165 Hudson Street loft pines for good old days of 2005

WTF?
Head scratching time for Manhattan Loft Guy …. When the Manhattan loft #2C at 165 Hudson Street sold at $1.655mm in 2005 they said “This won’t last!!!” and they were right. (Prior listing not on StreetEasy, but is in our data-base.)  It came out on February 18 at $1.65mm and found a contract at a $5,000 premium by March 11. When it sold again six years later (on July 21) it was a different story altogether: to market on February 27, contract by June 16, but the ask was $1.5mm and the deal was done at $1.455mm. (Again with the odd $5,000.)

That is an even $200,000 decline in six years. 12% if you don’t have your calculator handy.

early froth
Because The Market is never ‘wrong’, both those prices represent the actual market value of the loft as of May 3, 2005 and July 21, 2011. But they cannot be reconciled rationally. Not a chance.

My theory is that there was some kind of hyper-local disruption in the space time continuum in the winter of 2005 resulting in at least two buyers vastly over-valuing the loft then (remember: it sold above the ask). If you have a different theory, let me know, and present some rational basis, please.

Because my theory is supported by the fact that May 3, 2005 closing price could not be duplicated even at The Peak of the overall Manhattan residential real estate market. Note this unsuccessful attempt to re-sell:

The guy who bought in 2005 and wanted out in 2007 recognized that the overall market was up dramatically since May 2005, and that initial $1.8mm was a classic pricing strategy in those days: add 10% to the last sale price. Didn’t work.

Didn’t even work when he dropped to $1.7mm, a mere $45,000 premium over the 30 month old sale price (less than 3%). The fact that he dropped again below his purchase price at The Peak, tells me he was motivated, and must have been frustrated not to sell at any of four prices asked below his May 2005 purchase price.

This is not one of the those instances in which a loft seller missed The Peak by over-pricing, except in the unfortunate and literal sense that he was asking a price that The Market would not offer, even at The Peak. (I hit a classic case at 58 Walker Street on July 24.)

Did I mention that the market is not fair?.

© Sandy Mattingly 2011