Why is this building so cheap?

It's a "meh" co-op with no amenities in a so-so location (lots of street noise) that doesn't allow pets and apparently requires all cash. Apparently no reserve fund either, hence the assessments to rebuild one.

The City Realty score of 50 is the lowest I've ever seen.

https://www.cityrealty.com/nyc/lenox-hill/belmont-79-230-east-79th-street/8002

Reminds me of that old Pink lyric: "LA told me, 'You could be a pop star; all you have to change is everything you are.'"

Agree with George above. White-glaze brick coops have long outstayed their welcome. Low ceilings, boring layouts, paper-thin walls, collapsing facades. And this one is mid-block on the street, as opposed to on a corner and/or on the avenue, so it has no corner units.

Not a great kitchen layout, small-ish bedrooms (that 3rd which was carved off the LR may not even be legal), no chance of having an in-unit w/d, and floors will need to be replaced (this particular parquet has not aged well). Original floorplan can be seen at 11C, which is significantly pricier, and hasn't moved for a loooong time. Still, the basic floorplan isn't bad (ordinary, but what's wrong with that?), and there's probably central a/c (keeps the electric bill down).

City Realty site claims (a/o 2010 though) that sponsor owns lots of units - wonder how much that has changed, which would affect bank lending.

Yikes, the place has a ton of rentals, many of which say they are sponsor units. So this is truly the worst of all worlds: the pain of buying and selling a coop while you live in a rental building with transient tenants.

Maybe a meh building, and the 3rd bedroom is not a legal bedroom, and maintenance is a bit high.

But I am still shocked to find a renovated Jr. 5 on UES for less than $700k. Of course, the all cash requirement, coupled with a typical coop post-close liquidity requirement, would make it tough for buyers looking for an entry level 2br. Even tougher given the low interest environment we find ourselves in.

The sellers bought it for 1.2M in 2014. Wondering what has changed since then. Doubt the sponsor owns more units now than they did then.

There's some threads elsewhere on streeteasy on this building where it sounds like the sponsor control of building has other side effects that lead to it being poorly run.

Being unable to finance is certainly a huge, huge issue - even if you personally can do it and buy, you now have a liquidity issue if you ever want to sell it, and forget getting a HELOC to renovate, etc.

Beyond that there were complaints about ancient HVAC system failing building wide on a monthly basis as well. Given this complaint and the lack of a reserve (insane), imagine what other major systems in the building are poorly maintained, beyond their useful life, and/or in need in replacement.

So who be a buyer here?
Someone who has close to $1M sitting around in cash they are happy to lock up indefinitely in an entry level 2BR, and is cool with living in a run down building that is going to have unpredictable large assessments to cover repairs & building up a reserve?

Why not take the cash and a small mortgage and just buy in a normal building?

Don't forget the high maintenance! Wow - I think the conclusion here is that this $700k Jr. 5 is way overpriced.

Well, what do I know. This unit went into contract shortly after raising the price to $900k!

I call BS. Any broker can mark a listing as in contract. Then it quietly disappears and is never heard from again.

Or it comes back as Apt 3CC