contracts at 95 Greene show value + velocity + sloppy paperwork

2 January listings in contract
I noticed that #3F at 95 Greene Street was in contract as of yesterday in very quick time. It was new to market on January 11, so that is just under 3 weeks.

well-priced lofts sell …
… quickly, of course.

This one was offered at $1.795mm and $1,066/mo (condo) for “1,300 sq ft” set up as 1 bedroom + 1.5 baths that is said to be “superbly appointed” and “oozes (!) relaxed sophistication”. At this velocity, expect that it went at or above ask.

Given this rapid success, it would be quibbling to note that one enters the loft right at the kitchen counter and that to create a 2d bedroom would forfeit the dining area and require re-jiggering of bedroom and bathroom entries. Mere quibbling, that.

details, details
Imagine my shock when I noticed today that #5A was shown in our system as in contract as of today, again with a January listing date. The contract is as of today in our system, but the January was 2007 – not this year.

But it turns out that city records show that this actually sold in May 2007, at $1.775mm, so I guess the agents are just cleaning up their REBNY paperwork by showing this as In Contract today (but why not as Sold??).

4% discount
The #5A sellers never dropped the asking price of $1.85mm from January 25, 2007 for their “1,310 sq ft” that is “exquisitely renovated” and “light flooded”, with 2 bathrooms, a fireplace, a “chic” kitchen and the possibility of “easily” adding a 2d bedroom. What it doesn’t have (now) is a floor plan or pictures. (Maybe they were up earlier and came down for some reason?? Why is the listing up at all on PruDE if it has closed??)

The two lofts sound as thought they have a similar level of finishes, but it is hard to tell without seeing both (or having pictures of #5A). #5A claims to have large west windows and to be quiet, but I doubt that is much of an advantage over #3F.

Both #3F and #5A were represented by the Steinberg – Senequeir bunch at PruDE, so the agents were able to share the #5A history with the #3F owner.

Even the $1.7mm asked for #3F puts this building in the price-per-foot neighborhood of the beautiful spaces at 100 Greene Street that are in contract, and that were featured in 100 Greene hits market comfortably, beautifully (November 7; another Steinberg – Senequeir effort) and new at 100 Greene St / uber chic for uber bucks (March 13).

city records lose feet, have sales
By the way, the city thinks these two units are “1,201 sq ft” (#3F) and “1,205 sq ft” (#5A).

City records show that #2E traded in August for the $1.525mm asking price (also for “1,201 sq ft”) and that #3D sold in March for $1.765mm (“1,205 sq ft”), $16,000 above the asking price.

wondering, wondering
I wonder if they priced #3F at $1.7mm – below the clearing prices for #5A 8 months ago and for #3D 10 months ago –to stimulate a bidding war. (Clearly, it did whatever it was intended to, generating a contract within 3 weeks.)

© Sandy Mattingly 2008