4 months to close, 4 years to zero out at 260 West Broadway
threading the needle to a quick sale, through the Way Back Machine
The Manhattan loft #5G at 260 West Broadway (the American Thread Building) slid through The Market this year, starting on January 8 and finishing on May 6. (Not as fast as the ten week close at 155 Hudson Street that I hit on May 28, but almost as quick as the 15 weeks to close at 644 Broadway that I hit for the second time on May 29, but PDQ for this market.) I’d say they were well-priced for this market. I’d also say they were ready to deal ….
I have been waiting for the clearing price to hit public records since I noticed it as Sold & Closed 4 weeks ago (my original draft said "I’d say they were well-priced for this market"); it finally hit this week (leading me to add "I’d also say they were ready to deal" to that draft). The clearing price of $1.29mm is a healthy 19% off the asking price, and an anemic $35,000 lower than the price this May 2009 seller paid when buying in March 2005.
I would say that the low price has to do with the new-ish hotel blocking most of the north views (and probably light) on the 5th floor, except that #4G sold in July 2007 quickly (7 weeks to contract) for much more than #5G just did (#4G cleared at $1.775mm). So, I guess it was The Market (same old, same old). I have absolutely no idea what to make of the transfer of #9G in March 2008 at $2.3mm — a price per foot that is radically higher than any other transfer I see in this building; neither StreetEasy nor our data-base has any record of a listing for that unit, and that is a very high price for the north view above the hotel. #9G is a large distraction, even a mystery (but i digress) ….
odd numbers
#5G was marketed as "1,500 sq ft", but #4G was marketed in 2007 as "1,450 sq ft" and #8G was marketed in 2004 as "1,400 sq ft". I believe that the condo’s floor plan in the inter-firm data base from the Select Registry is taken from the official floor plan in the condo declaration; the "G" line is there said to be "1,420 sq ft" on floors 4 through 10. City records (per StreetEasy) shows this unit as "1,334 sq ft". Why oh why can’t they get that right?
quirky numbers
Taxes and common charges for #5G in 2009 were $685/mo and $948/mo, respectively. Monthlies for #4G in 2007 were $766 and $1,312 (I wonder if that common charge included an assessment for the elevator replacement project); while way back in 2004, the monthlies for #8G were $663 and $975 (essentially the same as #5G this year). Assuming the numbers in the listings were correct (counting on agents is … errr … problematic), it appears that taxes went up and down in the last five years in this line, and that common charges (assessments aside) have been flat. That’s roughly $1,600/mo for a "1,420 sq ft" condo with a doorman, common roof deck, and (pretty spartan) fitness room — a relative bargain.
Props to the #5G sellers (and to their agent, PruDE’s Lisa Sinclair) for biting the bullet in a biting market and doing what it takes for a quick deal.
© Sandy Mattingly 2009
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Follow Us!