15 Broad Street loft resellers could not move to Idaho until they accepted what the Manhattan market would give

(could not move their money, at least)
I admit it: sometimes I get stuck on trivia when reviewing Manhattan loft sales. In the case of the recently sold at $1.57mm “1,458 sq ft” loft #3230 at 15 Broad Street (Downtown by Starck), it wasn’t that it re-sold for 19% more than when it was purchased from the sponsor in 2007 (not bad at all), or even that the sellers had tried to sell for as much as $2.1mm in both 2009 and 2010 (ha!), but that the sellers moved to Idaho from being across from both Federal Hall and the New York Stock Exchange.

Voyeur that I am, I don’t believe I have ever noticed an Idaho seller before. So I wondered about what would cause someone to do that, and worried if the long time spent trying to sell (see: ha! above) meant that they could not move until this loft sold. You may not care (then why are you reading this?), but I clicked around enough to find this rental listing, which implies that the owners were able to go to Pocatello (or, wherever) by the beginning of 2011, if not earlier. It just took their money quite a while to catch up to them. (It may even have taken a long time for their furniture to catch up with them, as in both that 2011 rental and the aborted 2012 attempt, the loft was also available furnished.)

That’s what happens when you look at every deed record filed every week for a downtown Manhattan loft sale between $500,000 and $5,000,000, and have since November 2008: you get distracted by trivia on occasion. (The ubiquitous Master List of Manhattan Lofts Sold Since November 2008 is the product of that compulsion.)

now let’s look at what might interest you
The broker babble claims that loft #3230 has been “totally designer renovated”. It is hard to tell exactly what that means, beyond “[c]ustom built-in bookcases, maple stained ebony floors, integrated wine bar”, as the sponsor marketing was awfully impressed with the finishes (by Starck!); perhaps the “Valcucine kitchen with sleek surfaces” is new, as I did not see that particular proper proper name in the babble of the few other recent sales listings in the building that I clicked on. As you will see shortly, the #3230 owners thought their loft was far superior to anything else on offer in the building. And you will see that The Market found them rather … immodest.

But first a word about the floor plan: weird.

The loft has 2 (real) bedrooms and an interior home office that some owners in the line are, no doubt, tempted to put a sleeping person in. I can’t remember the last new development loft I saw that was 2 or more bedrooms yet had only 1.5 baths. That’s weird. The master and the guest bedroom share the full bath between them. Sliding doors are notorious for sound leakage, so there is rahter less privacy in this arrangement than is typical.

As I said: weird.

that immodest history
Here’s the full sales history, starting from the sponsor purchase:

As I dropped as an aside up top, that’s a 19% gain from the first number in 2007 to the last, last month. That spread is a fascinating contrast to the only 2011 resale of a 2007 sponsor purchase that made the paired resale analysis in my September 27, 2011, is the Manhattan loft market back to (up to) 2007? 61 repeat sales say “probably”, “a bit”, loft #1030. That loft is almost exactly the same size as loft #3230 (“1,440 sq ft” v. “1,458 sq ft”), and sold for 4% less than #3230 in 2007 (at $1.26mm; it is 22 floors lower and has only 2 interior home offices, no “bedrooms”, so a difference of only $53,542 seems small, in retrospect). Yet when it resold on April 12, 2011 it got only $950,000; at 24.6% off from 2007 to 2011, loft #1030 had the second largest decline of any of the 27 “losers” on the spreadsheet associated with that paired resale analysis. (You remember there were 52 “gainers” on the spreadsheet, right? If not, re-read that September 27, 2011 post.)

going for the gusto (but missing)
I also dropped a (snarky) aside about the effort by the #3230 owners to sell at $2.1mm in 2009 and 2010. Between August 2009 and July 2010, when the owners were asking $1,440/ft for #3230, a quick scan of the recorded sales in the building (StreetEasy building page, here) shows 24 sales at 15 Broad Street, with high being #1610 at $1,094/ft and the low is probably #830 at $621/ft, though there many sales well below $1,000/ft in that period. Yet our intrepid wannabe Idahoans (spuds??) were asking $1,440/ft! And then $1,269/ft for another 6 months. They obviously loved their “totally designer renovated” loft, but were, frankly,  living in their own private Idaho, indeed. (That song always makes me smile, but this video takes it to a whole ‘nother level.)

Remember that rental trivia up top? It looks as though the #3230 owners might have made it to (actual) Idaho by January 2011, as that is the first time I see the unit having been rented out. By the time they were on the rental market again (in May 2012) they were also back on the sales market, but were somewhat chastened by then, asking the $1.65mm ($1,132/ft) that got a contract at $1.57mm in just over 3 months.

They still thought #3230 was the cream of the crop in the building. The 7 prior sales in 2012 when #3230 came back to market (that building page, again) hit as low as $839/ft (#2404) and top out at $1,030/ft (the “1,407 sq ft” #2812; less than that loft was flipped for in 2007, but still). They settled for $1,077/ft, a small 5% premium over #2812 that may have been galling, even though #2812 also boasted of improvements:

newly refinished stained hardwood floors, new kitchen cabinets and hardware, customized bathroom rain showers, under sink built-in cabinets and California closets throughout. The raised loft includes custom shelving and a walled glass installation enhancing the already completely open and airy feel of the space. New high-tech lighting and built-in surround sound speakers throughout all controlled by digital touchscreen remotes

Life in Idaho may be simpler.

© Sandy Mattingly 2012