set speed aka onehansonplace.com

7/03/2007

The Real Deal article on Prospect Heights' condo glut

This month's hot-off-the-presses July issue has an article on new developments in Prospect Heights.

Apparently there's a surplus of condos on the market because the sponsors/developers/brokers have priced a lot of the units too high.

According to Peggy Aguayo, "Manhattanites who didn't even know how to get over the bridge but came because they saw signs for Soho-style lofts for one-quarter of the price."

The article mentions the 'overpriced' condos at 647 and 651 Washington Avenue. In addition, stalled units are also left over at 540 St. Marks Avenue, by the Franklin Av. shuttle (we didn't know those were on the market already, much less built!).

The article also mentions that 28 of 39 units at the Washington are sold.

Labels: , ,


17 Comments:

At July 04, 2007 11:02 PM, Blogger Ben said...

This article was full of errors, they referenced the project at 425 pacific by supreme builders as being insanely overpriced and languishing on the market. Only problem is that 425 is a single family house in boerum hill. They meant 925 pacific which they referenced later in the article as selling well.

This is sloppy reporting, the only evidence of a slow market came from the comments by one broker regarding 425/925 moving slowly and 540 st marks which, as you mentioned, has not been marketed, build, or even had plans approved yet. So the evidence of a slow market in this area is nil.

Regarding 674-651 Washington, it's being marketed by a broker who has no experience with this type of project and even so, 6 of the 8 units visible by the street have "under contract" signs in the window.

I was very disappointed by the reporting by the Real Deal which I usually respect.

 
At July 05, 2007 11:54 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ben, right on! 807 St Johns is also incorrect.

 
At July 05, 2007 6:49 PM, Blogger ltjbukem said...

ben, i'm also disappointed in TRD. they usually are on the money with some stuff. looks like they didn't fact check this article at all...

 
At July 05, 2007 7:32 PM, Anonymous dropjes said...

They didn't even mention the St Marks Lofts (364 St Marks Ave) which are actually on the market right now. Ten units are sold, seven still available.

Why would they be writing about 540 St Marks which is a long way from being marketed?

I was hoping to read something about the Scarano building on St Marks between Grand and Classon which had a stop work order last time I checked on the DOB site.

 
At July 06, 2007 1:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Extremely sloppy reporting and what is the moron from Fillmore (who has no marketing or selling experience in the nabe)talking about? It's confusing why they didn't listen to Aguayo who obviously has the most projects in the market and did a really great articel in the real deal about prospect heights last year. Just a disservice to the nabe with such reporting. By the looks of it thehello project is basically sold out!

 
At July 06, 2007 8:59 AM, Blogger Ben said...

BTW, I sent the real deal a letter voicing my disappointment with their reporting, I encourage you to do the same.

letters@therealdeal.net

and

editor@therealdeal.net although my mail to the editor bounced.

Hopefully they will issue a follow up article that more accurately reflects what's going on in the market. For instance, have you guys been watching this one:
http://www.thedevelopersgroup.com/buildings/building.aspx?buildingid=1096&

This has been on the market for what, two, maybe three weeks? 6 of 8 units have contracts out already.

 
At July 06, 2007 12:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

all this bullishness leads an investor to believe the masses are wrong.
strong sell

 
At July 06, 2007 12:26 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ben C?

 
At July 06, 2007 2:43 PM, Blogger Ben said...

who's asking?

 
At July 06, 2007 3:10 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The developers group sold waaaayy to low at that project, practically giving it away. I mean look at the firehouse and hello they got 750-800 a foot. And the Washington got around $600-$650 a foot.

 
At July 07, 2007 7:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

just for the record, i went to the open houses for both 647/649 Washington. and 651 Washington. They are not the same project, though the brokers were both equally clueless (one from Mill Basin and the other from Long Island. Where do they find these people?). 647/49 had some good units and some bad ones, but all the good ones seem to be in contract. 651 seemed like crap through and through.

655 looks like it could be interesting. Anyone know who has these listings?

And does anyone know anything about Gen next door? It looked quite good.

 
At July 08, 2007 5:25 PM, Anonymous dropjes said...

Re: Gen

I haven't eaten there yet but locals on the Brooklynian forum have been raving about it, including someone who just moved back from Japan. Should be good.

 
At July 10, 2007 5:17 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do we really know the actual numbers of what has sold or is all this "rant" about 'In Contract' signs?!
Based on common sense, 'In Contract" doesn't mean 'Closed' or 'Sold'.
It would be interesting to see how many of those 'In Contract' actually close, and when they close.
Change is great for the "nabe". But, we need to be careful of those spin doctors that would have us believe anything.

 
At July 10, 2007 8:47 PM, Anonymous dropjes said...

When I bought at 364 St Marks, the Corcoran site didn't say 'in contract' until the seller had literally received our signed contract.

I'm skeptical about the In Contract signs in the windows of the Washington Ave building. There's something old-school hucksterism about those.

 
At July 11, 2007 8:08 AM, Blogger Ben said...

I agree with the sentiments regarding the in contract signs at the washington ave building. However, the basis for my comments was not only on signs in a window. Hello Living, St Mark's Lofts, 457 Prospect Pl, etc. all appear to be doing alright.

The main point was that the evidence of a slow market in PH that was cited in the article did not hold up and in fact there is some evidence to the contrary.

 
At July 13, 2007 10:48 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am in contract at 649 Washington. And the signs bug the crap out of me. Old school is not necessarily the better school.

 
At July 17, 2007 3:43 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm in contract for one of the "Hello" units. If I could buy two I would. I think anyone who really takes a look at this neighborhood and spends some time in it will find that it is well worth investing in.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Interested in advertising here? Contact One Hanson Place