chasing the market down: our favorite price choppers

30yrs, exactly, re: the stepchild lines. E.g., to get to the front door from the passenger elevator you've got to pass through the service hall. Those C/D/E usually got the short end of the stick when firestair access, etc., was being juggled. Lots of examples in the Candela/Carpenter book.

02/25/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Brown Harris Stevens at $2,750,000.
03/17/2008 Listing entered contract.
06/28/2008 Listing sold.

no evidence of closing, now back on the market it seems (apartment number missing, but appears to be 8b) at $1.77mm. classic 6. 3b closed for $2.85 10/07.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/416586-coop-21-east-90th-street-carnegie-hill-new-york

AR: I'm pretty sure the new Corcoran listing is #6B. It seems to need a lot of work. #8B appears to have closed last year, but if there's a trail in ACRIS, it's not correctly indexed.

west81st, i'd definitely defer to your better knowledge. the lack of sale for 8b, lack of pictures for this listing (although i didn't go to corcoran's web site, shoddy work on my part), led me in that direction.

and for a bit of fun, pull up both listings, 8b and the current one, and read the descriptions.

When the market was bubblicious, people started throwing $ more indiscriminately at apts based on their category regardless of layout. Oh, it's a 6 on WEA - chaching, just under 2m. Now, we're starting to see a finer differentiation based on layout and location within building. I agree with 30yrs that price per square foot for different apts in diff. buildings is a silly metric. On the other hand, if you are looking at 2 similar sized apts, if one is inferior in layout, there should be a discount per square foot.

mimi wrote "Here's one in Harlem, 220 West 139th Street, wide townhouse, garage, renovated, very big lot, in Historical Striver's row, took over 45% chop:
06/01/2008
Listed in StreetEasy by Prudential Elliman at $2,450,000.
07/23/2008
Price decreased by 10% to $2,200,000.
11/20/2008
Price decreased by 20% to $1,750,000.
03/26/2009
Listing is no longer available.
Sold for $1,446,425
on 03/02/2009 "

mimi, This house was actually on the market from back in 2006, maybe a year earlier. One of the few Strivers Row houses that has a side yard. I've been in that house and it was certainly in very good condition. Not mint, but only finish needed would be to taste. I've heard that this was a "distress sale" and that price tells me that we still have a way to go before most listed Harlem townhouses reach bottom.

Nice price chop here on a Kip's Bay townhouse quite a few were tracking.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/147259-townhouse-318-east-30th-street-kips-bay-new-york

10/26/2007
Listed in StreetEasy by Sotheby's at $5,500,000.
01/28/2008
Price decreased by 11% to $4,900,000.
04/29/2008
Price decreased by 8% to $4,500,000.
06/16/2008
Price decreased by 11% to $3,995,000.
07/28/2008
Listing entered contract.
12/09/2008
Price decreased by 12% to $3,500,000.
12/10/2008
Re-listed by Sotheby's.
12/10/2008
Price decreased by 3% to $3,400,000.
01/22/2009
Price decreased by 13% to $2,950,000.
03/05/2009
Price decreased by 12% to $2,600,000.
03/28/2009
Listing entered contract.
05/12/2009
Listing sold for $2,000,000

About 50% chop from first being listed in March 2007:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/392485-coop-1150-park-avenue-carnegie-hill-new-york

StreetEasy History

03/30/2007
Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Sotheby's at $2,750,000.
03/03/2009
Sotheby's Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $1,999,000.
03/17/2009
Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $1,795,000.
04/17/2009
Price decreased by 14% to $1,549,000.
05/23/2009
Price decreased by 6% to $1,449,000.

5thGen, that one belongs on the comp thread as well. 14 and 15A sold for $1.85 in 04, and 2A went for $2.125 early 2006.

AR: The amazing part is that Happyrenter posted #3A on IYCDMMWC-UES back in March, when it was first re-listed at $1.795MM:
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/7617-if-you-can-demonstrate-market-movement-with-comps-upper-east-side-edition?page=3

A few caveats on the comps: #2A was a high-end reno, and the higher floors have the huge advantage of clearing the church for an open view to the south from the bedrooms. Still, $1.449 for #3A is stunning - epecially when you consider that #3A went into contract in late 2007, when the asking price was $2.5MM.

A stunning drop, that is. I'm still not sure it's a bargain relative to the other options in the PS 198 section of Carnegie Hill.

the living spaces are not huge, but the bedrooms are quite spacious. a family could easily fit a couple of kids in here without much trouble, especially given the extra 1/2 bath and the dining area. i would think that better deals are available nearby, but for it's Park location it seems competitively priced for now.

Thanks aboutready for the comps...I dont have full StreetEasy access..

HDLC,
That's an amazing chop. That's the best deal that I have in recent memory. Talk about the one that got away!

falco, that murray hill one is almost enough to get me out looking. would have been very difficult to get financing for a five unit, which was probably a serious price impediment. still....

That is amazing, but it needs a lot of work.

Here's an impressive chopper on Trump Place that also might be a new low for hiding a price cut by concealing hiding the apartment number:
220 Riverside Boulevard #4HI
StreetEasy History
02/05/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $4,600,000.
04/03/2008 Price decreased by 2% to $4,495,000.
06/20/2008 Price decreased by 3% to $4,350,000.
12/15/2008 Price decreased by 11% to $3,850,000.
05/01/2009 Listing is no longer available.
At which point this...
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/179719-condo-220-riverside-blvd-lincoln-square-new-york
... became this:
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/415198-condo-220-riverside-blvd-lincoln-square-new-york
05/23/2009 Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $2,500,000.

Same agent, same apartment, 35% off the price.

west81, both of those links appear to be broken at the moment (on corcoran site)

Wow, that is one heck of a chop. Do you know if $4.6 mil simply delusion, or based on prior comps? If this is a chop based on same building comps, that's an amazing comedown in price. I suppose the combo status doesn't help its case.

se10024: That's funny - it's off the market again. I wonder which attribute will change the next time #4HI reappears: The square footage? The monthlies? The address?

evnyc: $2.5MM is below the peak breakup value of the H and I units, but not by all that much - maybe 15 or 20% at most, probably less. $4.6MM was just a ridiculous price. And by the way, it looks as though that apartment has been on and off the market - with four different brokers - since early 2004.

so long as they chop it by a buck on re-list - not a problem with me...

some painful-to-watch pricing strategy at the Merc. Now slightly below 2005 closing cost, but notice recent increase. i'd say they need to move this puppy.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/380776-condo-252-seventh-avenue-chelsea-new-york

11/15/2005 Previous Sale recorded for $1,665,000.
12/02/2005 Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $1,800,000.
04/24/2006 Corcoran Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $1,750,000.
07/20/2006 Previous Sale recorded for $1,710,000.
12/07/2008 Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Prudential Elliman at $1,949,000.
01/13/2009 Prudential Elliman Listing is no longer available.
02/07/2009 Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $1,850,000.
03/02/2009 Price decreased by 3% to $1,795,000.
03/19/2009 Price decreased by 5% to $1,699,000.
04/03/2009 Price decreased by 3% to $1,650,000.
04/25/2009 Price decreased by 4% to $1,590,000.
05/07/2009 Price decreased by 3% to $1,550,000.
05/21/2009 Price increased by 10% to $1,700,000.
05/31/2009 Price decreased by 3% to $1,650,000.

360 East 88th St. (Leighton House) #38AC: inflated original ask, but very efficient chopping.
10/31/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Prudential Elliman at $7,500,000.
02/10/2009 Price decreased by 21% to $5,950,000.
03/03/2009 Price decreased by 19% to $4,800,000.
04/30/2009 Listing is no longer available.
05/13/2009 Re-listed by Prudential Elliman.
06/02/2009 Price decreased by 11% to $4,250,000.
http://www.prudentialelliman.com/Listings.aspx?ListingID=1049089

This apartment at the Sheriden (10LM) has been noted before, and chopped again. It's a nice space with two terraces but I think the hefty monthly charge combined with the need for a gut reno will ultimately put this one under $1.4m.

StreetEasy History
03/29/2008 Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $2,400,000.
08/05/2008 Corcoran Listing sold. Last priced at $2,100,000.
08/05/2008 Previous Sale recorded for $2,105,000.
11/06/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Halstead Property at $1,995,000.
01/14/2009 Price decreased by 5% to $1,895,000.
03/06/2009 Price decreased by 2% to $1,850,000.
03/27/2009 Price decreased by 3% to $1,795,000.
05/28/2009 Price decreased by 6% to $1,695,000.

This new development on 108th and Broadway seems to finally be getting some attention, after price chops and a broker switch: http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/238-west-108-street-new_york

The penthouse went into contract after a 32% chop from $2.225,000 to $1,495,000 :
10/02/2007 Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Sotheby's at $2,225,000.
03/17/2009 Also Listed in StreetEasy by Sotheby's at $1,495,000.
03/18/2009 Sotheby's Listing is no longer available.
04/02/2009 Listed in StreetEasy by Halstead Property at $1,495,000.
04/02/2009 Sotheby's Listing is no longer available.
05/04/2009 Listing entered contract.
05/21/2009 Re-listed by Halstead Property.
06/02/2009 Listing entered contract.

Then the second floor apartment went into contract after a 31% price chop:
07/16/2007 Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Sotheby's at $1,810,000.
03/17/2009 Also Listed in StreetEasy by Sotheby's at $1,245,000.
03/18/2009 Sotheby's Listing is no longer available.
04/02/2009 Listed in StreetEasy by Halstead Property at $1,245,000.
05/28/2009 Listing entered contract.

There are three apartments left to sell, all of which have undergone similar chops. We'll see what happens...

238 West 108th. Be careful -- the indicated sq ft is grossly overestimated -- it includes the elevator and the stairwell
They added the 2nd floor unit recently into the contract column. However, the sq ft on the 4th floor unit == 1300 rather than 1783 is much closer to being accurate
So this has just come down to close to 1000psf
not sure anything ahas ever closed, and I suspect that the 1st floor and the PH buyer are the same -- they will keep only one of the 2 apts

this one has relisted with an "R", now #8FLR instead of #8FL, reduced to $2.221 (which makes it exactly $1000 psf, kind of cute). maybe that will help, but it already spent 201 days on the market without the R. it closed for $2.345 early '08.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/417988-condo-15-west-17th-street-chelsea-new-york

11/08/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Halstead Property at $2,995,000.
12/13/2008 Price decreased by 8% to $2,750,000.
12/18/2008 Price decreased by 9% to $2,495,000.
01/23/2009 Price decreased by 4% to $2,395,000.
05/29/2009 Listing is no longer available.

333 Central Park West #56 just shed another $480K. Now down 52% from the initial ask.
06/19/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Prudential Elliman at $5,200,000.
07/01/2008 Price decreased by 6% to $4,875,000.
09/09/2008 Price decreased by 14% to $4,200,000.
12/08/2008 Price decreased by 17% to $3,495,000.
02/12/2009 Listing is no longer available.
02/19/2009 Re-listed by Prudential Elliman.
02/27/2009 Price decreased by 15% to $2,975,000.
06/04/2009 Price decreased by 16% to $2,495,000.

This apartment has flaws (small bedrooms, limited views, noise from the rooftop schoolyard next door), and I thought the renovation looked cheap. Still, it's a legitimate nine with a decent CPW address and reasonable maintenance. #36 - the same apartment two floors down - is a bubble comp for the books, at $4.65MM.

ar - maybe R is for "reduction" Or "reality check". Or "relisting after refreshing"

While they're playing games with the unit number, they should also take another $2k off the price so the apt. falls into an under $1k psf search

re: 15W17 - that closing price was pre-renovation. ouch. also, "interesting" ground floor tenant.

730 Park Avenue #11C. Old-style Park Avenue seven (2BR/2BA in family quarters + 2 maids' rooms and maids' bath) in estate condition. Closed 58% below original November ask.
StreetEasy History
11/18/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Brown Harris Stevens at $4,500,000.
12/05/2008 Price decreased by 14% to $3,850,000.
02/17/2009 Price decreased by 16% to $3,250,000.
04/03/2009 Listing entered contract.
05/05/2009 Sale recorded for $2,080,000

Given that it's estate condition, chances are that even at $2mil the family made out handsomely. Still, these are the types of sales that seem to me as though they will set the new price point: people who have a ton of negotiating room to come down on prices. Excellent find.

are these two units at the Cielo the same? it seems as though they are to me, although there is some floorplan discrepancy.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/418856-condo-450-east-83rd-street-yorkville-new-york
just listed, $7mm.

unit 21BC, taken off the market in March, same square footage and description. both apartments are listed as 6 bedrooms. 21BC has different floor plan but it looks just like different layout for same unit. maybe someone had it customized and then didn't close? $16.2mm was breathtakingly aspirational, but a chop to $7mm is noteworthy, just above initial price in '07. Crazy.

09/07/2007 Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Prudential Elliman at $6,700,000.
03/15/2008 Prudential Elliman Listing is no longer available.
08/29/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Prudential Elliman at $16,620,000.
03/01/2009 Listing is no longer available.

AR - I (and others) appreciate everything you do for SE readers.

one-bedroom, three-bath co-op at the Dakota, at 1 West 72nd Street, according to Streeteasy.com. The price of apartment 1011 was cut by $1.6 million, and the home is now on the market for $5.9 million. The unit is listed for 21 percent less than its asking price of $7.5 million when it first went on the market in July 2008. Prudential Douglas Elliman's Dolly Lenz has the listing. According to Streeteasy.com, there are four apartments for sale in the famed building -- where Judy Garland, John Lennon and Leonard Bernstein lived -- and three of the homes have had their prices slashed

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/319038-coop-1-west-72nd-street-upper-west-side-new-york
now, why would anybody want 3 bathrooms and only 1 bedroom? menage a trois type of couple?

130 East 82nd Street: Prime, 25ft.-wide UES townhouse with commercial space, a 3BR duplex and six 2BRs.
StreetEasy History
02/29/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Brown Harris Stevens at $11,000,000.
05/20/2008 Price decreased by 5% to $10,500,000.
10/30/2008 Price decreased by 8% to $9,650,000.
12/05/2008 Price decreased by 12% to $8,500,000.
02/22/2009 Price decreased by 7% to $7,890,000.
06/09/2009 Price decreased by 14% to $6,750,000

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/406727-condo-120-eleventh-avenue-chelsea-new-york
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/406726-condo-120-eleventh-avenue-chelsea-new-york

4B and 3B chasing each other on the way down, 4B just dropped $1M or 17%. the 3 br on the line A had just been reduced by 10% only.

I think they are both Sponsor listings? so I'm not sure you can say they are chasing each other down?

admin, LOL. your paying a premium for the four working fireplaces. And if you have prostate problems, the bathrooms are a godsend.

and the mirrors, just think of the possibility.

looking around, thank you. if you need any assistance in analyzing numbers, give a shout out and i'll forward again my gmail address.

"now, why would anybody want 3 bathrooms and only 1 bedroom? menage a trois type of couple??
a) it's obviously really a guest room with a bath,
b) I must be blind because I only see 2 on the fp.

i see 30yrs (although don't see the 3rd bathroom either). hey, the working fireplaces are a must if the sh*t hits the fan. as all you need to do for a cozy winter is to collect wood in the park.

another day, another chopper: a cut of $2M on 213 West 23rd Street:

"The price of the 6,000-square-foot triplex penthouse was lowered by $2.05 million, and the home is now on the market for $12.95 million. The home is now listed for 14 percent less than its asking price of $15 million when it first went on the market in April. The prewar apartment has 7,200 square feet of outdoor space and reinforced walls for art. Halstead Property's Elizabeth Sahlman and Liora Yalof have the listing. The apartment last sold for $7.5 million in June 2007, according to Streeteasy.com."

So this is another seller hoping for a flip with a 100% return. Didn't work out, so he's/she's shooting for a much more modest 70% return (gross of commissions, redo, taxes, maintenance, ...).

A couple of things about that building:

1) If I remember correctly, there was a lot of shuffling of players around as it was originally supposed to be sort of "self developed" by partners who would eventually end up owning units, but the sands kept shifting, partners came and went, and eventually it ended up getting developed by a single entity with "lines" (front and back) and "standard finishes"

2) It it another example of a building which could have had an amazing lobby, but decided to forgo that and basically make the servant's entrance into where the millionaires owners are supposed to enter. Since it's on 23rd Street (and not the nice part) to begin with, I found this to be a big mistake in terms of getting the type of people who can afford the units to want to live in the units in this building. Even if you assume that the unit itself is priced correctly, i don't know which person who is going to spend $15M on anything is going to accept going into their building thru what looks like "the help's" entry on 23rd St and 7th Ave. And David Barton can't be paying THAT much, can they?

This has had quite the choppy history. i wonder if the breathtakingly high taxes will be reduced given the final price.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/418235-condo-246-west-17th-street-chelsea-new-york

02/14/2008 Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by Core Group Marketing at $2,225,000.
05/13/2009 Core Group Marketing Listing entered contract. Last priced at $1,995,000.
06/05/2009 Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by Core Group Marketing at $1,375,000.
06/08/2009 Listing sold.

AR: that is a stunning chop.

dwell, especially given the neighborhood, and the fact that it supposedly was in contract for much higher amounts twice. chelsea, flatiron, village have been SO resistant to downward price momentum, until recently.

Is the 3k taxes per month? 5g per month even without mortgage.. Isnt that expensive?

246 west 17th street is still no bargain at that price. the walls are really thin in that building, you hear everything. and those taxes yikes. i remember the broker telling me prices were never going to get this low there though. he said the developer would rather hold out and wait. i guess they got tired of that.

it seems to me as though those taxes were based on the initial listed purchase price. you might get stuck with them for awhile, but I can't imagine they'd hold up.

jasonkyle, not a great deal, i agree. but i'm happy developers are finally lowering prices downtown.

i thought the taxes were that high because the first 3 floors are an original structure. are they price based as well? i guess that makes sense.

they were not tax abatement eligible because they were an existing structure, you're correct. but the taxes should have been based on price, as well. Which tells you how happy owners of $2mmish new development condos are going to be in a few years.

AR and Jason, I think this is a perfect example of how tax abatements will affect the market when they expire. Don't know how long they last (10 years?) so that probably means some will expire in a few years - if the market hasn't turned around by then, there will be added pressure to sell.

depending on the development they last 5 to 25 years I believe. 10 WEA, i think, has a five-year system with 20% being added yearly. Kalahari has a 25 year system, 20 years abated, then 20% yearly for 5 years. 10 year programs are usually 20% every 2 years.
boss, this will get ugly in a couple of years.

Huge chop on the Bailey mansion, one of the most interesting houses offered today. I'd like tour just to see the detail on the 66 windows. Given the location, I think some non-profit may make best use of this piece of history.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/418872-townhouse-10-st-nicholas-place-hamilton-heights-new-york

04/10/2009
Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Stribling at $6,500,000.
06/09/2009
Listed in StreetEasy by Stribling at $3,500,000.
06/09/2009
Also Listed in StreetEasy by Stribling at $3,500,000.
06/10/2009
Stribling Listing is no longer available.

Still listed on the Stribling website.

I keep telling you people, taxes are not affected by sales. RE Taxes are set as if the building were a comparable rental, and then divided by percent of common interest. If the unit sold for 50 cents it wouldn't lower the RET.

30yrs, the text on that apt. states that "all four fireplaces are in working order". BWDIK

????????????????????

"I keep telling you people, taxes are not affected by sales. RE Taxes are set as if the building were a comparable rental, and then divided by percent of common interest. If the unit sold for 50 cents it wouldn't lower the RET."

Only for co-ops.

HDLC: That home is beautiful. But you're right, the location is terrible. It sits across the street from a gas station to the west and a "hotel" (homeless shelter) to the south. The house directly to the east, another free-standing mansion, is now used as a "New York City Historic Landmark pemanently housing 21 formerly homeless adults."

http://www.harlemmagazine.com/20081227412/News/dawn-hotel-for-sale-10-million.html

http://www.broadwayhousing.org/sites/benziger-abraham_house.php

I don't have anything against the homeless. But if I'm going to be spending 3.5M for a wreck that probably needs 2M worth of work, I don't want my end result 5.5M mansion to be surrounded by homeless shelters and a gas station. It is an amazing home though.

"Only for co-ops."

I do not believe that is correct.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/email/crd_newsletter04-09.html

about half way down:

"NEITHER FISH NOR FOWL
Then there are New York City's co-ops and condos. As Class 2 properties, they must, by state law, be valued by income rather than sales price. As owned residences, they do not generate an income stream. The result? For such buildings, the finance department has to estimate what the rent would be if the co-op or condo units were rentals.

The taxes on condos more closely approximate those of rental apartment buildings, particularly in Manhattan, largely because many condos have been built in recent years and are thus assessed against the market value of comparable rental buildings."

http://www.millersamuel.com/pdf-tank/1051930559WFulr.pdf

see page 42, footnote 55 at bottom of page

ok, then, 30yrs. you don't think the rental income basis is going down? and will be viewed as such given that purchase prices are declining huge amount in the face of commensurate declines in rental prices?

as such, i'd guess that the real estate taxes should fall even FURTHER. but your point is well taken. i was just saying, not so artfully (or even factually), that the market has some bearing on real estate taxes. which in the end is the same result.

"it seems to me as though those taxes were based on the initial listed purchase price. you might get stuck with them for awhile, but I can't imagine they'd hold up."

This seemed to me that you were talking about the taxes on THIS unit as opposed to others in the building (i.e. the low relative sales prices should affect it's taxes relative to the taxes of others in the building). And you certainly meant that the taxes were "based on the initial listed purchase price". What I keep trying to get across is that the sales price of a unit doesn't affect it's taxes relative to other units in the building, nor does it affect the taxes of the entire building. Let's say you had a market where rental prices were rising and sales prices were falling (not impossible to imagine), what at some point it would trigger is some very low sales (like this one?) because the taxes (and/or CC's) would seem out of line. I'll give a perfect example from last crash: in 114 East 13th Street (American Felt Building) there are 4 units on a floor, all plus or minus 1000SF (you'll see listings calling them 950 to 1200 I believe). But there is one huge duplex on the first floor which is like ?3500?SF. But the cc's were always considered a little high since it's 40 unit building with a doorman (at that time people thought over $1 PSF was high). Well, this huge unit had like $5,000 a month CC/RET. When it got foreclosed on, no one wanted it and it stayed around for a bit ( ?2 or 3 years vacant?) and eventually went for around $500,000 ( I pushed that unit so hard... basically to the point where if someone who said he were looking for a lot of space in a condo for cheap and didn't buy it, it was the last conversation they had with me). In any case, the low sale had no effect on the RET of ANY unit in the building this one or any othrrs because it CAN'T BY LAW, all they can use is he valuation from similar rental properties.

Well, you ask what happens when that occurs? "A rising tide lifts all boats". Still the same, because all properties will be value decreased and they "back into" the tax rate: i.e. they look at the total they want to collect in $ from a given call of properties, look at the sum of all the AV's, and then compute the tax rate: so if everyone's assessment goes down from a negative in rental prices and AV's drop,they simply raise the tax rate.

Plus, when I say :based on other similar rental properties., remember it's the gov't talking, so what constitutes such hings would make you head explode. Look, I've been listening to talk of how this stuff gets implemented for almost 40 years and I still don't get it. All i can say is go research on NYC.gov and any other sources you can find and try to decipher it - it's very tough. But my main point is that REWALLY , REALLY , REALLY a hard as it is to believe that what you sell a condo for doesn't effect it's taxes, it really doesn't. And right now I'm too tired to go into further depth abouy it.

30yrs, great post on taxes. I also agree with you that the inverse of "rising tide lifts all boats" will not be allowed to happen by our politicians. Especially at a time of diminishing tax receipts (from lower financial services bonuses and reduced number or RE transactions, for example), there is no way the NYC government will allow its only more-or-less stable source of funding (RE taxes) to go down. If assessments go down, they'll simply hike the rate or (to save face) eliminate prior tax reductions. Kind of like the crap the MTA pulls with the metro card -- they started out with a huge % discount on your $20+ purchases and now they raise prices through a combination of an actual rate hike and reducing the discount.

"as such, i'd guess that the real estate taxes should fall even FURTHER." and "my main point is that REALLY , REALLY , REALLY a hard as it is to believe that what you sell a condo for doesn't effect it's taxes, it really doesn't."

this is semantics i'm afraid. RE transfers and mortgage recording taxes are somehow (don't ask me why) considered "not property taxes" but they are real estate taxes and are bringing at least $1 Billion less in revenue than last year. the higher the price, the more you pay on those. the high turnover provided tax revenue that is not coming back. and was mostly spent ... bloomberg "savings for a rainy day" is really like having a tiny umbrella to protect you from a tsunami. that revenue will have to come from somewhere if spending is not cut.

back to chopping. this is fugly.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/211315-coop-177-east-79th-street-upper-east-side-new-york

03/31/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Brown Harris Stevens at $2,100,000.
05/07/2008 Price decreased by 1% to $2,075,000.
06/21/2008 Listing entered contract.
10/29/2008 Re-listed by Brown Harris Stevens.
10/29/2008 Price decreased by 11% to $1,850,000.
11/11/2008 Price decreased by 1% to $1,840,000.
11/12/2008 Price decreased by 2% to $1,799,000.
11/22/2008 Price decreased by 7% to $1,680,000.
12/08/2008 Price decreased by 2% to $1,650,000.
12/16/2008 Price decreased by 2% to $1,625,000.
01/11/2009 Price decreased by 2% to $1,599,000.
02/18/2009 Price decreased by 3% to $1,545,000.
04/01/2009 Price decreased by 1% to $1,525,000.
04/13/2009 Price decreased by 2% to $1,495,000.
05/28/2009 Price decreased by 1% to $1,475,000.
06/04/2009 Price decreased by 3% to $1,425,000.
06/11/2009 Price decreased by 2% to $1,395,000.

1120 park 16ad---whoa chop this and check the comps in the very same bldg---ouch

talk about death from a thousand cuts...this listing makes me dizzy. would enjoy hearing the discussion between owner and broker.

A perfect example of stupid price cuts which actually do more damage than good to a seller. Especially these days, buyers know every price cut. there's no better way to signal "desperate seller" than to do a million cuts. but also, I always tell sellers not to bother with small price cuts because they don't get you anything. Remember, we are talking about ASKING prices in a market where everyone expects to negotiate (as opposed to marking down shirts ay Macy's where most people look at teh price tag and say "yes" or "no").

Yhe purpose of a price cut is to get more people to look at the unit (well, the most significant reason, anyway). I have always told sellers that if they are going to cut their price, make sure it goes into a different price category. WAYYYYY back in the old days before brokers used computers it wasn't as important because brokers showed, in general, the properties which they had in their minds which would be right for a buyer. But now in the days of total automation, you have to be much more careful: take 2 units that are only $2,000 apart in asking price: one is at $1,999,999 and the other is $2,000,001. The difference in traffic will be amazing because brokers will do their searches "up to $2 million and all miss the second. Now, of course this is hyperbole because no one is pricing at $2,000,001, but for example, using the above example, cutting from $1,545,000 to $1,525,000 - what was the purpose? how many more people looked at the unit at the power price than the higher price? If you were a broker, and someone told you they would look at the $1,525,000 asking unit, but not the $1,545,000 unit, what would you do? i know that I wouldn't show them anything anymore. In fact, all that such price cuts generally do is get the seller less money because they are having the same buyers interested and starting negotiations at a lower price point.

To give an extreme example, there have actually been times WITH MY OWN PROPERTIES where i thought they should sell at $205,000 but I priced them at $199,000 FRIM rather than $219,000, because I felt that $219,000 was a "stupid" or weak pricing because you lost all the buyers who's max was $200,000 9and it would be the best unit they saw), and instead the buyer who would look at it were looking from $200,000 to $250,000 and it would be amongst the worst they saw instead.

Big chop on a flip gone south at 355 Central Park West townhouse
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/428410-house-355-central-park-west-upper-west-side-new-york

I still think the contract price is high considering that even with a CPW address there's not going to be much of a view.

04/25/2007
Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Prudential Elliman at $11,750,000.
12/01/2008
Prudential Elliman Listing is no longer available.
12/02/2008
Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Brown Harris Stevens at $9,495,000.
06/11/2009
Brown Harris Stevens Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $6,595,000.
06/14/2009
Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by Brown Harris Stevens at $6,595,000.

This place reportedly sold for $4.75MM in 12/06. I don't know what could have been done in renovations between 12/06 and 4/07 to justify that outrageous flip listing.

aptometrist...long time no see.

HDLC: A couple of comments on 355 CPW...

Because of the re-listing, that history omits the intermediate reductions:
01/11/2009 Price decreased by 16% to $7,995,000.
04/01/2009 Price decreased by 13% to $6,995,000.
05/07/2009 Price decreased by 6% to $6,595,000.
The price chops are still impressive - just not quite so abrupt.

With regard to the December 2006 sale, I'm not sure that was an arm's-length transaction; the evidence is contradictory. Also, the recorded sale price in ACRIS is a little under $3MM. The LLC borrowed substantially more than that, partly to cover the renovations.

In any case, you're right that the original flip attempt was nuttily priced. I think this is one of those arbitrage attempts where somebody thought they could manufacture a trophy property by renovating and/or clearing out tenants. That's hard enough in good times, because rich buyers tend to be fussy about things like location and views. It's especially difficult when the supply of real trophies is rising.

this is a chopper, but it's also an interesting comp, on a couple of levels.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/362021-condo-455-east-86th-street-yorkville-new-york

11/18/2005 Previous Sale recorded for $960,000.
05/04/2006 Previously Listed in StreetEasy, already in contract, by Prudential Elliman at $1,325,000.
07/25/2006 Previous Sale recorded for $1,365,000.
09/19/2008 Prudential Elliman Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $1,375,000.
11/04/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $1,495,000.
01/29/2009 Price decreased by 5% to $1,425,000.
02/27/2009 Price decreased by 2% to $1,399,000.
03/24/2009 Price decreased by 4% to $1,350,000.
04/03/2009 Price decreased by 4% to $1,299,000.
04/16/2009 Price decreased by 8% to $1,199,000.
05/07/2009 Price decreased by 4% to $1,149,000.
05/26/2009 Price decreased by 4% to $1,099,000.
06/11/2009 Price decreased by 4% to $1,050,000.

Yet another example of what 30yrs just said about pointless price cuts. They should've just bitten the bullet in January and tried 990-something.

NWT, easy to say in retrospect. Often a cut can generate interest. I agree that the listing now looks silly on SE, but it wouldn't be that noticeable on the NYTs, and that's where many look. Initial price seems silly, but current price with a discount from listing is closing in on 2005 prices. many people who bought in the last few years think they've lost little value here. listings like this make me a bit sad. here are some other listings in the building.

Building: The Channel Club at 455 East 86th Street in Yorkville
Condo
Yorkville

SAVE Active Listings (12)
↓ $1,420,000 455 East 86th Street #11A 3 beds 1,500 ft²

$1,350,000 455 East 86th Street 2 beds 1,253 ft²

↓ $1,150,000 455 East 86th Street #21C 1 bed 1,050 ft²

Yes, I'm great with retrospective advice. I do believe, though, that in January -- with the apartment having sat at $1.5M for three months -- they should've known that a cut to $1.425M would get them nowhere. But then maybe the seller is in no hurry to unload the thing and get on with her life.

NWT, what is sad is that it's fairly apparent they NEED to unload the thing. and they need to take a loss. how much of a loss one perceives one can tolerate can change given circumstances, which I suspect may be deteriorating here.

Yeah, what a situation like this needs is an intervenor: someone to say "Look, the party's over. You're going to take a beating on this. Here's how to get it over with quickly." I know I'd need one if in that position.

NWT, you beat me to that conclusion. AR is right that many who bought in recent years don't know/are in denial about the current value of their place. To use your term, the 'intervenor' in this case should have been the broker, because he does see what is going on in the market. Opening at $1.495mm last November was broker malpractice, plain and simple. Even if the backstory is that the seller insisted on a number that the broker advised against, it's arguably malpractice to take the listing in the first place and clearly malpractice to let it linger three months before going anywhere with the asking price. And that's even before we get to the value dissipating micro-chop strategy.

The most charitable possible interpretation is that the broker was completely ineffective in communicating to his client(s) about where their best interests lay. A less charitable view is that he is merely incompetent. Alternatives beyond that get into mixtures of incompetence and broker self-interest...

AR,
The apartment in the Channel Club is an odd ball. It's big, it's plain and it has a weird trapped feeling when viewing that would probably be mitigated by furnishings. The kitchen is disproportionally small and the common room is square which defies dividing it for differential usage. The bedrooms were acceptable with reasonable light. When we viewed this my spouse kept wanting to leave.

I've also seen 11A. This is a great place for tiny people. You know who I mean, He's 5'2'', she's 4'10'' together they weigh 236lbs. soaking wet. One under sized child. This place would be great! Lot and lots of tiny spaces with interesting views.

and yet these apartments traded for so much at the peak, given their quality. i've been in apartments like that, ones that make you feel like fleeing but for some dumb reason you think you need to open a couple of kitchen cabinets to make it appear as though you haven't just wandered in by mistake.

Agree that price cuts on the UWS have been deep. Didn't know that they were deeper than elsewhere, though. A lot has to do with estate sales. I feel like there's been at least 1 per WEA building in the last 12 months.

10023, they seemed to get started a bit earlier so i think they're showing up more in closed sales sooner. and those estate sales, although the UES and midtown east should have their fair share of those as well. also the recent goose to the mortgage market, which largely affected apartments under $1m, hasn't shown up in the closed sales yet, but has been showing up in listing prices. i could be wrong, it's just a sense i've been getting.

I try to put myself in the broker's position. (Which is difficult, having no entrepreneurial spirit, among other things.) Bread on the table means getting the listing. I can offer an analysis the seller doesn't want to hear, or I can give in to the seller. The latter course at least offers the hope of either getting lucky or gradually teaching the seller about this market.

Recently I attended a OH type party for real estate agents of a particular firm. We were a last minute invite to come see this spectacular penthouse in our heighborhood. The agent who invited us we know for many year socially and I am a good friend of the husband. While at the mega penthouse I listened to the pep-rally like speech delivered to the agents who where celebrating the bottoming and resurgence of the market. After we went for drinks and, listened patiently as the agent/friend regailed us with 'chance of a life time, bottom of the market, buy now or be priced out forever chit chat' basiclly regergitating the morsels that had just been fed to her by her sales leader.
On the side I questioned her husband on her mindless non-analytical approch to the market. He made it simple. His wife is in sales. She either believes or she does not. If you don't drink the Koolaid you can't make a living in this job...plain and simple. He told me that his wife loves to sell she does not crave respect or fashion herself as a real estate analyst. The lady at the jewlery doesn't mine, polish, or set the diamond. She's not really sure why it even cost so much, she's there to help you pull the trigger and facilitate the sale. I think we expect too much from brokers.

"She either believes or she does not. If you don't drink the Koolaid you can't make a living in this job...plain and simple. He told me that his wife loves to sell she does not crave respect or fashion herself as a real estate analyst. The lady at the jewlery doesn't mine, polish, or set the diamond. She's not really sure why it even cost so much, she's there to help you pull the trigger and facilitate the sale. I think we expect too much from brokers"

agree, it's not such an easy job to have. i'd prefer people to be able to transact without one though, to pull the trigger respecting each others timing instead of having to hearing "decide now or lose it forever!".

expect too much from brokers? Bull crap. Completely disagree. The woman at the jewelry counter isn't making 6% on a multi-milion dollar sale. At a certain income level we should expect intelligence and insight of people. Unfortunately I see very little of that in real estate or wall street, which simply means those folks are OVERPAID.

yes...like many other things, the problem with brokers comes down to the disconnect between what they get paid (or used to get paid, when sales were happening) and their value add. at the very least, they are doing exactly what they did when the market was 1/3 to 1/2 of where is peaked. its inevitable that people would expect something for that kind of money.

"Yeah, what a situation like this needs is an intervenor: someone to say "Look, the party's over. You're going to take a beating on this. Here's how to get it over with quickly." I know I'd need one if in that position."

now you know why I switched to working for professionals and institutions. there is a LOT less emotion and a LOT more analytical behaviour.

"On the side I questioned her husband on her mindless non-analytical approch to the market. He made it simple. His wife is in sales. She either believes or she does not. If you don't drink the Koolaid you can't make a living in this job...plain and simple."

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/11192-another-35-decline?page=2 next to last post on the page, point (2)

Good thing you found your niche. I'd have lasted five minutes.

holy mother.

04/17/2007 Previously Listed in StreetEasy by RSNY Realty at $2,000,000.
06/06/2007 Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Brown Harris Stevens at $1,950,000.
07/01/2007 RSNY Realty Listing is no longer available.
12/13/2007 Brown Harris Stevens Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $1,815,600.
06/18/2009 Listed in StreetEasy by NYBGroup at $999,000.

actually, i forgot to post the link and went back to read it. deceptive, horribly so. bid on the city is accepting bids at something over $1.3 which seems EXTREMELY deceptive to me, when they listed the property at $999k. is this deceptive advertising? will not post the link for such deceptive practices.

LP1,
Maybe when the getting was good they were overpaid but today I don't think that charactorizes the situation. I really don't know what to expect from a broker. I really don't expect them to find a place for me, I search too hard on my own. I would like them to have at their fingertips inside gossip about buildings in the neighborhood they represent. By gossip I mean information about financials/law suits/maintainence problems/crazy boards/future sellability/etc. I would like expert speedy comps for any apartment I find interesting. I would enjoy expert guidence in landing a property at the absolut bottom price. So far it has all been wishful thinking. Truthfully, It's the kind of behavior and service I would expect from anyone I was paying to advise me. My Agent experiences is a gadfly trying to close a sale at all costs reguardless of my interests. I am sure there are super-duper pros out their but, it stands to reason that they must be dealing with the big fish as opposed to my guppy size aspirations.
Oh Dolly, can't you spare a little time for a tiny fish like me? How about a little squeeze...you like sushi?

If what you are saying is that they won't accept a bid of less than $1.3 million but have listed it at $999K I think it's more than deceptive: it might actually be against the law. OTOH if it's listed at $999K and they are GETTING bids at more than that, but just haven't "brought the gavel down" because they are continuing to receive bids, then that's another story altogether.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/429768-condo-215-217-east-96th-street-carnegie-hill-new-york

very confusing listing...it will be interesting to watch this one unfold. have a feeling that they're being so tricky that they'll screw themselves.

2 bed 2 bath -- 1025 Fifth Avenue #12FN -- gave up $1.1 million from original ask. I don't know the price per square foot, but that's a 44% drop over a 1 year period!

04/23/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $2,500,000.
05/07/2008 Price decreased by 9% to $2,275,000.
06/16/2008 Price decreased by 4% to $2,175,000.
07/03/2008 Price decreased by 8% to $1,995,000.
09/17/2008 Price decreased by 4% to $1,925,000.
09/26/2008 Price decreased by 2% to $1,895,000.
10/25/2008 Price decreased by 5% to $1,795,000.
01/12/2009 Price decreased by 20% to $1,436,000.
02/05/2009 Listing entered contract.
05/14/2009 Sale recorded for $1,400,000.