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

West81st: 1 day ago

Just for fun:
243 West 98th St. #3B. Same-unit resale, 99.94% below 2006 basis.
01/12/2006 Sale recorded for $800,000.
10/22/2008 Sale recorded for $500.

Bit of an asterisk on this one:
"As part of the scheme, Garri Zhigun, Galina Zhigun and Furman purchased a block of ten rent-regulated condominium apartments at 243 West 98th Street, Upper West Side, Manhattan ("the Apartments"). With respect to seven of the ten Apartments, subprime lenders were falsely told in mortgage applications and supporting documents that the buyers intended to live in the Apartments as a “primary residence.” With respect to there maining three Apartments, subprime lenders were falsely told that the Apartments were to be used as “investment properties” that earned approximately $6500 a month in rent from tenants. None of the documents submitted to the subprime lenders disclosed that: (1) certain buyers were seeking loans to purchase more than one Apartment as a “primary residence;” (2) each of the Apartments was already occupied by a tenant and therefore not suitable for a primary residence; or (3) the Apartments were subject to rent regulation laws that precluded the buyer from charging $6500 in rent."
http://www.mortgagefraudblog.com/index.php/weblog/permalink/3_guilty_pleas_in_multi_million_dollar_mortgage_fraud_case/

aboutready: 1 day ago

614 sold for $1,227,500 in 08/07. but 714 has a rather magnificent planted terrace, making the reduction in price more pronounced than is first apparent.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/404941-coop-101-west-81st-street-upper-west-side-new-york
04/15/2009 Listed by Prudential Elliman at $1,350,000.
07/23/2009 Price decreased by 4% to $1,295,000.
09/16/2009 Listing entered contract.
11/17/2009 Listing sold.
11/17/2009 Sale recorded for $1,160,000.

West81st: 1 day ago

Priced right, things move. 201 West 72nd Street (Alexandria) #9D. Same unit resale of a 2BR/2BA condo in a centrally-located, amenity-rich postwar building. Closed 11.5% below 2006 basis. One week on the market.
07/25/2006 Previous Sale recorded for $1,287,500.
07/31/2009 Listed by Brown Harris Stevens at $1,225,000.
08/08/2009 Listing entered contract.
11/13/2009 Sale recorded for $1,139,999.
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/441241-condo-201-west-72nd-street-upper-west-side-new-york

NWT: 2 days ago

Another quickie: http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/445923-coop-210-riverside-drive-upper-west-side-new-york

08/19/2009 Listed by Halstead Property at $1,795,000.
09/18/2009 Listing entered contract.
11/19/2009 Sale recorded for $1,700,000.

#4G, two floors up and same footprint, went for $1,660,000 in 2006.

aboutready: 2 days ago

03/16/2005 Previous Sale recorded for $900,000.
small 2/2. can't tell who did which renovations.
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/355132-coop-345-west-70th-street-lincoln-square-new-york
10/03/2008 Listed by Brown Harris Stevens at $1,150,000.
10/30/2008 Price decreased by 13% to $999,000.
12/08/2008 Delisted temporarily.
01/06/2009 Re-listed by Brown Harris Stevens.
02/24/2009 Price decreased by 5% to $950,000.
03/16/2009 Price decreased by 5% to $899,000.
05/01/2009 Listing entered contract.
07/13/2009 Listing is no longer available.
11/17/2009 Sale recorded for $848,000.

West81st: 6 days ago

334 West 87th Street #6A : Same unit resale of a two-bedroom, 1.5-bath coop, 8.7% below 2005 basis. Not clear whether renovation was done by the sellers or the previous owners.
09/15/2005 Previous Sale recorded for $952,500.
06/26/2009 Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $890,000.
07/18/2009 Listing entered contract.
11/13/2009 Listing sold.
11/13/2009 Sale recorded for $870,000.
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/432574-coop-334-west-87th-street-upper-west-side-new-york

West81st: 6 days ago

Correction: variance from ask on #6C should be +1.9%, not -5.6%.

West81st: 6 days ago

239 Central Park West, low-floor "C" line: large, viewless classic six in an A- building:
--------- Recorded Sales --------- | --------- Previous Listings -----------
** ACTIVE ** # 5C ............................... |↓ $1,850,000 2 beds 2 baths 1,825 ft²
11/16/2009 #3C $1,525,000 -10.0% | . $1,695,000 Sold 2 beds 2 baths
07/01/2009 #4C $1,700,000 - 5.6% |↓ $1,800,000 Sold 3 beds 2.5 baths 1,900 ft²
01/24/2005 #6C $1,625,000 - 5.6% |. $1,595,000 Sold 3 beds 2 baths 1,800 ft²

#3C needed the most work, and #6C needed the least. So the sale of #3C isn't quite as dire as it looks.

spinnaker1: 7 days ago

Must be more careful... thought I was being smart but ctrl f highlights every 6A -even 16A. Its OK now Tim, go back to sleep.

Also meant to say, "In my complete and utterly biased view..." Is that dyslexia?

West81st: 7 days ago

Spin: Are the Hasselbecks selling too? I believe they're in #16A. The man played his cards right: a retired, weak-armed backup QB gets a condo with a view (and a wife with The View).

I think Behar moved within Astor Court, no to it. Nice stealth plug for the building, though.

spinnaker1: 7 days ago

There has been some suspicious solidarity on the A line price movement. Maybe Hasselbeck has gone rogue.

In my unbiased view her colleague did a little better with her move to Astor Court.

apt23: 7 days ago

The price history for 6A is crazy. If the final price is below the original ask on 8/2007, as walterh7's post would suggest, it will look like very poor marketing on corcoran's part. and another reason why it is difficult to fathom this market.

STREETEASY HISTORY
08/24/2007
Listed in StreetEasy by Corcoran at $2,815,000.
11/30/2007
Price increased by 5% to $2,950,000.
07/11/2008
Price increased by 5% to $3,100,000.
10/21/2008
Price decreased by 8% to $2,850,000.
04/30/2009
Price decreased by 7% to $2,650,000.
05/23/2009
Price increased by 19% to $3,150,000.
10/19/2009
Listing entered contract.

walterh7: 7 days ago

on Ariel West....you can anticipate that when the closing px of 6A is published there could be some serious chaos unleashed among those A line offers.

spinnaker1: 7 days ago

I was pointing sarcastically (more or less) to the price hikes on the A line, now around 40% since 07/08. There seems to be a detachment with reality there.

West81st: 7 days ago

Spin: I'm not sure the "A" line is exactly marching on. Wasn't the most recent sale (#18A) off close to 20%? But you may be right that the bigger apartments at Ariel West are faring better. That would make sense, because AW is very family-friendly.

spinnaker1: 7 days ago

Another example of a newbuild condo in search of a price floor, while the A line marches on in defiance. Although with Whole Foods now open....

Looks like they may have added a percentage of the billiard parlor and tiki bar footprint to the 1320.

West81st: 7 days ago

245 West 99th Street (Ariel West) #9C: Same-unit resale of a 2BR/2BA condo in an amenity-rich new building.
01/18/2008 Previous Sale recorded for $1,585,000.
06/06/2009 Previously Listed in StreetEasy by Citi-Habitats at $1,650,000.
07/02/2009 Listed in StreetEasy by Prudential Elliman at $1,675,000.
07/07/2009 Citi-Habitats Listing is no longer available.
07/21/2009 Price decreased by 4% to $1,600,000.
09/02/2009 Price decreased by 2% to $1,575,000.
10/02/2009 Price decreased by 2% to $1,550,000.
11/06/2009 Price decreased by 3% to $1,500,000.
11/18/2009 Price decreased by 10% to $1,350,000.
Wells Fargo lent $1.393MM on this unit, so the new asking price is underwater. The latest cut also suggests that the repricing signalled by the resale of #7C has probably held. That's not surprising, since it's hard to imagine #9C appraising for more than $1.25MM after #7C sold for #1.2MM. Here's the history:
--------- Recorded Sales --------- | --------- Previous Listings -----------
** ACTIVE ** # 9C ............................... |↓ $1,350,000 2 beds 2 baths 1,320 ft²
01/09/2009 # 7C $1,200,000 -17.2% |↓ $1,450,000 Sold 2 beds 2 baths 1,320 ft²
07/17/2008 #14C $1,580,000 - 3.1% |↓ $1,630,000 Sold 2 beds 2 baths 1,320 ft²
05/07/2008 #12C $1,620,000 + 0.0% | $1,620,000 Sold 2 beds 2 baths 1,320 ft²
01/28/2008 #16C $1,690,000 .......... |
01/18/2008 # 9C $1,585,000 .......... |
01/16/2008 #10C $1,455,000 - 8.8% | $1,595,000 Sold 2 beds 2 baths 1,320 ft²
01/10/2008 # 7C $1,558,000 .......... |
01/10/2008 # 6C $1,526,840 - 2.0% | $1,558,000 Sold 2 beds 2 baths 1,320 ft²
01/08/2008 # 5C $1,495,000 - 4.0% | $1,558,000 Sold 2 beds 2 baths 1,320 ft²
01/08/2008 # 8C $1,595,000 + 0.0% | $1,595,000 Sold 2 beds 2 baths 1,320 ft²

NWT: 9 days ago

A line of 499 ft² studios at http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/201-west-72-street-manhattan:

09/2009 #04I $450,000
12/2008 #10I $520,000
01/2008 #05I $550,000
12/2005 #12I $525,000
05/2005 #06I $505,000
05/2005 #05I $255,000
08/2004 #08I $345,000
01/2001 #08I $275,000
11/1999 #09I $230,000
01/1999 #07I $185,000
01/1999 #06I $195,000
12/1992 #08I $162,500
03/1991 #10I $189,000
12/1990 #12I $191,000
12/1990 #04I $179,500
11/1990 #11I $190,000
11/1990 #09I $188,000
11/1990 #07I $186,000
10/1990 #06I $182,000
10/1990 #05I $180,500

sidelinesitter: 11 days ago

322 West 72nd, C line. 3C was a post Lehman contract on a low floor a bit above 2 trades from earlier in 2008 and at nearly full ask. You have to wonder what the buyer was thinking. The 9C price really looks like quite a good outcome for the seller, down only 10% from the average of the 3 2008 sales. It a little harder to draw conclusions compared to the 2007 and 2006 estate sales.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/400260-coop-322-west-72nd-street-lincoln-square-new-york
10/30/2009 #9C $989,000
12/11/2008 #3C $1,130,000
08/27/2008 #5C $1,110,000
01/14/2008 #11C $1,062,500
02/27/2007 #13C $976,000
06/28/2006 #7C $795,000

nyc10023: 13 days ago

Astute sellers. Probably got the one buyer who was willing to pay up for a 10-room on WEA.

kirby: 13 days ago

13B is reportedly in contract.

patient09: about 2 weeks ago

thanks guys

happyrenter: about 2 weeks ago

Not only is 12B only about half the size of 13B, it was also a complete wreck. On top of that, it is a bizarre apartment: 2000 square feet but only four rooms. It's not a family apartment. 12B is also on the market right now, asking over $2.5, which seems unlikely.

13B is a great apartment, far superior to the low floor sales earlier this year. Moreover, while it needs work, it is in much better shape than the three previous sales. OTOH those comps are going to make it difficult.

West81st: about 2 weeks ago

I incorrectly attributed the 300 WEA scoop to Curbed. The original April report on those sales appeared in the Times. Curbed just ref'd it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/realestate/manhattan/09real.html
http://curbed.com/archives/2009/04/09/rip_harry_belafontes_upper_west_side_floorplan_porn.php

Context offers a strong hint about the source of the leak. Note the quote from the listing agent about the state of the luxury market, three paragraphs up in the Times article.

mpaltrow: about 2 weeks ago

Patient - check out the 12B listing - it is only the front half of the 5B/13B footprint. So the spread goes strongly the other way...

patient09: about 2 weeks ago

back to 300 WEA...

If 12B sold for $2,100,000 in 2005....Seems like Minny got off a couple of nice sales in the mid 3's for 5A and 5B. Now, was the building greatly undervalued in the early years? Even if 12B was a piece of dog doo doo, the spread seems odd. So what does that mean for 13B?

NWT: about 2 weeks ago

nyc10023, I wish the OCD could kick in on demand. It's more like, "hmmm, here's a pointless project by which I can delay going in to work this morning...."

nyc10023: about 2 weeks ago

Based on traffic at OHs, buzz at OHs and number of OHs, I'm not surprised.

You can count the number of non-CPW, non-WEA, non-RSD, non-rental buildings so. of 81st with C7s on 2 hands.

ph41: about 2 weeks ago

nyc10023 - re: 161 west 75th - broker's website says "offer accepted"

aboutready: about 2 weeks ago

lp, the uws is not my area. but it would be interesting to take that hypothetical list of prewar buildings, pull each one up, and see how many units were on the market but didn't sell. that might be at least part of your answer regarding inventory, and if it were a fairly high number, i'd suggest that things might get more interesting again early next year.

nyc10023: about 2 weeks ago

LP: I haven't crunched the numbers, but I thought the inventory was very high earlier this year (Jan/Feb), esp. so. of 86th, highest than I've seen in 5yrs. Definitely decreased since then. As for 13B, I don't see how could not feel a chump if one paid anywhere close to ask, given the 4A/5A/5B closings.

For fun, perhaps NWT could put together a list of all prewar buildings so. of 96th with numbers of apts, and sizes :0

liquidpaper: about 2 weeks ago

re: 300 WEA - I think the sale that will be significant is the current listing of 13B for $5,250,000. My reason for saying this - and I would think patient09 and perhaps aboutready or some other frequent posters here might coroborate - is that the inventory on the UWS for large pre-war apartmets is absolutely as low as I can ever remember seeing it. And I am not just talking about "my" price range. Just for fun I look at what's listed for 6 or 7 or even 8 million dollars - and there is really very little out there, let alone at the level I think a family apartment ought to cost.

While I agreee that the Disney sales are interesting data points, I fear that they will remain staistical outliers as sellers are just not putting inventory on the market at these levels, and the rally in the stock market since these apartments sold, is beginning to be considerable.

walterh7: about 2 weeks ago

nyc10023....I agree with your line of thought. I too would flip the kitchen and maids. The scarcity/location dynamic is a good call. I see that 7A went for 2.150k (and I have no idea about condition of that unit) at the height and this may actually go higher! The sponsor, who still controls about 18% of the building, must be busting at the seams to get their shares into the free market. The mtc is no bargain for the services either. (wait list for storage and no bike rm)

happyrenter: about 2 weeks ago

I have a great deal of knowledge of 300 West End.

The best apartments in the building are the high floor B-line apartments, followed by the high floor A-line apartments, followed by low floor A-line, followed by low floor B-line. The B-line apartments are larger and have a significantly superior internal flow (very obvious in the units; less obvious from the floorplans). They have a quite wonderful layout with a bedroom wing and an office/den wing. They also provide the option for a very gracious 3 room enfilade facing West End Avenue. On high floors, the back half of the apartment is quiet and beautiful with open city views.

The high floor A_line apartments do not have quite the same elegant layouts, but they do have the corner living room.

The low floor B-line apartments are quite dark--the only open exposure is the 3 rooms facing west end. the rest of the apartment faces dark internal areas. The low floor A-line is better, facing 74th street. But it's not a great exposure, and the noise from Fairway deliveries is pretty bad, especially in the very early morning hours.

These are significant sales--300 West End is a dream building for a family who wants significant space, a prime location, a top building, but doesn't want a fancy or high-profile address. it is just about as good as it gets for coop living in NYC.

nyc10023: about 2 weeks ago

Walter: I went to the 2nd OH for 161W75. I was surprised at the good turnout given the price point, condition, and location/building (B building, B+ location, but good light & open views). If say, an offer was accepted at 2.2m, and you put in 200k of work to redo bathrooms, kitchen (nice original features though, shame to lose completely), minor reconfiguration (if possible, I would flip kitchen & maid's) - that's close to 2.5m for a smallish Classic 7, not that much off the highs for a C7 on UWS.

However, all C7s on the UWS are not fungible. If your target area is the 60s, 70s (87/199) zone, with a northern border of say, 81st St and you don't want to be on WEA or RSD (i.e. prefer to be closer to CP), there is a real paucity of C7s if your budget doesn't extend to CPW. In fact, I know all the rental & non-rental prewar buildings between 62nd & 81st, and there aren't that many buildings with C7s east of WEA.

hsw9001: about 2 weeks ago

NYO article Re: 300 WEA

Walt Disney's Grandniece Finally Sells West End Co-ops, But Loses Millions

http://www.observer.com/2009/real-estate/walt-disneys-neice-sells-co-ops-not-lot#

walterh7: about 2 weeks ago

Yes, 67 Riverside was in good shape. The thing I like least about it was the small 3rd BR and the entry foyer that looked very 'temporary' (and I understand the trend in the building is to re-unify the original layouts. The view was also quite nice.

Anyone have any insights on the the classic 7 in the 'Crumbs' building (161 W 75, #12A). That apt was a wreck, but it had a layout that could be improved with a bit of work. Streeteasy doesn't reflect that fact that the broker/sponsor's website indicates "offer accepted".

nyc10023: about 2 weeks ago

Yes, I saw it - didn't you see my little love paean to the apt on SE? I wanted it, and I also want the rear-facing 2 br so that I could recreate the original 10rm apt. If you were able to recreate the original layout, the problems with the layout of 9A would disappear (the original brs are all in the rear apt). There is very nice woodwork underneath, but I would find all the brown wood oppressive - so horrors I wouldn't mind it painted. 10ft+ ceilings, no signs of water damage on ceilings, doors have been replaced, but they kept the transoms. Renovation was okay, certainly move-in.

I said I would not be surprised to see it go for close to ask.

NWT: about 2 weeks ago

There was a story in the paper the other day about the Glickbergs and the additional Fairways they've opened. Also some history in that cookbook they're selling.

nyc10023, did you get a chance to see 9A at 67RSD? Going by the plan at http://www.corcoran.com/images/media/ListingFloorplans/1879163.1.gif it looks good for a couple wanting lots of space, a separate study, but no real second bedroom. I guess a couple of kids could go in bunk beds in the maid's room. Looks as if there's great wood under all that paint in the dining room.

nyc10023: about 2 weeks ago

Yes, the Glickbergs own Fairway - pics of 4 gens prominently displayed in stairwell. I don't know if they are the sole owners.

Beekman estate also owns the two dilapidated THs next to Fairway - I don't think they are landmarked, be a shame if they were demolished. They are unusual-looking.