If You Can Demonstrate Market Movement With Comps: Upper West Side Edition

Aboutready: Thanks for the heads-up on that price cut. I know nshipley likes that one a lot. You're right to be concerned about the kitchen. Here's my write-up from last fall:

250 West 94th Street #10H
$1,995,000 maint. $1822 3BR(counting maid's)/2.5BA 1,850 ft²
Traffic: very light

This classic six is well-situated, in an excellent building at the northern end of prime UWS, with the express train around the corner - a boon for anyone who still has a job downtown. The low profile of Pomander Walk across 94th Street allows a surprising amont of light to reach the north-facing rooms. The corner master even gets a glimpse of sunsets on the Hudson, if you tilt your head just right.

The apartment itself didn't make a very strong impression either way. The owners have made minor enhancements over the years to suit their evolving needs and tastes, like new bathrooms and some built-in storage,. They have not, however, done much to address the inefficiency of the space. As a result, although the apartment is generally in good shape (other than the obsolete kitchen), you might have to gut everything except the bedroom wing to get the most from the generous footprint.

A good architect/designer team could probably do something exciting with the 11-1200 ft² that comprise the kitchen, maid's room, foyer, LR and DR. The optimal use of that space would depend on family size and other variables. The key point is that, in its current configuration, this apartment functions as though it were 10-20% smaller, and that means it compares/competes with apartments that are priced $200-400K lower. The advantage here is that you have the flexibility to create a legitimate 3BR - or even a compact 4BR. So for a family that expects to grow, the answer might be to fix the kitchen and leave the rest as-is until the next baby arrives. Will anyone pay $2MM for that option? Color me skeptical.

My perspective is always a bit skewed, as I'm looking for fairly generous space with only one kid. I kept looking at the floorplan actually hoping nothing had been done to the kitchen so it could be combined with the maids room for something splendid. As this is just an exercise in fun for now, doesn't matter. Thanks for repeating your post for me.

Bender1961, 12A in 771 WEA was an estate wreck. 7A and 5A have been updated.

guys,

i am not claiming that ppsf is an irrelevant measurement. i merely suggest that it is silly to take a broker's listed square footage and use that to calculate it. if you want to take the time to run the numbers be my guest.

the advantage of a comp thread is that it is straightforward: what did something sell for in the past, and what is something similar selling for now. no muss, no fuss.

HR: I think that is the point. We are not taking the broker's listed sq ft. We are calculating it ourselves. Yes, we are taking the room dimensions they give us as a starting point. Yet they still need to pass the stink test on a proportion basis. Within reason, we know how long a tub is, how wide a door is, how deep kitchen coiunters are. So, if dimensions are given, we should be able to get within 10%. Whereas broker's given totals are worthless. BUT, BUT ,BUT...I have seen in the last month or so several listings where the broker stated sq ft is pretty damn close to my calculations, maybe there is a crack is this aspect of the charade.

trinityparent/bender1961: re 771 WEA, #12A went to contract in early October, so it's already a rather stale comp and should be considered in that light. The market has changed a lot in the past five months. Apart from freshness, I think #12A a valid comp for #5A and #7A, despite condition. The renovations of #5A and #7A appear to be 10-20 years old. At this point, those updates may not have much residual value, especially to a buyer who wants to express her own vision. In rough terms, I think the much higher floor and much worse condition are, in this case, pretty close to a wash.

patient,

you just made my point. why jump into that morass? this is a comps thread, i'm very happy sticking with comps.

here's a little movement:
309 West 86th 5A
STREETEASY HISTORY
09/19/2008
Previously listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran for $995,000
02/18/2009
Corcoran listing unavailable at $895,000
03/11/2009
Listed in StreetEasy by Elliman at $847,000

03/01/2007 #6A $925,000 -5.5%
02/02/2007 #7A $980,000 -6.7%

the renovation is not necessarily to my taste, but it is certainly mint condition, high-end work. the apartment appears to be a legitimate 1100 square feet--it's a rectangle, so easy to calculate, and i thought i'd help out the ppsf folks.

Passing 2004 prices at 302 West 79th: http://www.prudentialelliman.com/1067973
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT ... #6E .......................... |↓ $599,000 2 beds
08/12/2004 #7E $615,000 ........ |
No evident condition issues. #6E is renovated, though the bathroom isn't mentioned or shown. No info on #7E. I think the floorplans are consistent from the third floor to the seventh.

Now down to 2007 levels...with plenty of room to get to 2006....and perhaps beyond.

They tried to do a "blind bid" auction (for lack of a better term) a few weeks ago. Gotta love the message posted on the Warburg website "Buyer. We hear you".. Coulda fooled me.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/356054-coop-20-west-77th-street-upper-west-side-new-york

20 W 77 #4A
10/08/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Warburg at $3,850,000
11/07/2008 Price decreased to $3,750,000
02/17/2009 Price decreased to $3,200,000
03/10/2009 Price decreased to $2,950,000

04/23/2008 #10A $3,500,000 $3,500,000 Sold 3 beds 2.5 baths
08/13/2007 #8-A $3,200,000 -4.5% $3,350,000 ↓ 3 beds 3 baths
05/11/2006 #6A $2,412,500 -9.0% $2,650,000 ↓ 3 beds 2 baths

215 West 90th (Haroldon Court) "E" line: Large pre-war classic six condo. Monthlies total $1715. Stated square footage is 1837, but that must include common areas; the actual apartment is probably closer to 1600. So the opening ask is in the $1100 psf range.

#10E is a new listing, $100K below the owners' price in early 2006, and they appear to have put money into it. http://www.bhsusa.com/detail.aspx?id=1000636

--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
NEW LISTING #10E .......................... | . $1,750,000 2 beds
07/19/2007 . #14E $2,310,000 +5.0% | . $2,199,000 2 beds 3 baths (footprint may vary)
06/11/2007 .. #8E $2,150,000 ........ | ↓ $2,150,000 3 beds 2 baths 1,837 ft²
07/24/2006 .. #2E $1,425,550 ........ |
02/23/2006 #10E $1,850,000 ........ |

The fallout from banking and hedge funds continues.

so overall, prices are at 2004 levels? or 2005? or 2003?

"Overall", prices are all over the place.

If I were advising a seller who wanted quick execution, I might recommend 2003 pricing. Depends on the property, of course.

The Eldorado, 300 CPW new listing, seems like a very nice apt, but not east facing. Small master bed. Nice starting price point though.
$4,250,000 about 2,700 f2 $1,574 per f2.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/391159-coop-300-central-park-west-upper-west-side-new-york

Regarding the 'what year's price?' question... The struggle to get beyond 2006 is huge. From what I can tell, price appreciated dramatically from 2003 to 2006. Miller/Samuel has the price increase on the UWS (on a per sq ft basis) from 2003-2006 at 42%!!!! (for 2BR's.... 2003=887/sq ft; 2006=1259/sq ft).

If you go back further than 2006, you are essentially cliff diving. Whether NYC RE "takes the 2004/5 dive" is the $64,000 question. As I see it, buyers currently live @ 2003 and sellers @ 2006. That spread is a mile wide. This is why we are seeing so few transactions.

300 CPW 10B sold for $3.450 in 2006 (shortly before the peak). Why should it sell for $4.250 now? I would have thought that prices would be significantly, not just from the 2007 peak, but also from the near peak of 2006. Am I incorrect in this assumption?

300 CPW 10B sold for $3.450 in 2006 (shortly before the peak). Why should it sell for $4.250 now? I would have thought that prices would be down significantly, not just from the 2007 peak, but also from the near peak of 2006. Am I incorrect in this assumption?

What does the group think should be today's price for identical apartment relative to mid 2006?

EEEE1: haven't you heard? People don't lose money buying RE, it's a special type of asset. That's why you buy it leveraged - to max out on your return.

walter,

i think it's very, very important to look at individual situations rather than the total universe of apartments on the market. given that there are now a significant number of apartments with asking prices in the 2004 range, and that many of these apartments still aren't selling, it is sort of irrelevant that many sellers continue to ask 2006 prices. those apartments are simply going to languish, slash their prices, or be taken off the market.

Serious question. What does the group think should be the mark up or mark down for an identical apartment bought in mid 2007 and on sale now, or mid 2006 and on sale now.

for mid 2007 example, look at apartment 10C in the Normandy 140 Riverside Drive bought in mid 2007 for $1.85, on sale now for $1.895.

all else being equal (no renovations, no nothing) what should be the mark up or mark down from these purchase points?

W81: You posted a while back re 14A at 315w 106st at $2mm as being a new potential price point for classic 7s in the upper 90s/100s. Don't forget that the same building had another classic 7 (don't know the condition) that failed to sell at 1.8mm and is now off the market.
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/300933-coop-315-west-106th-street-manhattan-valley-new-york

and i know this is a subject for another thread, but an estate 7 closed at 8 E 96st for 1.6mm - I realize it was an estate, but a great location.

I think the 2mm for classic 7 barrier has been breached - in the market place, if not in sellers' minds, anyway

EEE1,

that apartment would have a chance (although not a shoe-in) of selling for 1.2 but personally, i don't think it is worth $1 million in this market.

so happy renter, to translate your estimates into numbers, is it your belief that 2007 prices should be marked down between 40% and 50% for an identical unit, all else being equal? doesn't that seem a little excessive?

EEE1:
I agree with you that it seems a bit on the high side. However, I have this view that all apts will go through price cuts before selling. I just simply think that 10B with a "start" of 4.25mm is not that ridiculous. Couple of chops over next 4 months and it is in the range.

patient09:

if happyrenter is correct about the Normandy, then 10B would need to be chopped almost in half, to near $2.2, to sell.

Do you agree with that price cut? Or do you think happyrenter is being excessively pessimistic?

eee1,

the market is not monolithic so i would not apply a blanket 40-50% decline across the board. in some cases the decline will be less than that, and in some cases more. i think these people were crazy to pay nearly $2 million for an average-sized four room apartment without a river view--even at the peak that was just way too much.

i am evaluating the apartment by comparing it to other units on the market right now, not by comparing it to what some fool paid for it two years ago. take a look at another apartment that came on the market today:

http://www.prudentialelliman.com/1089962

243 Riverside Apartment 1202, asking $1.25 million.

this apartment is much bigger (assuming the listed square footage is accurate. there is no floorplan yet), it has spectacular river views, and it has a beautiful renovation. the normandy is a fancier building, but it's not the beresford. assuming the information listed is correct there is just no conceivable way that 10C at the normandy is worth nearly as much as 1202 at 243 riverside. so even if we assume that 1202 will sell for its asking price (which it probably won't), that normandy unit should sell for well under that price.

eee1,

you are looking for a one-size-fits-all formula, and there isn't one. you have to evaluate each apartment on its own merits and in comparison with other similar units. first of all, the el dorado apartment sold BEFORE the peak, not at the peak, so the decline would be less. i also think these buyers were smarter and didn't signficantly overpay. in this market i think $3 million would be a reasonable ask for the el dorado unit.

EEE1: no time for more analysis. But, I think 10B would trade for $3.3mm right now. If things continue on current trajectory, $2.7 by year end. Then again owner may not want to sell. I think complete destruction will require more time to pass.

Bender1961: I think the key point is that 315 W106 #14A is an eight, not a seven. If it were a seven, the price wouldn't be very noteworthy.

I definitely share your reservations about judging UWS trends from apartments on 106th Street. A building like 315 West 106th isn't going to set price points for prime UWS. Actually, it's the other way around: Manhattan Valley gets priced at a spread below buildings 20-30 blocks south.

Happyrenter: 243 RSD (a.k.a. "The Cliff Dwelling") is one of the stranger buildings in the neighborhood. Walk by it on a February night and you'll see why 243 trades at the level it does, views and all. I don't particularly like the Normandy, but you're stretching the bounds of comparability there. That said, you may be right about 140 RSD.

Good points all. Specifically to happyrenter....I agree. Each apartment is a little bit different. There is absolutely no single "one size fits all" formula. But the larger set of data does demonstrate the reasons for the current conditions (very few transactions). It is a starting point from which to set your bearings.

west81st,

i agree about 243, it's not where i would want to live either. perhaps i should have found a better apartment to use for the comparison but it was the one i happened to be looking at. the point stands, however: $2 million for a non-view, average-sized 4-room apartment is just nowhere near where the market is.

i'd add, as well, that paula seems like the totally wrong broker for the normandy apartment. perhaps she just think every apartment in new york should sell for $2 million or more because she's never sold an apartment for less.

I'm not quite sure I agree 100% with your police work there, Happyrenter. Check who owns the place.

Then again, you know the old saying about a lawyer who represents himself. So she may be the wrong broker for that apartment anyway.

West81, happyrenter.

What is it about 243 RSD that is unappealing? I'm one of the many sideline buyers and interested in your views here.

haha, you got me there. wow, paula del nunzio is the moron who paid nearly $2 million for this smallish four room no view apartment? jeez louise. not exactly a great advertisement for her services as an advisor and representative for real estate transactions.

she'll have to sell more than a few $20 million townhouses to make up for the $$ she's going to lose on this one.

btw, i love the fargo reference.

Happyrenter: Now look at the seller. Not exactly arm's length.

Thinking_of_buying: The basic problem with 243 is that it occupies the most exposed site on Riverside Drive. That exposure enhances the views, but it also means you come and go amid fairly heavy traffic - right by the highway access - and the building has no feeling of privacy or exclusivity. It's also a fairly small coop, which generally increases risk and limits services and amenities.

I think aesthetics work against 243 too; the pueblo theme was an innovative attempt to work within the constraints of the lot; whether it works for you is a matter of taste, but on the UWS, being that different isn't necessarily a good thing.

The neighborhood has improved a lot since I was a kid. The 96th Street approach to the highway used to be a row of gas stations. Now there's just one, IIRC.

in re: 315 w 106th - I saw the other apartment also. Not comparable at all. Much worse condition, cramped feel, everything needed doing.

have done some legwork since my last postings. would have to agree that it really is a case by case situation. very difficult (impossible for me) to get a market sense. with recent drop at 106, does seem that gap is opening much wider depending on cross streets.

This poor guy bought very close to the peak, and I don't think 10% off his price is going to cut it. This is technically a classic 7, but the living room and dining room together are not much bigger than a normal living room.

490 West End 10D
StreetEasy History
04/19/2007 Previously listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran for $2,895,000
07/19/2007 Previous sale closed for $2,880,000
03/12/2009 Listed in StreetEasy by Jeff Weisbord Real Estate at $2,595,000

Never a good thing when the broker starts the listing off with "WE GET IT...so we have dropped the price $200k from the original ask." Do the math, it's only -16% off the peak price when the owner bought in 2007. He/She is going to face some stiff competition since both 13I (for $999K) and 9I (for $1.15MM) are also on the market.

I saw the apartment in 2007 and it was beautifully renovated with gorgeous details. However, I still don't think the price has dropped enough especially since we're seeing discounts of up to -20% or more (compared to peak) for similar apartments.

05/18/2007 Closing Price at $1,195,000
09/02/2008 Listed in StreetEasy by Elliman at $1,250,000
11/08/2008 Price decreased to $1,200,000
02/09/2009 Price decreased to $1,150,000
03/11/2009 Price decreased to $1,050,000

HR: Totally agree, and there's no way it's 2000 square feet - maybe 1800. IIRC, the "D" line at 490 WEA has a lightly better layout than the "B", because the third bedroom is less of a joke. On the other hand, I don't think there's much of a view - not sure about the 10th floor. In any case, the #9B comp seems unlikely to help #10D when it closes. FWIW, I've always liked the building, especially the lobby, but the sevens have some issues.

thinking_of_buying, your opinion means just as much as those others'. They have their goals, you have yours. I believe it's counterproductive, if not silly, to rely on the opinions of the anonymous posters.

inquirer: I think you may be totally missing the point here. Its not the opinion of the product that matters, its the idea flow, the issues you may not have thought of regarding a certain property. Its like in a business meeting, I refuse to let people who agree with me speak. I don't need someone blowing sunshine up my ass. I am looking for every reason why my thoughts are wrong. Then I can better evaluate on my own. An open forum its called, I think....peace.

patient09, you are right BUT... It's an anonymous forum where some posters might (just might) have the agenda contradicting the others. Peace.
I' for one, love west 106 from park to park. The street has TREES, for god's sake.

Inquirer: Yes, it's a lovely street, but it's a lovely street that historically trades close to a 50% discount vs. similar apartments a mile or so south. Does that discount make any sense? To some people, I guess it does. Honestly, though, nobody's trying to dictate taste here. And you're absolutely right about watching out for agenda-driven posts.

Back to comps:
601 West End Avenue #12A. Same-unit resale, now asking $40K less than the early 2005 purchase price. Not sure whether the current owner did the renovation.
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT... #12A .......................... |↓ $1,395,000 3 beds 1,450 ft²
05/10/2005 #12A $1,435,000 ........ |

West81st: thank you.
About W 106: Tribeca comes to mind. At some point it was trading at 50% discount to ... something.
Right now, w 106 is, to my taste, the best street in Manhattan Valley, value-wise also. And with new Whole Foods etc. within blocks. And I heard that Jewish Home and Hospital is putting up a modern tower (condo) on w 105.
Basically, I'll take w 106 over w 96 & 97 at Broadway.

333 West End Avenue, low floor 7, on the market for 2.295m with Corcoran. Hmm, think it'll close for a tad under 2m?

nyc10023,

that 333 west end 7 is quite a nice apartment, but as discussed previously, the three bedrooms all face west end on only the 3rd floor which is clearly far less than ideal. so we can't call it a perfect seven, but it is certainly a very real, very nice seven, and if it breaks through $2 million that will certainly be significant.

slight movement on CPW. could be significant because there is no listing information on the sold unit, and the current unit is in good condition

291 Central Park West 5W
STREETEASY HISTORY
03/12/2009
Listed in StreetEasy by Sotheby's at $2,800,000

recorded sale
05/11/2006 #7W $3,000,000

i'm not familiar with the building, but it is a condo and the cc are very low, which should help. i still think it's too pricey.

HR: If I have the block right, I suspect there's a big difference between the 5th and 7th floors, in terms of clearing the rooftops to the west.

Back to 771 West End Avenue "A" line. Corner classic seven. #5A was just reduced to under $2MM.

--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT..... #7A .......................... |↓ $2,600,000 3 beds 2,100 ft²
CURRENT..... #5A .......................... |↓ $1,995,000 3 beds 2,000 ft²
12/09/2008 #12A $2,300,000 -11.5% | $2,600,000 Sold 3 beds 3 baths 2,000 ft²
07/11/2006 . #3A $2,600,000 . -1.9% $2,650,000 | Sold 4 beds 2.5 baths
http://www.prudentialelliman.com/Listings.aspx?ListingID=1073870

#3A was newly renovated when it sold. #5A and #7A were redone in the 90s, I think. #12A was an estate wreck, but the high floor adds considerable value on the corner.

#7A may not respond for a while (contentious estate sale). The competition also includes the neighbors on the opposite corner of 97th: http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/389516-coop-755-west-end-avenue-upper-west-side-new-york

west81st,

what do you think of the a line at 771? i have mixed feelings. the living room is nice and wide, but only 16 feet long, and the dining room is small.

Happyrenter: In the original floorplan, the dining room is huge. See the open house thread for more info on how it has been modified in #5A. I think the original layout (see #7A) is a good, solid seven with a lot of flexibility. You're right that the living room is a weakness, and I share NYC10023's preference for side-by-side LR & DR, as opposed to having them face each other across the foyer, as they do here.

i don't know if it's a good deal, but it is sort of a milestone:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/391643-coop-760-west-end-avenue-upper-west-side-new-york

760 west end apartment 4e, a small classic six (or 5.5, depending on your point of view) just came on the market with an initial asking price of 999. granted, it presumably needs everything, and it is on a low floor, but it's still something new. common charges aren't bad either.

recorded sales:

12/21/2005 #12E $1,425,000
11/30/2004 #6E $1,075,000
10/01/2004 #11E $1,075,000

RE: living room/dining room locations. Having lived, been around the world and to hell and back. My preferences for a dining room are the following; 1. you don't need to pass through it to achieve access to any other room, 2. has its own natural light, 3. can be closed off (glass doors) from living room and other areas.

and 4. direct access to kitchen, or pass thru butlers pantry on way to kitchen.

Jesus - we could almost afford that!

90 Riverside Drive "E" line: large, south-facing six with river views.
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
03/10/2009 #11E $2,275,000 -17.3% |↓ $2,750,000 Sold 2 beds 2.5 baths 2,100 ft²
01/06/2009 . #2E ........................ | ↓ $2,450,000 Off-Market 2 beds 3 baths 2,000 ft²
03/29/2005 . #6E $2,187,500 .......... |

#11E was an estate sale, and clearly needed work. No information on the condition of #6E. #2E was updated somewhat, but the pricing was overly agressive for the second floor.

west81st,

the most interesting thing about 11E is not the price, which is still relatively strong (and the market has continued to deteriorate since november as well). what's interesting is the differential between the final asking price and the final sale price. that's quite a gap.

HR: The timing was unlucky on #11E The occupant died in December 2007, at the age of 99. Her heirs didn't dither. The apartment was on the market by March, asking $3.15MM. Unfortunately, Bear Stearns had collapsed the week before, spooking the market. The listing was pulled in July, then re-appeared at $2.75MM just as Lehman was failing.

I agree that the heirs were fortunate to get $2.275 under those conditions. That's 28% less than the original ask, and 17% below the final ask, but going to contract in November probably spared them another sharp drop.

-$250k over 6 mos. Where will this land? Any opinions?

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/345587-coop-245-west-104th-street-manhattan-valley-new-york?email=true

daytonflyer: Two big problems there: No views, and nowhere to eat the glorious food you cook in that trophy kitchen. Nice building, for sure. I'll go out on a limb and say $725K if it sells at all.

west81st,

thanks for the info. my point is simply that it is anecdotal confirmation of the rumors we'd been hearing that deals were being done 15-20% below final asking prices. now that things from late in the 4th quarter are closing and getting reported we are seeing this phenomenon.

daytonflyer: I think I see the dining table in the kitchen, behind the column. West81st, do you mind eating in the kitchen?

That's the peninsula. You sit around it on those stools and peer around the column at each other.

I believe that's a dining counter...

NWT: you are right. I am wrong. Apologies to daytonflyer and West81st. What a waste of kitchen space! They could've made and eat-in.

I finally made it to 245 W104 today. I'll write it up in the Open House thread. Meanwhile, here's another throwback to early 2005 pricing, just reduced to below the price the owners paid.

345 West 70th Street #2B. Edwardian five - 2BR/2BA, ~1100 sq.ft. mt.$1047
http://www.bhsusa.com/detail.aspx?id=944489
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT..... #2B ........................ |↓ $899,000 2 beds
03/16/2005 #2B $900,000 ........ |

Cute little apartment, low maintenance, good school catchment. Tough to sell a low-floor prewar in the middle of Trumpville.

It has a 40 bottle wine refridgerator. Just googling; 70th St. seems desirable.

http://www.frontdoor.com/for_sale/listing/620-56782812

You take me to interesting places. Thanks.

Revisiting the "A" line at 201 West 89th: BHS just reduced #12A by $125K, to $1.725MM.

--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
NEW LISTING #12A ......................... |↓ $1,725,000 2 beds 2 baths
07/12/2007 . #7A $2,125,000 -3.4% | $2,200,000 Sold 2 beds 2 baths

Both apartments are nicely redone. With the difference in elevation, this looks like a 20% drop from a pre-peak contract, and counting.

345 West 70 2B got into this survey:

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/03/19/magazine/20090319-wygf-slideshow_10.html

Thanks, LA. Looks like LL reduced the price again before that piece even reached its publication date. That's how fast the smart brokers are moving to stay ahead of this market.

west81st,

no need to mention the difference in elevation. this is a straight-up 19% off the peak price paid for the line. if the elevation difference is at all significant to the value of the apartment then we are surely looking at a greater than 20% decline. but imho this could have a ways to go. i have a theory that these 'six into five' apartments are going to have trouble in this market. i could be wrong, but in a bear market it seems to me that a trophy kitchen is worth less than a third bedroom.

HR: For the most part I agree, but I really like the layout of #12A for the right family. A lot of people use the maid's room as an office and/or occasional guest room. The little, windowless room in #12A is appropriate for that use, and having a separate laundry space is nice too. The kitchen really isn't that big. I think they rotated it 90 degrees to give it extra light, then used the remaining windowless spaces for the office and the laundry. Clever, IMO, but you're right that some BR flexibility is lost.

this is why different taste is different taste. it seems ridiculous to me to lose a windowed bedroom and wind up with a medium-sized kitchen and a windowless 'office,' all for the sake of an extra window in the kitchen. on the other hand, the maids room may have been particularly tiny and unusable. that's part of why i expect these six-into-fives to suffer: in general they were thus converted because the original layout of the kitchen/maids was poor and cramped.

no good comp for this one, but more evidence that the weakness in classic sixes is seeping into the sevens, and that the weakness in the 90s on west end is making its way to the 70s:

STREETEASY HISTORY
08/01/2008
Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Orsid Realty Corp. at $2,995,000.
12/06/2008
Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $2,495,000.
12/11/2008
Delisted by Orsid Realty Corp.. Last priced at $2,495,000.
12/29/2008
Price decreased by 8% to $2,295,000.
03/17/2009
Price decreased by 9% to $2,085,000.

i'm on record not particularly liking this dark and dreary apartment with a world-class view of the schwaab house. still, it is a large-scale classic seven in an utterly ideal location that looks about ready to break through the $2 million level. $2 million seems to be the new reasonable ask for a nice-but-not-perfect west side seven.

agree - i think 277 WE is headed for 1.7m closing now. The estate should have put it on the market at 2.2 following the sale of 12MC in summer '08. Would have closed by now.

Revisiting 255 West 84th #8B. FSBO doesn't seem to have worked.
This: http://realestate.nytimes.com/sales/detail/253-NS90214294
Has become this: http://www.prudentialelliman.com/Listings.aspx?ListingID=1091000
Now $250K below 2007 cost...
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
NEW LISTING . #8B .......................... | . $1,395,000 3 beds 3 baths 1500 ft²
PRIOR FSBO .... #8B .......................... |↓ $1,445,000 3 beds 3 baths
05/25/2007 #8B $1,645,000 -3.0% | $1,695,000 2 beds 2 baths + maid's suite

As mentioned above, #8B is a unique layout, a room smaller than the prior-sale "B" line comps.

I thought the owners did a pretty good job with the Times ad, but they had to give up after one small price cut. Now the price is even lower, plus they'll have to pay a commission. As for the choice of brokers, they signed with the Elliman team that also has the infamous price-chopper at 221 W82. That situation isn't the brokers' fault, but it doesn't exactly recommend them either. At the Alameda, Lenane sold #12A in December, so she would have been the obvious choice. Looks like the owners just asked their next-door neighbors which brokers they were using to unload the 5200 sq.ft. white elephant at 219 W81.

Solid sale at 25 CPW, from the super-luxe segment:
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
03/04/2009 #15J $8,500,000 -4.5% | $8,900,000 Sold 3 beds 3 baths 2,580 ft²
12/15/2004 #15J $5,525,000 ......... |

Looks like one buyer who could afford 15 CPW opted for the Century instead. Nice reward for selling his company.

127 West 79th (Clifton House) #8A: Same unit resale. http://www.bhsusa.com/detail.aspx?id=1002066
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
NEW LISTING . #8A .......................... | $2,350,000 3 beds 3 baths
11/28/2006 #8A $2,462,500 -1.3% | $2,495,000 3 beds 3 baths 2,000 ft²

More financial industry fallout. Great location, good school catchment, nice enough building. On the downside, the joined floorplan is very awkward, the public rooms are interior and the kitchen appears to be the same second-rate gear they inherited when they bought the place.

yeah, that layout is not at all pretty. i don't see any conceivable reason why this would sell for over $2 million.

HR: Agreed, though PS87, AMNH, Zabar's, Fairway, Delacorte etc. do set it apart from the sevens on upper West End.

By the way, the last bubble sale at that price point on the UWS may have taken place on that very floor.
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/216379-coop-127-west-79th-street-upper-west-side-new-york
I saw that apartment. Not bad, if you like open plans. The open house was JAMMED. Those were the days when $1300/sq.ft. drew a crowd.

These people clearly really want to get this place sold. If anyone on this board is looking for a mid-level upper west side classic six i think this place is crying out for an aggressive lowball:

250 west 94th 10H

STREETEASY HISTORY
09/17/2008
Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $1,995,000.
10/02/2008
Price decreased by 5% to $1,895,000.
10/27/2008
Price decreased by 5% to $1,795,000.
12/01/2008
Price decreased by 6% to $1,695,000.
02/07/2009
Price decreased by 6% to $1,595,000.
03/21/2009
Price decreased by 6% to $1,495,000.

the comps are dramatic;
02/13/2007 #7H $1,790,000
05/02/2005 #3H $1,800,000

17% below the 3rd floor comp from 2005....as of now. i'd offer 1.1 and i bet it could be had for 1.25 or less.

Happyrenter: As Aboutready noted at the top of the page, the shocking comp for #10H is #4H. A total estate wreck, it sold last summer for $1.87MM. #10H needs reno in the kitchen/maid's area, but is otherwise in good condition. The high floor is significant too. #10H has a mostly open northern view over Pomander Walk, and the master bedroom even gets a peek of river/sunsets to the west. For #10H to be asking 20% less than #4H sold for gives you some idea of how completely the bottom is dropping out of this sector. By the way, I'd be curious to know what the folks in #4H did with their blank canvas. The "H" line converts readily to three bedrooms. With a little ingenuity, an architect could get four or even five from the footprint, depending on how far the kitchen can move and a few other variables.

250 West 94th is a nice building. One of its key selling points, though, is easy access to the express subway line. With the middle tier of Wall Street mostly out of the market, a ten-second walk to the 2/3 train isn't such a big asset.

west81st,

you're right that 4H is a shocker; sorry i missed it. but i'm even more surprised by 3H. 2005 was a strong year, but by no means the peak, and we are 17% below the third floor comp on that. the west 90s is just a bloodbath, as the comp i am about to list will amply demonstrate.

275 West 96th 28G
3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, open city and partial river views, terrace, needs TLC.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/394104-condo-275-west-96th-street-upper-west-side-new-york

STREETEASY HISTORY
03/21/2009
Listed in StreetEasy by CBHK at $975,000.

recorded sales:
12/22/2006 #33G $1,410,000
06/22/2005 #21G $1,501,000
02/08/2005 #34G $1,280,000
11/30/2004 #20G $1,300,000
09/20/2004 #14G $1,185,000

prices in the line have bounced around a bit, so i am assuming, for instance, that 21G was renovated, but that 33G was not (hence the lower price paid in a more expensive year for a higher floor). so if we use 33G instead of 21G as the peak comp for an unrenovated unit in this line, we have a decline of 31%. if we use 21G, which was the peak sale for the line, we have a decline of 35%. both of these sales are from 2006, prior to the peak.

comparing this to the 2004 sales, i think you would have to say that this is a 2002 price--perhaps depending on the amount of TLC we are talking about.

Another price cut at 755 WEA. #3B was just reduced $76K, to $1.299MM. http://www.bhsusa.com/detail.aspx?id=990453
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT .... #3B .......................... |↓ $1,299,000 2 beds
10/17/2008 #2B $1,450,000 -6.5% |↓ $1,550,000 Sold 2 beds 2 baths 1,700 ft²
02/21/2007 #4B $1,500,000 ........ | . $1,500,000 3 beds 2 baths 1,600 ft²
01/11/2006 #5B $1,460,000 ........ |

As noted above, #2B and #4B were both wrecks. #3B is in fair condition, with a nice wine fridge.

bump

Seems to be a lot of places in PS 75 zone sitting on the market. Should I read anything into that? What is the general perception of it vs. ps 84 and some of the other schools up there?

great location, nice-looking prewar four room apartment:

320 west 76th 6F
STREETEASY HISTORY
12/06/2007
Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $1,175,000.
07/23/2008
Corcoran Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $949,000.
03/05/2009
Listed in StreetEasy by Brown Harris Stevens at $849,000.
03/26/2009
Price decreased by 6% to $799,000.

recorded sales:
12/19/2007 #3F $1,060,000

this is the sort of price necessary to create distance between the low-end classic sixes and smaller prewar 2 bedrooms. now 25% below the 3rd floor comp sale.

I have heard that PS75 is pretty good (no self-interest here as I do not own in that zone). PS84 hasn't improved much compared to 166 or 75 but it does have the new Fr-English program (I believe there will be one K class this fall and 1 1st grade class).

West81, correct me if I'm wrong but it seems to me that these days what constitutes the tipping point for an UWS schools is a committed parent body large enough and affluent enough to pay for supplies, hire a FT classroom aide for every class & organize a good after-school program. As far as physical plants go, I think the buildings in D3 are adequate. Teachers are not horrible (as you can imagine, people compete to teach in D3 as opposed to some other neighborhoods). If each classroom had a FT aide to divert disruptive children and maintain discipline, that goes very far...

Apologies if this has been caught, I have been away from the threads for a while -
490 WEA - apartment #10D - on the market for $2,595,000 - listed16 days ago.
490 WEA - apartment #10D - sold on 7/19/07 for $2,880,000

happyrenter,
"great location, nice-looking prewar four room apartment:
320 west 76th 6F"—
it's a DUMP. Nonexisting kitchen and the second "bedroom" is the size of a broom closet. The bathroom... you have to see it. The building is one of those 70's jobs that have to be touched up every year.
A very depressing place/building. It's a shame, because the location is superb.

This isn't on exactly point, but I figured no one would mind if I make a note of this:

03/26/2008
Previous Sale 1,554,000
01/28/2009
Listed in StreetEasy by Prudential Elliman at $1,715,000.
03/27/2009
Price decreased by 5% to $1,625,000.

http://www.prudentialelliman.com/listings.ASpx?listingid=1073984&utm_source=Streeteasy&utm_campaign=corporate&utm_medium=listings

Owner is listed as Trustees of Columbia Univ. who owns 4 other units.

It bugged me because they call this a family unit; with 2 typically small bedrooms, as they say,"Only in NY." (yes, I omitted the term "luxury." You think that would have been outlawed by now by pc patrol.)

What do you think "ready to deal" means? How ready?

Whoops - there's another thread about 200 WEA.

Passing 2004 prices on a nice classsic six at 771 West End.
--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT .... #5B .......................... |↓ $1,350,000 2 beds 1,700 ft²
09/14/2004 #2B $1,360,000 ........ |

I've seen #5B; it is in very good condition. The back of the apartment is rather dark, but that would be even more true of #2B.

251 West 89th #3F was just reduced to slightly below the owners' 2007 cost. That was a peak sale, probably close to 50% above the 2004 value, so there appears to be a lot of downside left. It seems likely that the owners' original 20% equity is gone.

--------Recorded Sales----------|--------Previous Listings----------
CURRENT .... #3F .......................... |↓ $3,100,000 3 beds 2,200 ft²
06/25/2007 #7F $3,025,000 +6.1% | . $2,850,000 3 beds 3 baths 2,200 ft²
06/22/2007 #3F $3,200,000 +0.2% | . $3,195,000 3 beds 2 baths 2,300 ft²
07/01/2004 #9F $2,250,000 ........ |