July 21, 2009 · 2:24 pm

Byram Shore sale

238 Byram Shore Rd, a David Ogilvy listing on the market since January, 2007 at $9.8 million, finally sold to a David Ogilvy client yesterday for $7 million. Funny thing about this listing is that it was next door to and quite similar to 240 Byram Shore Road, which had started at $9.499 in 2005 and sold in January, 2007 for $7.250. So a week later, when I visited the Ogilvy listing, I thought that something in the $7s would be appropriate instead of a price higher that its neighbor had failed to achieve.  But that just shows how little I know. Mr. Ogilvy kept this firmly at $9.8 all these years and then found his own buyer for $7. My guess is that the seller didn’t really want to move and enjoyed meeting new visitors on weekends and during suppertime, so all’s well that ends well.

13 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

13 responses to “Byram Shore sale”

  1. Wally
    July 21, 2009 at 2:54 pm

    Does it seem like David Ogilvy’s firm tends to sell its listings to its own clients more than usual? I could be wrong, but it seems like I hear this a lot. And if this is true, is that a good or bad thing for its clients?

    • christopherfountain
      July 21, 2009 at 2:59 pm

      I don’t want to bad mouth another agent, Wally, so I won’t. I will point point out that a house listed at, say $8 million when it’s worth $4 tends to prevent other agents from making offers.

  2. anon
    July 21, 2009 at 3:09 pm

    That’s a good example of why I don’t trust most real estate agents. They are hunting for whales.

    I know everybody’s got to eat, but it doesn’t seem right that a real estate agent in Greenwich gets $100K commission for selling the average $2mm house, and an agent in a normal part of the country gets $10K for selling a $200K house. Does the agent in Greenwich work 10 times as hard?

  3. Helsa Poppin
    July 21, 2009 at 3:18 pm

    Whoa, Chris, you’re blowing my mind. You mentioned the conflicts of interest in representing sellers and buyers before, but I never thought through the implications. The seller’s agent can’t hide offers from outside buyers from his client, but by setting the price high enough, the agent is in effect discouraging such offers. Things look dead, the seller starts to get anxious, then the agent introduces him to a single buyer, his own client. Pockets the entire commission, which is almost certainly more money than he’d get if he’d priced the listing lower, even if the lower price invited multiple competitive bids.

    Agents can only take advantage of this sort of thing in this sort of market – one where sellers are predisposed to overvaluing their properties and buyers are shy about bidding aggressively low. No wonder things haven’t yet become unstuck.

  4. anonymous
    July 21, 2009 at 3:19 pm

    Sellers or buyers who misprice houses deserve like-minded realtors; principals should “man up” and not blame their own poor choice of advisors

  5. anonymous
    July 21, 2009 at 3:52 pm

    Not very different from dynamics/conflicts of interest of any company (seller or buyer) in choice of M&A I-banker, fees paid and repeat relationships (and industry reputation) at risk for all fiduciaries involved…

  6. Riverside Roger
    July 21, 2009 at 4:32 pm

    OMG…do people not really know…i guess not.
    This has been David O’s MO for years. The number of deals where he’s got both ends (sides) and for waay under original asking (no reductions) is HUGE….

  7. anon
    July 21, 2009 at 4:51 pm

    Is Bryam Shore in Port Chester?

  8. Anonymous
    July 21, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    I believe what is being described goes on a lot. Quite disheartening.
    The agents seem to be in the ‘driving seat’ and act as ‘gate keeper’ against the ‘low’ priced sales at actual market value.

    If they allow realistic sales to proceed, what happens to their own holdings?
    That clearly is why they resist you blog so vehemently.

    It would be like you disallowing any sales in Riverside if they fall below 2006 values, unless your friend is the buyer, of course. I know, completely unethical, possibly illegal and in no way relates to your practice.

    I believe the rental rates are the same, proven by the fact that many properties sit ‘forever’ on the MLS at incredibly ridiculous rental values. And these are owners who actually want to rent their property.

    One example of unadvisable rental pricing may be the long-term empty condos in Central Greenwich.
    But they do not stand on their own.
    If the rental prices of any of the properties in Greenwich were in anyway realistic, they would be rented.
    Quite unbelievable and demonstrates a lack of skill in the “professionals” concerned. (Professional being described as members holding a discreet body of knowledge and skill which is unique to that group).

  9. Richard
    July 22, 2009 at 7:42 am

    This is a great example of why I would never buy real estate without being represented by a buyer’s agent.

  10. cos cobber
    July 22, 2009 at 7:43 am

    Right, byram shore is in cos cob next to neverland ranch.

  11. Accolay
    July 22, 2009 at 11:35 am

    Please. Cos Cob may not be mid country, but it’s leagues better than Byram.