break away to win the neighborly competition / so many lofts, so many dollars … but no sales (yet)

 

but will ANY win?
I have been having an off-line dialogue since March with Reader SW about a particular high-end Manhattan loft building with multiple units for sale, which prompts a(nother) rumination about neighborly competition. (I have linked to some other neighborly ruminations, below.) As of then, the four-way-neighbor-against-neighbor dynamic was fascinating but static — I didn’t see any of these lofts as being priced in the range to generate a deal (unless at a substantial discount).   In other words, they appeared to be "sellers" who were afraid to break away from the pack, into a zone where buyers troll.
 
first, the (early) history box
 
  Day 1 Day 37 Day 42 Day 45 Day 62
A new at $1,300/ft     drop to $1,225/ft  
B   new at $1,400/ft drop to $1,350/ft    
C       new at $1,275/ft  
D         new at $1,350/ft

 

My immediate thought when that fourth loft hit the market was "these people are more scared of leaving money on the table than they are of not selling at all". (See my March 25 rumination, am I a coward? assessing + bearing risk in a risky world .) The "D" "sellers" are counting on their finishes and specific form of spectacular (more on the loft interiors below) to distinguish them from the other 3 lofts … "good luck with that" (my second thought when "D" hit). By that time, "C" and "A" (especially) had changed thegame, albeit not dramatically.

But then one player got tired (or for some other reason took a loft off the market, temporarily, it appears) and two additional players took the field.

the updated history box

 
  Day 1 Day 37 Day 42 Day 45 Day 62 Day 68 Day 71 Day 81
A new at $1,300/ft     drop to $1,225/ft        
B   new at $1,400/ft drop to $1,350/ft       off market (temp)  
C       new at $1,275/ft        
D         new at $1,350/ft      
E           new at $1,125/ft    
F               new at $950/ft

 
The "E" sellers really sought to distinguish themselves from their neighbors on price, so they must have been crushed when the "F" neighbors came out to play. "F" has clearly positioned itself as the one that dollar-conscious buyers have to consider first. At a minimum, the "F" sellers have made it difficult for the others to maintain their current asking prices, even with a buyer who is not interested in buying "F".

 
the lofts (ooh-la-la)
Trust me, this building is one of the great condo loft conversions in its prime Manhattan loft neighborhood. Moreover, each one of these lofts has high-endfinishes, though they vary in the quality of the views (one of them, at least, has spectacular views), and they are of similar sizes and configurations. I will not use the u-word, but they each have very different looks — so much so that I can easily understand some people feeling strongly that they might buy one (at the right price) but would never buy another (at any price).

If this neighborly competition occurred in a cookie-cutter "apartment" building in Manhattan (even a high-end "apartment" building), the outcome would be clear: no one would bid on "B" or "D"; every serious bidder would bid on "F" and probably "E"; while "A" and "C" might get some action.

But the dynamic here is much more intriguing because these lofts vary so much — though all are high quality. I will be surprised if "F" does not find a buyer relatively soon, as they are clearly serious about selling. I will be surprised if "B" (if it comes back at the same price) or "D" are able to negotiate off their asking prices, except at big discounts; indeed, I will be mildly surprised ifthey get much action at all, as I think the "F" boldness on price makes them appear to be unserious as sellers — their beautiful lofts notwithstanding.

This plot is thickening, nicely. Thanks to Reader SW for focusing me on this dynamic..

© Sandy Mattingly 2009 

 

 

Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply