May 11, 2009 · 9:09 am

22% off from 2007 price

31 North Porchuck sold new for $7.850 million in July, 2007. Beautifully constructed on four acres of land, with pond, the new owners added a pool and other improvements and must have had, conservatively, $8 million into the place. It sold Friday for $6.250. Maybe if they’d staged an art show they’d have done better.

About these ads

8 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as

8 Responses to 22% off from 2007 price

  1. anonymous
    May 11, 2009 at 9:12 am

    And $6.25MM isn’t net of realtor commissions, transfer taxes, etc, correct?

  2. anonymous
    May 11, 2009 at 9:28 am

    To be fair, a new car bought in July 2007 would have depreciated similarly even by December 2007, let alone nearly 2 years post first-use; perhaps convergence of used house vs used car depreciation is logical and long overdue

    • christopherfountain
      May 11, 2009 at 9:32 am

      What’s different is that land is falling in value. That hasn’t happened here in a long time.

  3. Stanwich
    May 11, 2009 at 9:57 am

    No doubt it is quality construction if you say so but it is rather cookie-cutter for the price. Something on that size and scale should be more substantial….like fieldstone. It’s like an overgorwn version of Pecora’s house on Cat Rock. Nice, but nice doesn’t cut it at that price.

  4. anon
    May 11, 2009 at 10:44 am

    According to Zillow, this property traded at $1.758 mm on 8/31/05. Add in $300/sq ft x 10,000 sq ft ($3mm) and you get about $4.75mm. Sounds like it’s still overpriced.

    • christopherfountain
      May 11, 2009 at 11:06 am

      Ah, Zillow. It sold for $2.550 million June 30, 2005, and I think your $300 per square foot figure is low. This isn’t a purchase from a bankrupt builder, so $450 a foot for this quality is not a crazy price. Add that to the land , get $6.550, and you’ve come out okay (even though 4 acres here is no longer worth $2.550). Not a bad buy. I might have held out for $5.5 but then, it might have sold. If you want a specific house in a specific location and aren’t paying a ridiculous amount to get it, well then, why not? What else are you going to do with your money. I don’t advocate over-spending, but there are times where, if you have the money, you can spend what it takes to get what you want and i don’t think that’s all that nuts. Ask me about my Orvis 5 wt. flyrod, bought for 1/2 price from its $700 original! How could I not buy it?

  5. Anonymous
    May 11, 2009 at 10:06 pm

    Chris,
    You say that Back Country ,4 acres is not worth $2.5 million or $625 an acre. What do you think is reasonable for central Greenwich land, on say .17 0r .13 acre ? 2.5 million an acre? I know that it varies between Davis Avenue and Belle Haven, but what is you best guess for the average living?
    Thanks a (half) million.

    • christopherfountain
      May 12, 2009 at 8:26 am

      If a Round Hill Road building lot (2 or 4 acres, dependig on zoning) is worth $3 million, and I have my doubts, notwithstanding two recent sales at that price, then a 0.17 building lot is mid-country, seriously undersized and whalloped by FAR, wouldn’t be worth all that much. Half a million?