getting pushy but getting it / 90 Hudson exceeds $1,200/ft

renovation bliss, perhaps

The Manhattan loft #5B at 90 Hudson Street was certainly pushing the envelope when it came to market in September 2007 at $1.495mm (we know this because it did not sell). That ask was roughly $1,500/ft in a no-frills-mature Tribeca coop, but the sellers were very proud of the gut renovation (not only is it a "gorgeous renovated loft", but it is "1,000 sq ft of pure bliss" and is "totally renovated with top of the line materials"; all that gushing in a not-very-long listing description makes no bones about the renovation). You can see the part of the Halstead listing captured on StreetEasy here (why no floor plan in the listing??).

They were patient (obstinate?) at that price seven months, until dropping to $1.395mm in April and then $1.349mm in September, before getting into contract by October 18 and closing December 15 for $1.237mm. That’s 13 months to contract, and a closing 17% off the original asking price. Still, getting nearly $1,250/ft is pretty good for a no-frills mature coop, even on "Main Street" in Tribeca (the coop was converted in 1983).

The $1.237mm clearing price is all the more impressive because the larger #4A failed to sell for the 8 months it was on the market beginning in September 2007. (It is "1,250 sq ft" and was asking $1.595mm, or $1,276/ft at the same time #5B was asking nearly $1,500/ft.) The part of that Halstead listing captured on StreetEasy is here. That unit has 2 bedrooms + 2 baths, as opposed the 1 bedroom + 1 bath layout of #5B.

market inefficiencies

Can’t tell what condition this loft was in when the December 2008 sellers bought it in May 2005 (for $936k), but it is at last interesting that the two "B" units underneath sold later, for less: #4B in August 2005 for $875k and #3B in December 2006 for $830k. (Not a very efficient market, is it?)

My conventional wisdom to buyers is that if they don’t overpay on the way in (when buying in a stable neighborhood; Tribeca has qualified for quite a while), they will hold their place in the market on the way out. (Whether they sell for more than they paid is a function of Overall Market Direction, of course.) The December 2008 #5B sellers certainly did well with their sale price; I wonder if they overpaid when they bought it in May 2005 (based on the later sales of #4B and #3B). Absent some unexpected (and unknown) facts about these 3 Bs, one would expect #3B (in December 2006) and #4B (in August 2005) to have been worth more than #5B (in May 2005).

Weird.

squeezed by math (how hard?)

Now I wonder what they paid for that gorgeous and total renovation of pure bliss. Add $200/ft for a gut renovation (it was probably cheaper in 2005-2006), figure 6% commission on the $1.237mm clearing price and more and more of that (apparent) $300/ft "profit" from May 2005 to December 2008 evaporates. My guess is that they did not have to pay $200/ft for renovated bliss, but their 3 year old purchase price strikes me as anomalous as the sale price does now. Hope they enjoyed living there. 

© Sandy Mattingly 2008