eventual 92 Warren Street resale beats 2007 new development price by 5%

one theme, or another
Is the recent sale of the Manhattan loft #5W at 92 Warren Street more interesting because it is a resale of a 2007 new development that exceeded the original sponsor sale price, or is it more interesting because it illustrates one problem with doing comps in a former new development? How about this: I report; you decide?

This loft is at the top of the old portion of the 13-story new development in which 8 stories were added as a high setback. Speaking of piggy-backing, the last marketing campaign has some wrinkles (and many prices), but the overall story is that this loft found a contract by December 30 and sold on March 4 at $2.46mm. That clearing price is a 5% premium to original sale price form the sponsor on March 15, 2007 of $2,341,975. The wrinkles are a little hard to follow on StreetEasy, so bear with me as I use some (letters).

This loft was marketed continuously from May 4 to that year-end contract, but (a) it enjoyed a 3-week run at the end of 2009, asking $2.6mm, (b) when it returned to market this past May it was asking $2.895mm, (c ) after dropping to $2.75mm and $2.65mm, the listing changed agents (but not firms) on October 14, then (d) dropped twice more ($2.575mm and $2.495mm) before (e) finding that contract on December 30 at $2.46mm. (The first part of the listing history is here; the second is here. The deed filing is not linked to either listing history on StreetEasy.)

A 5% premium over 2007 for a resale of a new development is not bad. Once again, I am thinking of my March 5, 2010  data dump: 27 Manhattan lofts sold in 2007 + recently, which I touched on a month ago at another 2007 new development in my February 18, recent Grand Madison sale shows 225 Fifth Avenue lofts still treading water.

how to gauge new development resale comps?
One way to look at resales in new development for a comp analysis is to look at the change from the original sale (here, that 5% premium for #5W after 4 years). By that measure, the resale of #5E a year ago at $3.4mm was a slight hit (2%) from the $3,462,050 three years earlier. But on a price-per-foot basis, the resales of #5W this month and the resale of #5E a year ago February are much closer: the “2,845 sq ft” #6E cleared last year at $1,195/ft, compared to the “2,019 sq ft” #5W this month at $1,218/ft.

Maybe this only proves that 5% either way for different lofts marketed at different times is not something to split hairs about. In market terms, these two resales were essentially flat. In personal terms, the resales were a mild loss for one seller and a mild gain for the other. Meh.

Perhaps I am just cranky thinking about snow after the mild weather last week, but I think that sometimes we over-analyze small differences in a Manhattan residential real estate market that has some constant but varying noise.

© Sandy Mattingly 2011


Tagged with: , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply