At Trump Place 220 (220 RSB), some lines appear to be nearing 2004-2005 price levels.

Let's try that table for the "A" line one more time:

Date ----- Apt. - Recorded Sales ----| ---- Current/Previous Listings --
ACTIVE ... #10A ............................ | ↑ $1,099,000 979 ft²
ACTIVE ... #11A ............................ | ↓ $1,125,000 979 ft²
ACTIVE ... #17A ............................ | ↓ $1,055,000 979 ft²
ACTIVE ... #??A ............................ | ↓ . $899,000 979 ft²
07/22/2008 # 3A ... $875,000 .. 0.0% | .. ↓ $875,000 979 ft²
07/08/2008 # 6A. $1,057,500. -2.5% | ↓ $1,085,000 979 ft²
06/20/2008 #14A .. $998,000 -13.2%| ↓ $1,150,000 979 ft²
09/06/2007 # 5A $1,125,000 ........... |
08/07/2006 #18A $1,050,000 .......... |
11/10/2005 # 4A $1,049,000 ........... |
08/24/2005 # 7A $1,080,000 ........... |
06/06/2005 #12A . $925,000 ........... |
04/22/2005 # 5A . $979,000 ............ |
09/01/2004 #15A . $855,000 ........... |
07/19/2004 #11A . $837,000 ........... |
07/09/2004 #17A . $835,000 ........... |

So do you think the $899k unit is for real? If so, the sellers of 10A, 11A, and 17A must want to kill that guy for underpricing them so much.

It appears that the $899k unit is for real. It is unit #4A:

http://www.nestseekers.com/Properties/5103

On to the "B" line. No closed sales here in 2008, but the two open listings tell a grim story:

Date ----- Apt. - Recorded Sales ----| ---- Current/Previous Listings --
ACTIVE ...... #5B ............................... | ↓ $899,000 880 ft²
ACTIVE ...... #4B ............................... | ↓ $899,000 880 ft²
11/20/2007 #14B ... $931,125 -5.5% | ↓ $985,000 880 ft²
09/07/2007 #16B ... $999,000 ........... |
11/10/2005 # 4B $1,049,000 ........... |
07/15/2005 # 5B ... $925,000 ........... |
03/04/2005 # 9B ... $850,000 ........... |
06/22/2004 #10B ... $795,000 ........... |

#4B and #5B have two related problems: They are south of their 2005 prices, they are probably driving each other down. Again, I'm assuming the NestSeekers listing (#4B) is legit.

Thanks, Alpine. That jibes with this combination listing for #4AB, with the same NestSeekers agent:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/95274-condo-220-riverside-blvd-lincoln-square-manhattan

Anyway, the guy they should kill is #3A. He set the market by selling for $875K. (I think he had to pull the trigger because he was carrying two apartments.)

In the future, be ready to see some nasty comps for 200 Riverside Blvd. There are several units there in forelcsure, including 3A.

So 4A and 4B are both for sale with the same agency? That souds interesting. Perhaps they are owned by the same person who planned to combine the units???

Re. 4A and 4B: Different names, but same family.

The other 1BR lines are harder to analyze (less recent activity, more variation in layouts). I do see a couple of repeat listings that could become trendsetters if the owners need to sell:

Date ----- Apt. - Recorded Sales ----| ---- Current/Previous Listings --
ACTIVE ...... # 8G ............................... | $1,169,000 902 ft²
07/03/2008 #18G ............................... |↓$1,185,000 902 ft²
06/03/2005 # 8G $1,150,000 ........... |
06/07/2004 # 8G ... $857,500 ........... |

$1.169MM seems ambitious for #8G, considering that #18G (same floorplan, ten floors higher) was on the market for over a year, most recently at $1.185MM, before being pulled off in July. Even at the asking price, a $19K increase over three years wouldn't cover inflation, let alone transaction costs.

Date ----- Apt. - Recorded Sales ----| ---- Current/Previous Listings --
ACTIVE ...... # 7R ............................... |↓ $899,000 696 ft²
3/19/2007 # 8R ... $834,000........... |
11/3/2005 # 7R ... $880,000........... |
5/13/2005 # 8R ... $860,000........... |

The Elliman listing touts 7R as "Investor/1031 Exchange opportunity to buy luxury apartment with tenant in place." I don't know enough about investment property to comment on the persuasiveness of that pitch, and a lot depends on the terms of the current lease. But with similar units renting just north of $3K/month, $899K looks pricey. By the way, the "R" line is one that seems to vary a lot, so I'm not sure #8R is a perfect comp.

Declines always start slow and you wake up one day and you're down 20%. If someone seriously needs to sell I wouldn't be waiting to long, it could cost you hundreds of thousands by this time next year.

Wow, that is considerable. That being said, I always thought there was WAAAY too much inventory in that spot, which to me is essentially cut off from the rest of the UWS by Lincoln Towers and such. And Trump is a good marketer, but some of his buildings are just ass (I think of all the low 60s gold and black cap).

Granted, some part of town has to take the lumps first, thats as good a spot as any.

Great analysis West81st as always.

The prob with the A line is that the bedroom has an irregular configuration, small window and is North facing (which means most of the time you are looking into another building). At least the South facing gets more light. The B line I think also faces north and perhaps into the building it self, which I think what "garden facing" really means. The R line is east facing which is ok b/c there is a big park in between Lincoln Towers apartments, which to me like public housing (nonetheless it does look nice inside). So I think the apartments which are nonideal, there is softness.

To me, the main reason to live on RIverside Blvd is for the river views. Otherwise why would anyone want to pay a premium and trek 2 avenues or more, in the cold windy winter, to the subway? The G line has at least partial river views and I'd be curious to see how it fars in the long run. At 220 Rsd Bvld I haven't seen 1 bdrms with a full river view. Maybe they haven't come on the market.

I am keeping my eye out on this area b/c it seems that there is massive inventory and it would be interesting to see how keen sellers are.

I have been there chasing these apts for 3 months now.
3A is foreclosure.. 5B is a relo deal..
A line configuration is bad, no light in the apt and you cannot do much with the 'large' BD as most of the A lines are advertised.

"That being said, I always thought there was WAAAY too much inventory in that spot, which to me is essentially cut off from the rest of the UWS by Lincoln Towers and such. And Trump is a good marketer, but some of his buildings are just ass"

EW, the only thing I would change about this statement is by replacing "some of" with "all of"

JuiceMan, why would you say so ? We are seriously considering to buy a unit here very soon.
Any insights will be appreciated.

narayap, my issues with Trump are exactly what EW mentioned. Lots of overblown hype that match the overblown prices, just because it has the Trump name on it. In fairness, I just hate Trump and think the product produced is rarely worth the price tag that comes with it.

That said, my opinion of the RSD developments is that they are far away from civilization and transportation (for NY standards), lower units have great views of the west side highway, and in the winter, it is cold as hell over there. These apartments seem to be coming down to a price I feel is more realistic for what you are required to give up to live there, but there also seems to be a ton of inventory. I’m not saying it this is the worst place in Manhattan to live, I would just be aggressive in negotiations at this point in time.

I don't think this is really a trump building - I think he licensed his name to the developers. I'm not a fan of most of his buildings, but they usually do have nicer finishes than this... At any rate, I can definitely see big declines in this part of the "uws." The area is too sequestered and the whole development is completely contrived and devoid of character. It's like Diet Battery Park City.

> I don't think this is really a trump building - I think he licensed his name to the developers.

Per the trumpnation book, thats been most of his "developments" for years.

> but they usually do have nicer finishes than this...
Check out all that trump parc / whatever the hell on the upper east side. Fairly crappy quality. He might put it into trump tower and the international hotel (which was a refinish, not new construction), but the majority of the step down stuff has always been pretty lousy. Trump Place is actually better than those from what I've seen...

Revisiting the "A" line at 220 RSB, #11A was just reduced another $50K, to $1.075MM
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/183512-condo-220-riverside-boulevard-lincoln-square-manhattan

Anyone know how much the Trump name adds to the prices at Trump Place? Let's say you took the same exact 1 bedroom apartment and put it into a non-Trump building, how much cheaper would it be?

The A-line configuration is not a good one. The light is bad, there are no views at all regardless of the floor. Clearly, the asking price does not justify the space offered.
The building offers a lot of amenties at a decent monthly cost. Low taxes make it attractive.
Not sure how the taxes would be once abatement is over.

There appears to be some weakness in the "D" line as well:

Date ----- Apt. - Recorded Sales ----| ---- Current/Previous Listings --
08/14/2008 # 9D $1,200,000 -11.1% | $1,349,000 1 bed 1 baths 1,052 ft²
05/02/2008 ............................... | $1,300,000 ↓ 1 bed 1.5 baths 1,052 ft²
09/18/2007 ............................... | $1,500,000 1 bed 1.5 baths 1,052 ft²
09/17/2007 #15D $1,399,900 ..............|
10/04/2006 ............................... | $1,350,000 ↓ 1 bed 1.5 baths 1,052 ft²
05/25/2006 ............................... | $1,870,000 1 bed 1.5 baths 1,052 ft²
11/14/2005 #12D $1,300,000 ........... |
11/01/2005 ............................... | $1,275,000 1 bed 1.5 baths 1,052 ft²
05/31/2005 #11D $1,250,000 ........... |
05/05/2005 #10D $1,050,000 ........... |
04/19/2005 # 8D ....$900,000 ............. |
03/25/2003 #11D ....$584,250 ............. |

Looks like the real money was made at least three years ago. Since then, nothing much has happened. By the way, I'm not sure #15D has the same footprint as the others.

this seems to match the trends that the article in the sun is talking about

#10A is now asking $1.059MM. No more whistling past the graveyard; but I doubt a $40K cut is enough.
http://www.prudentialelliman.com/1001879

#11A has reduced to $1.075MM. With its upgrades and throw-ins, #11A might still be a better value.
http://www.corcoran.com/property/listing.aspx?Region=NYC&listingid=1192937

Meanwhile, #4A is still out there at $899K:
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/167101-condo-220-riverside-blvd-lincoln-square-new-york

In other news, #7R is off the market. Couldn't get $899K, after selling in 2005 for $880K.

Maybe he should have put the building in LIC, all still apparently the only place in the city still selling.

I suspect that the 'A' line will sell closer to $900/sq ft as was 3A. I think the majority of the nonriver views in these Riverside Blvd should sell closer to $1000/sq ft if not less.

Another update: #8G is now $1.1MM, or 4% below the owner's 2005 purchase price.
See:
http://www.olshan.com/property.php?id=183920

It's interesting to see Olshan touting "Price slashed below original purchase price!" as a selling point. It's also somewhat misleading. #8G originally closed in early 2003 for $763,688:
http://a836-acris.nyc.gov/Scripts/DocSearch.dll/Detail?Doc_ID=2003012702503003

It changed hands again in June 2004 for $857,500. The current owner, a Canadian partnership, bought #8G in June 2005 for $1.15MM:
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/closing/26665

So $1.1MM is a bargain only in relation to the resale price near the end of a big run-up. It's still 44% above the REAL original price, recorded five and a half years ago.

The Changs did well. The Maltzes did even better. Our friends from Vancouver, on the other hand, may be wishing they had invested closer to home.

West81st, loved your analysis. Great last line!

Yeah, it's always the last guy in the run-up (ponzi-scheme?) that gets burned.

> It's still 44% above the REAL original price, recorded five and a half years ago.

Thats just asking. If it sells for 5% under asking - no stretch there - that is 37%, and 10%, that is 30%. Your return over a boom period comes down to 5% annual... (not including any transaction costs)

The difficulty with this kind of analysis is that even whilst looking at a number of different lines, you're still considering a VERY small, statistically insignificant number of datapoints. One must also consider varying degrees of renovation in the apartments; if the owner has not upgraded anything, a unit sold in 2005 (closer to date of original construction) may well be in better shape than a unit sold in 2008. Finally, particularly in a place like Trump Place, where high floors can have breathtaking views and low floors can have you staring into breath-choking fumes of cars on the west side highway, it's exceedingly difficult to compare apartments on different floors, even if they have the same exact layout.

Can you actually stare at breath-choking fumes?

I think that is a misstatement anyway, I ride my bike along the west side path, and there are no choking fumes.

Another update: #11A just undercut #10A with another $50K reduction: http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/183512-condo-220-riverside-boulevard-lincoln-square-new-york

#10A will probably follow suit. Maybe those two owners should flip a coin, and the loser should take his unit off the market until the other sells. Otherwise, any sensible buyer who wants an A-line apartment will just wait until they're done beating each other down, then play them against each other in negotiations.

What was the original selling price on these?

Oops... I stand corrected. #10A already went off the market a week ago. Guess he lost the coin flip. The competition for #11A at this point is #17A.

10022: Low to mid 800s in 2004.

10022: The original developer prices were in the high 500s to low 600s.

For example, here's the 2003 deed for #11A ($611K): http://a836-acris.nyc.gov/Scripts/DocSearch.dll/ViewImage?Doc_ID=2003030301015001

...and here's #17A ($585K): http://a836-acris.nyc.gov/Scripts/DocSearch.dll/ViewImage?Doc_ID=2003022000776001

The current listing for #11A and #17A both opened a little under $1.2MM, or about twice the 2003 prices. Neither is still owned by the original buyer.

Just to reclarify W81's numbers, the following are all closings on the A/B lines between 8/06 and the present (from floors 3 - 20; apartments on higher floors have different configurations):

5A - 9/07 - $1,125,000
6A - 7/08 - $1,057,500
18A - 8/06 - $1,050,000
14A - 6/08 - $998,000
3A - 7/08 - $875,000

16B - 9/07 - $999,000
11B - 8/07 - $965,000 (WITH STORAGE)
14B - 11/07 - $933,125

I think the conclusion one must reach is that there is no conclusion to reach, yet. If you look at the 'A's in particular, both the second HIGHEST price attained in the last two years as well as the LOWEST price attained in the past two years both occurred in the same month! And on the 'B' line, at a point at which the credit crisis had not yet hit, an apartment that came WITH basement storage sold for $34,000 less than an apartment WITHOUT storage a month later, at a time when it was known that the credit markets had hit a snag.

The point is that one cannot look at so small a sample size and come to any definitive conclusion about the state of the market. Even within the same time periods, there are wide disparities of prices on units with the exact same configuration. Other factors, like upgrades, floor height, the shrewdness of brokers, buyers and sellers (or lack thereof), and the undefinable 'X' factor all play a role.

When we start to see a CONSISTENT trend of decline in a large number of apartments over a fairly extended period of time, then we know that we're in trouble. But to just grab 4 or 5 sales is inconclusive, and can serve to prove a point in any direction, depending on your perspective.

SwK: I don't think anyone on this thread is extrapolating to the broader market. The thread began as an attempt to answer a question specifically about RSB, not about the West Side or Manhattan as a whole. At best, tracking these transactions is like watching fruit flies in a genetics lab. Individually, they are completely uninteresting, but they have the advantage of being numerous and relatively generic.

I agree that the pattern of recent closed sales is erratic and inconclusive. I do believe, though, that if you add the current and failed listings to the mix, a picture begins to emerge. It's a fuzzy picture, and it may have no relevance at all outside the investor-driven market for viewless 1BR apartments on Riverside Boulevard; but it is certainly a picture of a market whose best gains were achieved before 2006, and one that is now headed in the other direction.

So this particular species of fruit fly is mutating back toward 2005. Whether that tells us anything about the rest of the animal kingdom is anyone's guess.

Very critical point alluded to in your post, W81: "investor-driven market". The collection of condos on RSB are particularly - one might even say, uniquely (for NYC) - driven by a disproportionate number of investors. With the long trek to the subway and the dearth of commercial or night-life anywhere near the buildings, this collection has far less appeal to well-heeled owner-occupant New Yorkers than other new developments do. (The sole exception to that rule would be high-floor units with riverviews, which certainly offer a unique product unavailable in most other condos.)

Investors/flippers create artificial demand; they're here when the market is hot, and gone when it's not. Thus, their presence artificially drives up demand and price during boom times, and their withdrawal depresses the markets even more when real estate is no longer sexy. That injection and 'rejection' of investors in other markets throughout the country greatly contributed to the decline in the last couple of years, while NYC's relative paucity of investor-driven increases played a role in protecting the City's prices during the past two years' decline. (In my opinion.)

Thus, now that NYC is on the way down, it is precisely neighborhoods and developments like this - condos with a particular appeal to investors, and a particular lack of appeal to owner-occupants - that one might expect would see the most precipitous decline during the correction we are about to/already experience. But the situation here is 'unique' enough by NYC standards to posit that whatever happens in developments like Trump do not necessarily augur the future in the rest of town.

This thread was started b/c I wondered how all these condos on RSB can maintain their price given the large # either for sale or for rent. The weakest lines seem to have their prices dropping and failing to sell. I agree that the ones I would consider are the ones with the river views, otherwise it is probably not worth the walk to the river (especially during the winter).

Potentially this is where you may be able to find good deals as the market weakens.

Slightly off-topic, but the low-end three-bedroom sector on RSB may be cratering too:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/229038-condo-200-riverside-boulevard-lincoln-square-new-york

$2.3MM in May. $1.575 now, after a $375K reduction this morning. That's $943 per sq.ft.

Since #4J faces southwest from the fourth floor, it might provide a test of SwK's theory about "staring into breath-choking fumes". In any case, $943/sq.ft. for an apartment BHS touts as having "11 foot ceilings and direct river views" seems like a breakthrough, low floor and all.

It's got to be a desperate seller. 2 drops for a total of $600K (25% ) in 2 weeks.

It's got to be a desperate seller. 2 drops for a total of $600K (25% ) in 2 weeks.

desperate or smart?

Wow! 4J is asking the same price as the 2 bdrm next door #4H. Will have to look out for the eventual sale price. I suspect in the transactions in the next 3-6 months will be between those who have to buy and those who have to sell.

I beg to differ with SWK about low floors "staring into breath-choking fumes" for 200, 220 and 240 RSB because the buildings are at a higher elevation. OTOH the statement is true for 120, 100 (Avery) and 80 (Rushmore)

hsw9001: #4J is also $520K below a new Elliman comp on the 7th floor:
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/352985-condo-200-riverside-boulevard-lincoln-square-new-york

Although #7D is slightly bigger, the common charges on #4J are actually 10% higher, suggesting that it may be the more valuable property (at least in the view of the developer and, now, the condo board). The difference in total monthlies is closer to 5%, because #7D has higher taxes.

So, is #4J a great opportunity, or is it just the first listing to reflect changed realities?

It's true that the lowest apartments at 200 - 240 are at higher points (relative to the highway) than the lowest apartments at 80 - 120. Nevertheless, apartments that are situated directly above the highway are only slightly less unappealing than those that face the highway directly

West81st, looks closer to 2004 comps at best. Looks like these sellers ate > $150k losses if you count the transaction fees.

220 Riverside Boulevard #5B
11/21/2008 Sale closed for $840,000
07/15/2005 $925,000.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/134295-condo-220-riverside-boulevard-lincoln-square-new-york

that is why you should never buy a low floor in a high rise - those are considered the commodities

220 Riverside Boulevard, #4A took an ever bigger beating. This is at least a $250k loss in 3 years (including closing costs). Even if they put down 20%, they lost more than what they put in as downpayment. I don't mean to make multiple posts, but the more you look, the more you find. And each looks like a bigger car wreck than the next.

10/29/2008 Sale closed for $823,179
11/10/2005 $1,049,000

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/94646-condo-220-riverside-blvd-lincoln-square-new-york

Is 220 Riverside, 4A a forclosure (or something similar)? I see the buyer is JP Morgan Chase and for an odd amount - did they just take the apartment in satisfaction of what was due on the mortgage?

I don't know the situation. I check my data with the rolling sales update. How do you search for Riverside Blvd apartments on ACRIS? I get an apartment # is incorrect error for all the Trump buildings.

realtytrac says it was a foreclosure sale as of July 9.

I'm wondering what people's thoughts are on what's happening to these apartments and where they're going. Riverside blvd (not drive) is actually pretty far away from the more established parts of the UWS (e.g., it's a hike from 70th and riverside to the subway at 72nd/b'way, and an even longer hike to, e.g., Fairway.) I'm wondering if these are the sorts of buildings that could have two potential outcomes:

1) Be such a force as to transform their immediate neighborhood and thereby become well-located.
2) fail to do (1) and drift ever downward toward the pricing for their otherwise somewhat inconveninet (for a UWS apartment) location.

I wonder if what we're seeing here is a failure of this development to really transform the neighborhood, and, as a consequence, the pricing is beginning to drop toward the levels of the (slightly more conveniently located) lincoln towers apartments (though still maintaining some premium for being more luxurious). If so, they've still got a long way to fall.

#2 is more likely. when real estate markets drift downards, people can get more for their money and will be more picky. when things are expensive, people convince themelves that, say, 82nd between 2nd and 1st is the same as 86th between Park and Lex because they can't get the better location (because of pricing and because it sells immediately). in a downturn, people hold out. this true across neighborhoods and within sub-neighborhoods.

I thought that bringing Costco to that area is a great idea b/c it establishes an anchor tenant and at least the possibility building some retail around it. But the NIMBY's killed that plan and I don't see how the neighborhood will develop in the future.

I keep my eye on this region b/c I think there can be bargains to be had in the future. Especially in the nonriver view apartments.

So, what is 20% off 2005 prices?

2003 prices?

hsw9001: Thanks for the updates. That's quite the methane-choked canary there on Trump Blvd. I have no idea, though, whether the coal mine is localized or extends to prime UWS.

JohnDoe: Eventually, option 1. On this cycle, option 2 (IMHO).

$840 psf. Ouch.

The Trump devs. were always priced higher than most apartments in more convenient locations on the UWS. I remember thinking they were outrageously priced in '99 (350k for 1-bed at 200 RSB). I continue to think that they're overpriced relative to the market, and the fall will be brutal.

Also, there will be more downwards pressure because most people did 90% financing.

This is how it works... movement in bunches. This will put downward pressure on the Trump stuff, and everything else on the UWS.

JohnDoe/hsw9001: For the full history on #4A, follow this link,:
http://a836-acris.nyc.gov/Scripts/DocSearch.dll/BBL
then select "MANHATTAN/NEW YORK" and enter 1171 for the block and 1405 for the lot.

Pesahov borrowed a total of $944K, 90% of his purchase price. The first and second liens were both originated by WAMU, which means they were part of the toxic waste heap Chase acquired in September. Chase defended the liens at auction with a winning bit of $807,500 (plus taxes), making #4A REO.

Thanks - that's really interesting. Wonder what the next highes bit was. I'm a little surprised Chase wouldn't just take the loss - seems like they're only setting themselves up for a larger loss.

What does REO stand for?

R.E.O is "Real Estate Owned", which of course is a meaningless phrase on a literal sense. It means a RE property owned by a bank, and clean of liens and stuff, so that it usually sells below what private sellers charge but above what foreclosures go for. I think.

Thanks West81st. Couple interesting points.
1) The condo association had liens of common charges starting in '06. So that is when I assume the owner stopped paying common charges and the mortgage. The foreclosure process only just completed 2 years later. So if owners are being hit all these current economic problems now, at earliest we would see the effects of foreclosure in 2010.

2) The initial sales price in 2003 was $501,930. The runup in 2 years to > 1M was undoubtly unsustainable. The first owner made a killing. The second owner/bank were left to hold the bag.

I don't sell up here but aren't the West 60s getting hit by the whole PS 199 kerfluffle?

Trompiloco, spot-on definition of REO. In a foreclosure proceeding, the bank usually reserves the right to NOT sell, which is why foreclosed homes don't sell for ten bucks -- the bank steps in and prevents the sale if it doesn't like any of the bids on the table.

ali r.
{downtown broker}

Ali: Yes, but I don't think 220 RSB is affected. The way I recall the rezoning, the area that shifts to 191 ends at 66th Street. That might have changed, though.

Another reason not have kids. ;-)

White elephant though Riverside Boulevard may be for small-timers, the well-connected still seem able to get their money out, and then some:
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/closing/776976
140% markup since 2006. Not bad. Adds new meaning to the term "Broadway Producers". Call me a cynic, but somehow I don't think that sale was an arms-length transaction.

can't see it, its behind login. can you paste details?

100 RSB and 120RSB were zoned out of 199 and into 191.

nyc10022: http://cityfile.com/dailyfile/3389

You can't afford $10 a month for Insider access? Typical East Side cheapskate.

Anyway, my point about that sale was that the Trump Organization would be very motivated to ensure that a bold-face name like Landesman made a nice profit on his high-profile RSB property, since his sale was sure to make news either way. But hey, for all I know "Nana Capital, LLC" is a totally legitimate investment partnership specializing in $10MM riverfront penthouses that don't face the river.

> You can't afford $10 a month for Insider access? Typical East Side cheapskate.

Better that than to run out of money and have to move to the suburbs. How is that coming for you?

Ah, but on the West Side, we willingly sacrifice our individual prosperity for the common good... even if it means retiring to Ulster County.

Trump Place is one of the unique locations in Manhattan where the supply is able to continue growing, and with each addition to supply, the quality improves making the old quality look pale in comparison.

Mid-floor "E" line (#17E - corner 2BR, convertible to 3BR) is now 4.8% below mid-2005 pricing for the identical unit immediately below:
Date ----- Apt. - Recorded Sales ----| ---- Current/Previous Listings --
ACTIVE....... #17E ................................. | $1,799,000 2/3 beds 2 baths 1,486 ft?
09/20/2005 #16E $1,890,000 ............. | 1,486 ft?

No details available on finishes in #16E, but #17E appears to be fully loaded with Trumpy upgrades.

"Trumpy upgrades."

Nice...I like that West81st!

Another update on #8G: just reduced a further $101K, to $999K, or 10% below the owner's 2005 purchase price.
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/328791-condo-220-riverside-boulevard-lincoln-square-new-york

west81st, great catch but you need to work on your math. that's 14% below the 2005 price.

Oops... 10% below the prior ask... 14% below the owner's basis. Thanks.

Actually 9% below the prior ask. I give up. Happyrenter has to check all my calculations from now on.

isn't it wild to see how much people were willing to pay for shitty apartments in shitty developments not that long ago? i mean, honestly. a one bedroom apartment on trump place? i wouldn't be surprised if that place sells for under 500k.

Hedge-fund math-genius Ruvim Breydo bought 17N for $2.9mm in 2004, listed it for near $5mm in May, and has now knocked the price down to $3.4 mm. He seems to have also bought at 15CPW this summer at a peak price.

Any thoughts on how much lower 17N goes before it sells?

happyrenter: Must have been the magic of the Trump name. At this point, the brand value is probably negative. But four years ago, for some long-distance investors in Vancouver, there may have still been some lustre.

EEEE1: That's a hard one to comp. It's a trophy apartment, but buyers with that kind of cash have amazing options now. Even if somebody loves Trump Place, why pick 220, which is already showing some age?

10% of the units at 220 riverside boulevard are on the market for sale as we speak. people must really love living there! 17N, I hate to say it, actually looks like a pretty nice apartment. I more or less detest Riverside Boulevard so it is hard for me to be objective. Maybe it could attract someone who just adores that view for $2.5?

There's a weird typo in ACRIS on the closing price for 220 RSB #10R. The November sale shows a price of $265K:
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/closing/774394
Now THAT's a deal. The actual sale price was $985K. See page 5 of the deed registration:
http://a836-acris.nyc.gov/Scripts/DocSearch.dll/ViewImage?Doc_ID=2008111700730001

Dude run!.. .it's for REAL... save the women and children first... then grab the nannies and if you have space in the Bentley .. take the butler.... RUN! RUN! RUN!... that number if for REAL!... I'm just kidding don't take the butler :)

It's prob just a 2nd lien being paid off... just my guess..

West81st, Re:10R. I brought that discrepancy to the attention of streeteasy about a month ago and they said they would investigate the error. Apparently the $265000 comes from the county records but both the rolling sales update and ACRIS give another #. So I don't think streeteasy #'s are 100% clean and errorless. If you are interested in doing rigorous comp analysis, streeteasy data is convenient, but you should definately double check outliers with official records.

hsw9001: Thanks. ACRIS shows $265K in the database:
http://a836-acris.nyc.gov/Scripts/DocSearch.dll/Detail?Doc_ID=2008111700730001
To see the real price, you have to open the document image.

Back to 17N, anybody out there with any real knowledge of the situation. Will people start to take loses from prices back in 2004?!?!

KBL: There's absolutely no way to predict. It's starting to happen on generic low-floor apartments. That's a very different product from high-floor trophies.

The mortgage on #17N is $2MM, less whatever the owners have paid down since 2004. If you're looking for a "floor" under the price, that's one useful number, but it doesn't tell you anything about what the apartment is actually worth or the owner's other circumstances.

If Breydo's firm (DE Shaw) were to hit the side of a mountain - which is conceivable with the current turmoil over redemptions - 220 RSB #17N might end up in a fire sale if the Breydos have to scramble to hold on at 15 CPW, where they owe $5MM. Hedge fund guys live by leverage, and some of them will die the same way. Or maybe the Breydos have so much cash that they'll dump 220 RSB at a loss because they don't care.

This is all pure speculation. You're talking about unique properties and a unique (and opaque) family financial situation. The answer to your question is probably "yes", but whether Ruvim Breydo is one of the "people" who will take those losses is anyone's guess. So, if your heart is set on getting #17N for $2.2MM, you're probably out of luck. But if you're just looking for a similar opportunity, something will probably pop up.

great advice, west81st. in a declining market the worst thing you can do is set your heart on one particular apartment. each situation is, as west81st says, unique. that one apartment could sell tomorrow for the asking price, it could be taken off the market, it could sit on the market for years, it could be foreclosed on, it could be cut drastically and sell for a song. no way to know. what is highly likely, however, is that some apartment relatively similar to 17N will at some point in the not-distant future sell for a very attractive price. wait for that apartment.

two months later. still no buyers on 17N. What is a fair offering price per sq. ft. at this point?

I'm curious to know how low its gotten here...

It is soooo windy by that building(220). I would hate to run in and out in the winter.