may not get that cheap, or happens that quickly. All I am saying, I am probably a buyer when I can get 1500 sqft for $800/sqft, off the peak price of about $1200/sqft. This is coop in a desirable hood.

thrinald: #7D is still 9% above the price #4D fetched eight months ago. $1.2MM was absurd. $980K is much better, but I don't think it's a bargain in this market. Inventory on the Upper East Side is rising rapidly, and 2BR/1BA apartments in prime neighborhoods on both sides of the park are getting squeezed out of the $1MM-$1.5MM range by legitimate 2BR/2BAs and low-end sixes.

7D is mint condition. 4D was original condition. 7th floor is the top floor with light. 4D, though I never saw it, must be coffin-like given what I know about how the building is configured. I think someone hits the offer on 7D. $1.2mm may have been high, but the offering in the spring at that price point kind of sucked. I know, I looked with my wife for months. In the end I think everything that was $1.1-1.2 is going to $800k, but I think there are people out there who want to buy and will transact somewhere in the middle. To those people, I would say look at this apartment. It's very cheap to carry. Really depends what rents do.

Thrinald: Fair point, though $980K is still 33% above the price they paid for #7D four years ago. If the current owners did the renovation, maybe that justifies the markup; it certainly would, if they had added the second bathroom, but they cheaped out on that crucial front.

Wherever this particular listing happens to trade, We seem to agree on one key point: that apartments worth mid-700s in 2004 are probably headed back to about $800K.

I would guess they put about $150k into it. Yes, a bathroom would have been key. Check out the other unit in that building. About 1400 sqft asking $1.6mm without a second bathroom. Now that's laughable. Yes my target is 2004 pricing. It may go lower but at that point I think you can justify the investment.

What's scary is when I say 2004 pricing...it makes the decline coming sound almost too mild for the state of Wall Street, the banking system, and the mountain of unsold glass condominiums. Add to that, the US dollar has been strong.

Owner of 16 E. 96th 7D, here. The '04 price was pre-renovations (~$100K, good guess Rhino86), no broker (transaction between friends), and most importantly perhaps, pre-doorman, which was brought on in '06. When you say "'04 pricing", I think I'm justified in saying this apartment is not apples to apples over the intervening 4 years. I also think $820/sq ft for a pre-war doorman bldg half a block from the park is a good value proposition over time, but then, I'm biased.

Agree on the bathroom - can be easily added. #4D is a dark hole and sold during a period when there was a potential financial liabilty to shareholders (lawsuit since settled). Maybe you view this as a plug, but send anyone looking at 2BR's on the UES. They won't be dissapointed.

Got this one today in my inbox: http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/359145-coop-425-park-avenue-south-kips-bay-new-york?email=true

Apt #18D is asking $800k, whereas 4D is asking $849k and 3D is asking $829k. I have not seen any of these units in person, but 3D and 18D appear in similar condition from the pictures. The appliances in 3D's kitchen appear to be newer than 18D, albeit that both are bright colors which I, for one, consider unappealing.

Apt 12C, which has a very similar footprint, is asking $899k.

18D has a different layout than the others and I suppose one would have to decide if a large eat-in kitchen is preferred over an office space - it is called a bedroom on 18D's floorplan, but is without a window.

BTW West81st - $1.2MM was not absurd at the time (orig went to market in July)- was still priced competitively relative to other offerings and got three offers, and the one that went to contract fell through due to difficult financing market. Now it's priced way under others. Check Carnegie Hill in this price point.

jtreadwell, I wanted to commend you on having a listing where the stated square footage actually seems to match the floorplan. bravo. was that your decision or the broker's?

Both. I know from my days of searching how much a mis-representation of square footage can affect your mood when you're looking at a place.

Compare 16 e 96th 7d to 32 W 82, http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/318788-coop-32-west-82nd-street-upper-west-side-new-york which is listed at 1100 sqft, has no doorman, and was lowered from $1.275mm to $1.1mm. Ok finishes but cramped, and it's way under 1000 sqft. And yes, as a real life example it put me in a foul mood seeing it given the size lie, and I gave the broker a world of shit. I offered $950k for it just for kicks and she vented to a friend that I had pulled a twig out of my pants, but accidentally sent the email to me. We can only guess where the market will go, but 16e96 7d is offered well vs other places on the market.

West81st I take my hat to you, your posts are fantastic!

"Both. I know from my days of searching how much a mis-representation of square footage can affect your mood when you're looking at a place."

100% agree!

Agree. Always interesting stuff from West81st. The only problem is her blinding preference for West Side over East Side. It's heaven over there and hell east of the park. Otherwise fair and balanced.

Thanks all.

jtreadwell: I'm glad you joined in, and wish you the best of luck with your sale. At the $1MM price point, I think PS 198 could be a bit of a handicap, because your buyer may have a young child (or two), and probably can't afford UES private schools.

FWIW, my West Side bias is mostly tongue-in-cheek schtick. Though I grew up on the UWS and eventually moved back, I owned a coop in Lenox Hill for two thirds of my post-college life. It's a great neighborhood, and PS 6 is a terrific school. Besides, Citarella is Citarella, and Gourmet Garage is Gourmet Garage, whether east or west, and Hi-Life finally reopened on Second. I'll take Fairway and Zabar's over their eastern imitators, but there's always Fresh Direct to fill the gap.

Interestingly, the demographic of interested parties and bids have been all over the map: couples no kids, couples with kids on the way, divorcees. You're right about PS 198 - few in this building would choose to send their kids to public school unless they can convince someone to let them in PS 6. Of course the other advantages far outweigh that consideration IMHO (I've got two kids).

Ladies, ladies...You are forgetting the most important difference. There are only a handful of boards mortals can pass West of Lex. And East of Lex isn't near as nice as Columbus or even West End. So there is just way more to look at on the West Side, unless you can find that gem brownstone in the low 80s between 2nd and Lex, which I never see on the market. Over by Antonucci or Zocalo, those are nice blocks but no listings.

Here's one: the F line at 203 West 90th.

3F closed in April for $905K after the following history:

05/01/2006 Previous sale closed for $830,000
06/11/2007 Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $975,000
10/04/2007 Price decreased to $949,000
11/03/2007 Price decreased to $925,000
01/18/2008 Price increased to $929,900
03/07/2008 Corcoran listing entered contract
04/28/2008 Sale closed for $905,000

I looked at 3F and liked the amount of space (for a 1-bedroom), but did not bid because I thought the asking price was crazy for an apartment in a so-so neighborhood situated a couple of floors above Saigon Grill and whose bedrooom window looked out on Amsterdam.

4F was listed for $975K in September, likely based on the 3F comp. Look at it go down:

09/04/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Margaret Bassett Real Estate at $975,000
09/15/2008 Price decreased to $925,000
09/22/2008 Price decreased to $895,000
10/02/2008 Price decreased to $795,000
10/21/2008 Price decreased to $695,000

I wonder if the poor souls who ended up buying 3F for $905K are kicking themselves. If they had waited a few months, they could have had a similar apartment (overall, the apartments are in similar shape, but 3F had a half bathroom off the kitchen where the washer/dryer are in 4F, and also had part of the living room walled off for a nursery) for three quarters the price.

That's interesting because when I guess that pricing could hit 2004 levels by the time we bottom, part of my basis is that 1 bedroom apartments are practically already there.

Curious jtreadwell where are you moving to?

Larger apartment in same building - only another ~400 sq ft, but that makes a big difference with another kid. It's estate condition, so needs significant renovations.

Rhino - I think you have a good plan. Wife and I have a similar plan, except need at 3-bedroom now (which we thought about buying, but will be renting), and intend to buy a 4-bedroom in 2 years or so. No guarantees market will go down, but I figure it's very unlikely to go up, and if it stays flat we should still be able to afford what we want in 2 years, and will have saved significant money in the meantime, not to mention transaction costs.

Regardless of the market (with possible exceptions for run-ups, i.e. if you had a crystal ball in 2003), I think buying something you intend to sell in 2-3 years is not a great idea.

On the Move:

203 West 90th, 3F grew 100 ft2 in 2 years (or 12.5%) not bad for surfice inflation!

Newbuyer, I think buying for three years can be ok if you are working from a point where owning represents a massive after tax savings to renting... Not only do you have that savings per month, but during those times, real estate is much more likely to appreciate than depreciate.