16 Hudson contract / 3A beats 3C?
I hit Unit 3A at 16 Hudson Street when it was new in September and asking $2.495 (maintenance is $1,800/mo) for “1,860 sq ft” with (as I said then) “one cook’s kitchen, two renovated baths, three bedrooms and 12 windows”. (September 6: 3A seeks to top 3C at 16 Hudson)
That was an interesting post (for me, at least) because I had seen the unit down the hall that was then in contract, and has since closed. #3C was asking $2.175mm and $1,891/mo for “2,000 sq ft” that had been on the market since November last year (starting at $2.295mm). It had a rough as well as long history, with one aborted accepted offer and one aborted contract, before landing in July to the contract that closed on September 18 at $2,087,500.
size vs. finishes
With such a recent and nearby comp, I said in the earlier post:
I wonder if the #3A
buyerseller already knows what the neighbor’s contract is worth next door….
what does the comp say?Compared to #3A, #3C has a more ‘interesting’ layout, as it is almost a triangle. I recall the kitchen and baths as being pretty basic, rather than “cook’s” or renovated (I saw it early this year, with buyers who inspired my March 15 Jagger’s Law of Imperfect Lofts / life is compromise (sigh)). This space does not immediately open up the way it does in #3A, and it felt to me a little ‘dated’ (despite — or because of — the “superb floor plan designed by a top architect has withstood the test of time“). As it does next door, the plumbing in #3C is clustered near the door and there is no en suite bedroom.
So I would mark #3C as a little bit bigger and #3A a little more finished (at least as to kitchen and baths). I wonder if the west windows in #3C over Hudson Street can be opened more often than the east windows over West Broadway.
more wonderI also wonder what the fact that it has taken #3C since last November to find a contract off an asking price of $2.175mm has to say about how long it may take #3A to find its buyer off of $2.495mm….
If the #3A sellers did not know #3C’s contract price when they came to market in early September for $2.495mm, they should have found out soon after the September 18 closing. Then it was four weeks before they dropped the price for #3A to $2.395mm, then another four weeks before dropping to $2.325mm, and then two more weeks before having a contract signed.
The implication of all this history is that #3A got a contract somewhere between the last asking price of $2.325mm and the #3C closing price of $2,087,500. I look forward to finding out how much more than #3C’s asking price….
© Sandy Mattingly 2007