The market is going down
I've complained before about the difficulty of comparing selling prices for the same property because so many houses are renovated between purchase and resale. Here's one that wasn't: 26 Lake Drive South, in Riverside. The current owners paid $2.125M for it in January 2005, did nothing to it (the previous owners had done the necessary renovations like new kitchen and baths)and put it on the market this year for $2.250. That was a reasonable response to the softening market - after commissions and taxes, they'd have been luck to break even - but it sold yesterday for just $1.850. So apples to apples, three and a half years later, it was worth $275,000 less.
And here's another sad tale, perhaps, depending on how you feel about wildly-unrealistic original asking prices: 402 Sound Beach Avenue was listed February, 2006 for $3.399 M and went to contract yesterday for something less than its latest price of $2.395M. In answer to my reader who keeps urging me to show over-priced listings, this is a nice example of why I won't bother; it took 2 1/2 years for the seller to come to his senses. Of course, by pricing it so high to begin with, the seller missed what was left of the bull market and sold on the downside, all to his loss - I doubt this house was $1,000,000 too high in 2006, but it sure was by the time he sold it.
On a cheerier note, Joann Erb's listing, direct waterfront at 200 Shore Road (close to the beach), was listed June 26 this year for $8,000,000 and has already gone to contract, demonstrating again that a beautiful newish (5 years?) house with spectacular waterfront will trump price, a busy road and a narrow lot, every time.
Well, almost every time. 23 Eggleston Lane isn't a new house but does have waterfront on the Cove and a dock. It originally asked $8.5M and dropped again yesterday to a new price of $6.975. You'd think that a $1.5M chop would speed things along but we'll have to wait and see.
26 Mayfair Lane originally asked $8.375M. 547 days later, it sold for $6.250M. I won't presume to read the minds of sellers, but these seemed quite elderly and I wonder if they really wanted to get a high price or just got some bad advice. Either way, it's tough to keep your house in showroom condition for almost two years so, unless you like that sort of stuff, I'd price it realistically and move on.
1 year ago
Posts
4 comments:
Typo on 26 Lake Drive South - that's a $400k decline based on the prices listed, not $275... at least I'm not the grammer police!! While I'm at it, do you know what's going on at the top of Greenwich Ave with the new construction? Thanks for maintaining this blog.
Sorry!! Nevermind. I was looking at the listing price. Apologies
Any thoughts on the two new homes built on Lakeview Drive in Riverside? In late 2006 our realtor urged us to act quickly because "at this price these (then unbuilt) homes won't last." It appears he was wrong - they are (now built and) still available - at pretty close to the same price. Thoughts?
Those houses on Lakeview Drive, north of the Post Road, have indeed been sitting for a long time - December '06, although construction had barely begun then. Their trouble, as I see it, is that lack the lake, and the view isn't all that great. The neighbor further down, 22 lakeview, was a spectacular house on 0.79 of an acre with direct waterfront and a dock, plus 5,750 sq.feet of space. It sold in May 2005 for $3,425,000, which was right about where I'd placed it in a price opinion but I was trying to get a listing for my fellow agent and, I'll confess, I thought that a tad high for a Riverside property north of the Post Road, river or not. But the two houses you inquire about are each on just 0.28 acres, have 5,400 sq.ft. and, as noted, don't have water access right out the back door. One of them has dropped from $3,265,000 to $2,995,000, the other is still at $3.265M. They're nice houses but I think the 2008 market is not what the 2005 was. If you like them, you might want to toss a bid out and see what happens.
Post a Comment