Price cuts swamping accepted offers

Le deluge. No sales activity to speak of but lots of price cuts, finally – 11 just this morning, but many of those are for condos or rentals. Two that aren’t:

21 North Street

21 North Street, very nice construction by Kali-Nagy that took two years to sell after being built in 2005 but did move in 2007 for $5.650 million. It’s been on for a while now and today dropped to $4.845.

9 Rockwood Spur. Sold for $4.150 million in 2004, tried to sell again in 2007 for $5.650 (too late!) and has today dropped to $3.495 from $3.795.

This keeps up, we might see a trend, eh?

As an aside, some of us were astonished to see houses like 21 North Street sell for as much as they did back in that time. While I take no pleasure in seeing another man’s loss (nor mine, come to think of it), it’s reassuring to see some sense of reason beginning to appear in the Greenwich real estate market. Except Riverside’s, but that day may come too.


Filed under Uncategorized

10 responses to “Price cuts swamping accepted offers

  1. Cos Cobber

    Boy, that 21 North Street is beauty. Great taste.

  2. Cos Cobber

    Someday I hope I could plow the driveway. That would be nice.

  3. Anonymous

    great house. great design

  4. I noticed that within the Greenwich Fine Prop listing is a link to the house’s own website, 21 North. I have seen more and more high-end homes with their own domain name – that has to be a hunk of additional change for the real estate companies and IMHO a waste of $$. If the real estate firm website is good enough (hint to EBT), then a home specific page says to me that the home is a dog – what’s the old college admission’s phrase – the thicker the folder, the thicker the student. You get my drift.

  5. Anonymous

    I know a couple of folks who have done their own sites. Both were as a result of their agents sucking so bad at marketing the property the owners decided to take it upon themselves to do some additional marketing on their own, with some sort of referral to the agent. You can be sure there was some negotiation there, since the agency agreement was not broken (for whatever reason).

    In one case, the seller found his own buyer. The other, I think they took it off market.

    The joke is it ain’t hard to do with pre-fabbed templates, and costs an extra few hundred bucks or so (depending on time and capacity/functionality) for the seller. Most agents I’ve met have a tough enough time pulling their head outta their ass to figure out how to download pictures and email .jpg files, so hosting a separate website would be akin to transcribing the New Testament into Mandarin.

    Literally, dealt with one last year who didn’t know what a “j-p…whatever” was and had a tourette’s-like response to anything remotely technical: “can you just fax it to me?”

  6. Anonymous

    It cost about $200 to do this site, linked to the listing. I think it is a good idea.

  7. Anonymous: I’m not saying a home-specific website in general is a bad idea, I was only confused why the mention/link of it sits within the confines of GFP, with the same photos as in the listing page. I could understand an owner setting up their own website if, as you said, their agent took photos like I’ve railed against, but in this particular case, they are duplicates. Odd.

  8. Curious

    I was surprised to see such a differential between the (now reduced) price of $4.85 million and the assessed value of $2.07 million. Asking price is 2.34 times the assessment. Chris, do you track this metric? This example seems higher than others but I have not studied it. I also had heard new construction tends to get higher assessed values than existing homes. Is that true?
    Maybe the 2007 purchase price was just a great example of the top of the market?