Another Cubs Season in the Books, But the Hot Tub Still Remains: 1131 W. Addision in Lakeview
Now that the Cubs season has officially wound down, I thought we should revisit this 3-bedroom penthouse unit at 1131 W. Addison which is nearly within throwing distance of Wrigley Field.
See our May 2010 chatter and pictures here.
It has one of the coolest rooftop decks in Lakeview with dead on views of the ball park from a completely private deck outfitted with a 6-person hot tub, cable television and electricty.
Who would need to actually go to the games?
The duplex unit has 11 foot ceilings and luxury finishes such as custom cabinets, granite counter tops and a Viking stainless steel appliance package in the kitchen.
Is this priced to sell now?
Nancy Gaspadarek and Catherine Brennan at Sudler Sotheby’s still have the listing. See the virtual tour pictures here.
Unit #3: 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1 car parking, 1500 square feet
- Sold in June 2007 for $552,000
- Originally listed in October 2009 for $629,900
- Withdrawn
- Was listed in March 2010 for $609,000
- Reduced
- Was listed in May 2010 for $589,999
- Reduced
- Currently listed for $579,999
- Assessments of $176 a month
- Taxes of $7605
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 12×12
- Bedroom #2: 10×9
- Bedroom #3: 20×11
Nancy Gaspadarek and Catherine Brennan at Sudler Sotheby’s still have the listing. See the virtual tour pictures here.
Unit #3: 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1 car parking, 1500 square feet
- Sold in June 2007 for $552,000
- Originally listed in October 2009 for $629,900
- Withdrawn
- Was listed in March 2010 for $609,000
- Reduced
- Was listed in May 2010 for $589,999
- Reduced
- Currently listed for $579,999
- Assessments of $176 a month
- Taxes of $7605
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 12×12
- Bedroom #2: 10×9
- Bedroom #3: 20×11
Imagine how fast eric rojas could ride to wrigley from here
Another prime example of what I discussed on Monday. They lowered the price 10K to freshen up the listing. I’m sure that the agent promised that the 1.6% reduction should really turn some heads and get those potential buyers lined up immediately.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1131-W-Addison-St-60613/unit-3/home/22044097
It looks like in August they took it off and relisted the property the next day to freshen up the listing. Neither strategy worked. Unfortunately it looks like it will need a substantial price drop to make this sale over the winter. Otherwise you know what’s coming here folks………..
Wait till next year!
I think the important thing to remember is that many people (maybe not this person) are underwater by no fault of their own. They were simply fooled by the media and banks into thinking they were doing the smart thing at the time. We should not be glad or treat these listings as a joke – it has and can create HUGE emotional and social issues (in addition to financial concerns). The small reductions in price in this particular unit probably were taken very seriously by the owner who may be having a difficult time with finances and may be between a rock and a hard place.
It appears to be for rent as well for $3000/mo.
http://www.thenemirowgroup.idxco.com/idx/7632/details.php?listingID=07635686&idxID=004
Yeah the 10k reduction is really gonna matter on this one….NOT.
“They were simply fooled by the media and banks into thinking they were doing the smart thing at the time.”
And people like you, clio. Go to mirror. Look in mirror.
I certainly understand what you’re saying Clio about listening to media and banks, but to say they are “underwater by no fault of their own” is probably stretching it a bit. These people made decisions to purchase these properties and also to take out mortgages. If someone is buying a house and taking on a 30 year commitment, there is no excuse for them not to take into account whether they will be able to pay it back if their circumstances change. Even without considering a huge recession, you plan for the worst and hope for the best. I think a lot of people planned for the best and didn’t even consider the worst. They should have been making educated decisions based on circumstances that were in their control. If they didn’t have the down payment, they shouldn’t have bought. I certainly understand that purchasing with small amounts of equity can be a valuable tool for asset growth, but shouldn’t be used by ordinary people for their primary residences.
In all, I do think it’s sad that theses people have to make life-altering decisions every time they lower the price and they can be big hits to take, but if they were willing to profit when the going was good, I don’t have as much sympathy for those that are losing now.
But you’re not being fooled by anyone clio, when you say now is the time to buy?
clio on Oct 1st, 2010 at 4:29 pm:
“My opinion is that if you can afford to buy, and want/need to buy – go ahead. Prices are NOT going to come down very much and we are bouncing around the bottom now.”
“But you’re not being fooled by anyone clio, when you say now is the time to buy?”
You mean, anyone who doesn’t live inside his skull?
They should market this as a short-term rental during baseball season. They could clean up renting this out to Chad’s pitching it as their pad to the Trixie’s.
Getting out from an underwater property is an everyman for himself type situation. The key is to keep all of your options open and don’t discount any option simply because you have preconceived notions of what you should or should not do. For example, people are always like “I will NOT file bankruptcy” yet they have a second mortgage for $100k that they’re paying only the interest on and have no means to actually increase the payment. Or “I MUST KEep THE HOUSE” when they have only a first mortgage and are totally underwater and they will never ever recover or be able to repay the mortgage; or they firmly insist on their selling price to make a profit and refuse to discuss short sale or DIL options with their lender.
I would have bought this pre-2000, but how would any normal dude or dudette have been able to foresee the madness of tranched subprimes?
This is not saying I support inflated prices, etc., but my brother worked overseas and I heard a lot about how incredibly complicated the house of cards really was. If we want to talk about people being held accountable for their actions, there should be a LOT of banking executives in the pokey.
“If someone is buying a house and taking on a 30 year commitment, there is no excuse for them not to take into account whether they will be able to pay it back if their circumstances change. Even without considering a huge recession, you plan for the worst and hope for the best. I think a lot of people planned for the best and didn’t even consider the worst. “
“I would have bought this pre-2000, but how would any normal dude or dudette have been able to foresee the madness of tranched subprimes?”
And, in any event, what we have now ain’t even close to “the worst”. Anyone game planning their live for the worst would make HD on a bad day seem hopelessly optimistic.
“If we want to talk about people being held accountable for their actions, there should be a LOT of banking executives in the pokey.”
Hard to make a criminal malfeasance case against them if their firms are more or less intact courtest of Uncle Sam.
Still, you would think there would be SOME perpwalks (WaMu, anyone????). Thats whats so amazing about this entire thing: perpwalks are still a rarity. It was everybody and nobody’s fault all at once. Or so our govt & media would have us believe.
“The small reductions in price in this particular unit probably were taken very seriously by the owner who may be having a difficult time with finances and may be between a rock and a hard place.”
Clio — don’t let the facts get in the way. Or even read the facts for that matter.
These are still listed above 2007 purchase price. Are you joking? Between a rock and a hard place because they cannot make $ from a 2007 purchase.
Assinine commentary.
They key to avoiding this entire mess post-2000 was 1) to recognize that housing prices were rising too quickly, they were rising faster than I was savings in 2003; 2) the buy, hold for 3-5 years and refi or sell idea is a really really bad idea even though prices seemed only to go up – all you had to think was ‘what if…’ and 3) stay far far away from the insane bubble buy buy buy mentality.
Yes that meant renting for 8-10 years and that has it’s own problems but I’d much rather be in my shoes today than to be hopelessly underwater. granted I wasn’t in a position to buy until 2003 or so i had to stay out of the bubble in the very early part of the mania but still, i know plenty of people who ignored 1 through 3 above, against my better advise, from 2003 on and they’re not in good positions today. they would say “that’s preposterous, housing prices can’t fall” or “that’s preposterous , i’ll be able to refinance” or “that’s preposterous, i’m not going to be making less money in 5 years, I’ll be making way more money.”
“These are still listed above 2007 purchase price. Are you joking? Between a rock and a hard place because they cannot make $ from a 2007 purchase.”
Sold for 552k, listed for 580k – even if they got asking price (which I am sure they know they will not), they will not make any profit/$ off of the sale (after sales commissions/closing costs, etc.,) – they will be losing and they know it… – no need to rub it in.
This type of property purchase was made as an investment and they lost. They perhaps got caught up in the home as a shorter term investment mentality but no one made them sign the papers. They will move it when it reaches the new norm or if they can find just that “right buyer” who loves what it is and where it is: unlikely.
“But you’re not being fooled by anyone clio, when you say now is the time to buy?”
Not sure if anyone here has played any sports, but my point was that before a game, everyone knows the rules – there are going to be winners and losers. If someone loses, the winners should never gloat or be happy. Just be silently content that you aren’t in the loser’s situation.
They people aren’t at fault and they were duped by the media and the banks? My God…how ridiculous has this become? I know this is America – where it’s everyone else’s fault but your own, but this is really getting out of hand. If you’re stupid enough to believe that “real estate always goes up” or “DOW 20,000 next year” you deserve to get burned for taking that kind of risk. The unfortunate part about it is that our goverment will redistribute the wealth from those of us not stupid enough to believe this BS to those people who were “duped.”
“that our goverment will redistribute the wealth from those of us not stupid enough to believe this BS to those people who were “duped.””
It already does – it’s called progressive taxation!!! welcome to my world.
“they will be losing and they know it… – no need to rub it in.”
Along with everyone else who purchased anything in the last 7 years. So what is your point?
Nothing?
Not surprising.
“progressive taxation”
There are plenty of regressive taxes out there. Sales tax, for example. Some, including billionaires, have gone so far as to argue that income taxes are regressive.
Bill Brady purportedly paid no federal income taxes, for example. Like the commercial (which cracks me up) asks — who is this guy?
“There are plenty of regressive taxes out there.”
Really? There are taxes out there that in which when the the tax rate increases as the taxable base amount decreases? What are they?
“Sales tax, for example.”
No sorry libtard. Sales tax is a flat tax.
Maybe you should learn to get your definitions right before blindly believing what the media calls is a “regressive” tax. Definitions matter and I’ll call out people at every step along the way who seek to pervert the meaning of certain words in the English language to further their ideology.
It is regressive due to the amount of money poor folk spend on basic necessities as a percentage of income.
“A regressive tax imposes a greater burden (relative to resources) on the poor than on the rich — there is an inverse relationship between the tax rate and the taxpayer’s ability to pay as measured by assets, consumption, or income.”
“Like the commercial (which cracks me up) asks — who is this guy?”
He’s the soon to be governor elect of Illinois. And he’s not raising taxes. However if you feel like paying more in taxes you’re welcome to make a donation, JMM. Nobody is stopping you.
You disgust me and remind me of Bill Gates dad.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703882404575520241519315372.html?KEYWORDS=laffer
No its not. Thats not the definition of a regressive tax. That’s the sociology definition some asshat made up.
“A regressive tax imposes a greater burden (relative to resources) on the poor than on the rich — there is an inverse relationship between the tax rate and the taxpayer’s ability to pay as measured by assets, consumption, or income.”
This is a common attribute of flat taxes and regressive taxes (if regressive taxes actually existed in reality), but an attribute is not a definition.
There are very few regressive taxes in actuality. The only one I can think of off the top of my head are utility bills where there is a connection fee. To call sales tax regressive, or even a flat income tax system, is dishonest and unrepresentative of what they actually are.
No it isn’t. Regressive taxes are disproportionately burdensome to lower income folks. Similar to a giffen good.
Asshat, nice.
And, I think if you look around, state of IL is FAR lower than other states at 3%.
“And, I think if you look around, state of IL is FAR lower than other states at 3%.”
Yeah asshat and if you read the article I posted you’d see more money to government just results in a more wasteful government. California’s is at 9.3%–what happened JMM?
“Regressive taxes are disproportionately burdensome to lower income folks. Similar to a giffen good. ”
Let me spell it out for you because you are none too smart:
Regressive tax: a tax imposed in such a manner that the tax rate decreases as the amount subject to taxation increases.
Progressive tax: a progressive tax is a tax by which the tax rate increases as the taxable base amount increases.
Flat tax: a tax system with a constant tax rate.
Which one of these three definitions does your pea brain not understand? No Miskin doesn’t spell it out for you because he is a leftist Keynesian ideologue. But it doesn’t matter JMM the definitions are the definitions and you are guilty of misusing them.
Regressive taxes are universally extended where the economic costs increase and income decreases. Again, in case you missed it:
“A regressive tax imposes a greater burden (relative to resources) on the poor than on the rich — there is an inverse relationship between the tax rate and the taxpayer’s ability to pay as measured by assets, consumption, or income.”
That is not the definition of a regressive tax. That is an attribute common to them but not always the case.
Sorry dude but you sound like a lot of econ undergrads: you can quote out of an economics textbooks but are incapable of discerning the true meaning of the concepts.
“Similar to a giffen good.”
Periodically, you seem to feel compelled to through in a technical economics term but not at all helpfully or correctly. Hard to see how a type of good is like a tax. I suppose an increase in the price of a giffen good can be said to harm the poor disproportionately, but that’s true of any good that the poor purchase disproportionately (I haven’t made the statement fully precise). Whether said good rises to the level of a giffen good is not important.
It really doesn’t help illuminate anything on point.
What’s with the Bill Gates’ father article? How in the world does the author make a correlation with those figures, there are too many variables to make the conclusion that was made. Typical, slanted WSJ article.
“Typical, slanted WSJ article.”
dd, It was an opinion article, hence op-ed. How dumb are you? My suspicion is real dumb. Real, real dumb.
The WSJ doesn’t cater to people incapable of discerning the difference between op-eds and regular news. Sorry, move along.
Per Wikipedia regressive taxes are also described as “if the activity being taxed is more likely to be carried out by the poor and less likely to be carried out by the rich”
The lotto, Revenue from casino’s especially in NW indiana, anything bought at a convienience store, as well as booze/smokes. Those are all more frequently carried out by the poor more than the rich. None are taxes but all are disproportinate effect on the poor!
I’m sorry, but a sales tax is a flat tax. Whatever the purchase price is, everyone pays the same percentage of the total sale.
“Definitions matter and I’ll call out people at every step along the way who seek to pervert the meaning of certain words in the English language to further their ideology.”
Then I can enlist you in my campaign to stop calling the estate tax the “death tax”?
“Per Wikipedia regressive taxes are also described as “if the activity being taxed is more likely to be carried out by the poor and less likely to be carried out by the rich””
Again these are attributes. This is akin to you saying that 1) pit bulls have a much higher bite incidence relative to other dogs. 2) Pit bulls must be violent. Are all pit bulls violent?
Lets get back to official definitions when throwing around words, as definitions are important. Of course flat taxes disproportionately impact those who earn less compared to progressive taxation. But then again, JMM isn’t telling you that 47% of Americans pay no federal income taxes (and many, if not most of those, actually receive a net refund of cash from our federal government via the EIC). Societal engineering at its finest.
What’s regressive about our tax system is that many ultra rich pay only a 15% tax rate on their capital gains income while their secretaries pay a higher tax rate. So yes the top tax rate of 35% or whatever is on income, but the loophole is that if you earned $100,000,000 but it’s not income, it’s capital gains, then you’re taxed only at a 15% rate. So in effect, that’s a regressive tax for the rentier class while us schleps pay a higher rate.
We’re destroying the middle class, it’s disappearing before our very eyes, and we pissed it away on Capital one credit cards, teaser rate HELOCs and $500 a month car payments.
“He’s the soon to be governor elect of Illinois. ”
I wouldn’t be too sure of that: http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2010/10/04/new-poll-quinn-up-by-six/
Quinn is an incompetent boob and Brady is a religious whackjob.
Tough choice.
Quinn is not an incompetent boob. he panders to the unions and relies strongly on them for support. he doesn’t have what it takes to fix our messed up financial situation and he wants to keep everybody to get elected.
brady is not a religious whackjob. he’s a former homebuilder who made a ton of money downstate during the boom and is now like most homebuilders isn’t building much of anything. he has downstate values some of which are very different than chicago area values. However he’s a down stater and they have a hard time getting support up here.
On election day I predict a close race with Brady winning by a 4 to 5 point margin.
“#Madeline on October 5th, 2010 at 6:38 pm
“He’s the soon to be governor elect of Illinois. ”
I wouldn’t be too sure of that: http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2010/10/04/new-poll-quinn-up-by-six/
Quinn is an incompetent boob and Brady is a religious whackjob.
Tough choice.”
“Typical, slanted WSJ article.”
“dd, It was an opinion article, hence op-ed. How dumb are you? My suspicion is real dumb. Real, real dumb.
The WSJ doesn’t cater to people incapable of discerning the difference between op-eds and regular news. Sorry, move along.”
Bob, this is called zero logic, not op-ed, and yes, I agree the article is dumb, dumb opinion, but still slanted. The good news is that Bill Gates does have a dad who is intelligent and sees the big picture.
I apologize to everyone about starting this weird discusion about taxes – I shouldn’t have said anything!!
clio: ““they will be losing and they know it… – no need to rub it in.”
JMM: Along with everyone else who purchased anything in the last 7 years. So what is your point?
uhhh – relatively few people who bought in the last 7 years have lost money – remember, to lose money, you have to sell your place. many people are hanging tight – right now it is a paper loss which will be erased in the coming years. Also, I heavily invested in real estate in the last 7 years and haven’t lost a dime in real estate (yet).
“uhhh – relatively few people who bought in the last 7 years have lost money – remember, to lose money, you have to sell your place. many people are hanging tight – right now it is a paper loss which will be erased in the coming years. Also, I heavily invested in real estate in the last 7 years and haven’t lost a dime in real estate (yet).”
Clio- that is technically correct. But most Americans move every 5 to 7 years. That means just about everyone who bought during the boom years is stuck now. They cannot move (up, down or whatever.) The people I know who MUST move (for job reasons etc.) are short selling their homes.
CH,
I have clients in this building and have been on the roofdeck…I can see my seats!*
*I can’t see my actual seats, stands in the way. Although this place is closer walk to my seats than the bike check.
“Bob, this is called zero logic, not op-ed, and yes, I agree the article is dumb, dumb opinion, but still slanted. The good news is that Bill Gates does have a dad who is intelligent and sees the big picture.”
I’m going to trust Arthur Laffer’s “zero logic”, who is a well respected and renowned economist, over your dumbass every day. You smell of class envy. As someone who isn’t even well off myself I find your paradigm repugnant. Although probably not as repugnant as Bill Gates’ pops as from your posts that wreak of class envy I can tell you probably aren’t very well off.
“Madeline on October 5th, 2010 at 6:38 pm
“He’s the soon to be governor elect of Illinois. ”
I wouldn’t be too sure of that: http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2010/10/04/new-poll-quinn-up-by-six/”
Bwhahahahaha! Madeline what planet do you actually live on? I knew it was your own little world but I had no idea it was in another galaxy on the other side of the big bang.
Not saying any candidate is a shoe in but that amateur site you posted is proof positive you are a partisan off in her own little world. I’ve made better websites in 1995 than what you posted. Did you pay your $350 to Capitol Fax blog like a good little automaton Madeline?
Bob, I just googled for “Quinn Poll” and it was the first link that came up with the latest poll from Suffolk. Try it!
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Quinn+Poll
The website is irrelevant; the information about the poll is what’s interesting.
And I’m pretty sure the word you’re looking for in your response above is “reek”, not “wreak”.
Madeline if you care about poll accuracy I suggest you look at Rasmussen. It was the only polling organization to predict the results of the last presidential election to within .5% for each major candidate.
“Regressive tax: a tax imposed in such a manner that the tax rate decreases as the amount subject to taxation increases.”
Okay, then using your definition, the second largest tax imposed by the federal government is regressive. And it has a cliff.
Supposedly Cory got two offers on this property last week and it sold on Friday. I was looking at it as a rental (3K a month)…
Needless to say, got more for my money elsewhere.
There’s no indication this property is under contract.
Gotta agree with Bob here. Sales taxes are proportional taxes, not regressive taxes. And if leftists want to argue that proles spend a higher percentage of their income in sales taxes than the rich, I would argue that such result occurs in part because of the progressive income tax. Let’s say Bob makes $100k and pays $20k in income taxes and then spends his full remaining $80k on items subject to sales tax at 10%. He then effectively pays only 8% of his income in sales taxes ($8000). Let’s say Prole makes $25k and pays $0 in taxes, he spends the full $25k on items subject to sales tax so he pays $2500 in sales tax or 10% of his income. Bob is divested of his opportunity to consume the same percentage of his income as Prole by the progressive income tax.
Yes anon, Socialist Insecurity taxes are regressive at the point where the cap is hit. But the benefits are also capped and those of us who are young and are paying the max today will contribute far more than we will ever receive in benefits on an inflation adjusted basis. The payouts are also capped – should Jamie Dimon get back $1 million a year from Uncle Sugar when he hits retirement age?
Payroll aka FICA tax is extremely regressive. 6.2% (plus employer pays another 6.2%) on income. But only up to $107,000, then rate is 0%. I understand that benefits are capped, but that doesn’t refute the fact that FICA taxes are regressive.
75% of americans pay more in FICA taxes than they pay in income taxes.
“Yes anon, Socialist Insecurity taxes are regressive at the point where the cap is hit. But the benefits are also capped and those of us who are young and are paying the max today will contribute far more than we will ever receive in benefits on an inflation adjusted basis. ”
It’s a general fund tax, as that’s how it’s been used for 20 years. No argument about the “lock box” in the form of T-bills will dissuade me on that point.
Bob was trying to argue that regressive (as defined by him) taxes are rare–I was pointing out that the 2d largest single tax in the USA is a regressive tax, so not really so rare.
“Madeline if you care about poll accuracy I suggest you look at Rasmussen. ”
Bob, until this morning Rasmussen hadn’t released a poll for IL governor since early September.
Speaking of accuracy…it’s Addison not Addision.
A 6 person hot-tub! That sure is ambitious. I’d feel pretty bad if I purchased this unit, but was unable to fill the hot-tub with 6 hot-bodies.
what about 2 fat bodies?
OMG. I agree with all of Bob’s points. Is it a full moon?
“OMG. I agree with all of Bob’s points. Is it a full moon?”
No anybody with real intelligence would see JMM is quoting his perceived definitions out of an econ textbook on his shelf that is really nothing more than attributes of progressive taxation. He’s not smart enough to discern the difference which is sad considering he manages other people’s money.
Fine they got me on SS tax being regressive. But it really sounds much more like a hybrid between a flat tax and regressive to me. I’d be all for removing the cap on it in any case as I am against regressive AND progressive taxation–both are our government sanctioning value judgments on behavior.
The most intelligent comment on this page was made by clio, “before (any) game, everyone knows the rules – there are going to be winners and losers. If someone loses, the winners should never gloat or be happy. Just be silently content that you aren’t in the loser’s situation.”
I would only remind people that the rules were changed in the middle of THIS game. Real Estate may have deflated harmlessly in a normal supply and demand marketplace, but THIS market was poisoned to death by 17 rate hikes that were implemented just before the 3-year ARM’s were about to reset in 2006 (the artificial interest rate lows occured in 2003). At the exact same time, enormous property tax bills started arriving, reflecting previous year’s assessment increases). Then tighter credit standards were put into place, and your ability to sell had just became as impossible as your ability to pay. There no way to avoid it.
If I didn’t know what a “credit default swap” is, I might believe this was all a big coincidence. Unfortunately, it’s all too obvious that this was Wall Street’s most spectacular pump-and-dump of all time. Real Estate was not only destroyed as a competitor, it’s destruction now produces phenomenal returns as people default on their mortgages. It’s the perfect man-made storm. Wall Street builders built most of the 20 million homes that diluted the market (and now sit vacant), they created the dubious financial products necessary to sell them, and they told the FED to light the match and run. It worked like a charm, and the politicians who signed the Commodity-Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which made it all legal, still don’t have a clue.
“Wall Street builders built most of the 20 million homes that diluted the market (and now sit vacant.)”
No one made anyone buy a house. You can’t blame it on Wall Street. Plenty of renters on this site who have been sitting on the sidelines all this time.
This is a high-quality luxury condo with more bells & whistles than many of its competitors. The location is very appealing to many different types of buyers. This sold for $530k, which is only $22k below its 2007 value, which in my opinion isn’t bad given the current real estate market and economic climate. I’m sure the new buyer will thoroughly enjoy this unit.
Sold….$530k…Bump