price of 'museum quality' in Noho = $1,000/ft / 644 Broadway closes quickly

no dithering here
In the (entirely fictional) Manual of Style for real estate agents, the phrase "museum quality" is used because (I guess) "quadruple mint" just does not zing. (The fact that few people actually want to live in a museum may mean it is used ironically, but the phrase is probably used because it sounds impressive, logic be damned.) The Manhattan loft #2E at 644 Broadway hit the market in December for $3.995mm boasting of a "museum quality renovation" plus classic loft features, such as 12 foot ceilings and rather large wood-framed arched windows.

The loft is described as both "3,600 sq ft" and "3,400 sq ft" in the listing text (the higher number) and the listing "Essentials". Using the smaller size, that asking price was $1,175/ft, seemingly aggressive post-Lehman pricing in a neighborhood in which mere ‘triple mint’ lofts with views and light have sold in the range of $1,000/ft (such as #3E at 684 Broadway, a "3,100 sq ft" loft that was "renovated to perfection" and closed at exactly $1,000/ft in April 2007; the more recent sale of #7E in that building was under $1,000/ft, and was discussed as a new listing on Manhattan Loft Guy on October 4, 2007 and as a ‘sobering data point’ when it sold, on September 24, 2008). Seemingly, they were asking a premium for the museum stuff in #2E at 644 Broadway.

price is right, after all
The goal in setting the asking price is to attract serious bidders with whom one negotiates the best deal available. In this case, that worked, as the seller got a contract within a 40 day period that included Christmas and New Year’s. But the price worked because the seller was negotiable, ending 14% off that asking price, at $3.45mm. If it is a "3,400 sq ft" loft, that’s barely $1,000/ft; if it is larger, that’s under $960/ft.

note to editors
If ever someone writes that Manual of Style for real estate agents, there should probably be a prohibition against describing someplace as the "heart" of two neighborhoods, even if one is arguably a sub-neighborhood of the other. As an example of prohibited usage, they could refer to "in the heart of NoHo/Greenwich Village". They should also prohibit quoting two different figures for the size of a loft (as here), or two different ceiling heights (12 feet or 16 feet; also, as here).