were sellers of 21 Astor Place loft more motivated this year, or was market stronger than in 2011?

the numbers say there is a story, but not what the story is
The sellers of the “1,436 sq ft” Manhattan loft #10A at 21 Astor Place gave it a long shot last year, asking $2.25mm almost six months before taking a break fr 10 months. When they did come back this Summer, it took less than 4 weeks to sign the contract that recently closed. You can’t actually see the thing that made the difference in those two efforts, but here is the much-less-than-full-story outline:

To review: the same asking price that did not work for half of 2011 took only 26 days to get a signed contract in mid-2012.

There are two logical potential explanations; which do you prefer? Either (a) the sellers were resistant in 2011 to a compromise as small as 9% off the asking price, or (b) The Market could not produce a buyer at a reasonable discount last year, but could do so (easily; quickly) this year. If there is another alternative explanation, I don’t see it.

not a push for the building
Unsurprising for what was a deluxe loft conversion at the top of Noho in 2003, I don’t see anything in the perfunctory broker babble or the listing photos to suggest that loft #10A has been improved since it was purchased from the sponsor in 2004 (for $1,318,633, by the way). Even those glass closet doors in the master (pic #7) make an appearance in the #4F broker babble from earlier this year. That babble gives you a better idea of the finishes and proper proper names that were standard in the building.

That #4F sale, by the way, was at only $1,218/ft, which is both a far cry from $1,428/ft for #10A, but well below the only other two sales in the building since the thaw. This sequence of the only four sales in the building since mid-2009 suggests that the #10A sellers did not over-reach by asking $2.25mm:

Of course that is a pretty extreme range for same building sales in a 2003 conversion, but the most extreme outlier (#7F) was upgraded and was improved; it also had a celebrity feature that should not have increased its value, as I discussed when The Son-in-Law sold the loft in my June 11, 2011, 21 Astor Place loft sells up 21% in 2 years.

I also hit the #6F sale when it was fresh, in my August 3, 2011, more man-on-dog action as 21 Astor Place loft sells up 3% since Peak. At that point it looked like an outlier (I called it a Bright Shiny Object because it was a 2011 resale above [slightly] a near-Peak buy); now it looks like a building norm.

when there is no fact-based explanation, retreat to an aphorism
I will grant you that the building value history is thin, leaving open the possibility that The Market was not ready to clear #10A in 2011 at $1,428/ft but had matured enough to accept that value in 2012. But I think that history is enough to suggest that #10A was not (in a purely theoretical sense) over-priced in 2011, despite not selling for 6 months.

And I have no information about whether the sellers rejected an offer in 2011 that could have gotten to the same contract price then as worked a year later. Given an eventual discount of only 9%, I doubt it.

In the absence of facts supporting a reasoned analysis, it is not that I give up but that I retreat. I retreat to this: The Market is The Market is The Market, and sometimes (in the context of a specific transaction) it cannot be explained. No matter how much fun it may be to wonder.

© Sandy Mattingly 2012