Bank Owned 2/2 in Old Town Finally Sells: 222 W. Division

We last chattered about this 2-bedroom in the Venetian at 222 W. Division in Old Town in August 2011.

222-w-division.jpg

See our prior chatter here.

On the market since May 2011, it had been reduced to where it was listed at 40% off the 2004 purchase price at $249,900.

The unit recently sold for $242,000.

If you recall, from the listing pictures, it appeared the kitchen was intact and had stainless steel appliances and granite counter tops.

It also appeared as though there is only a partial wall height on at least one of the bedrooms (or maybe both of them).

Built in 2004, the unit had central air, in-unit washer/dryer and deeded parking.

Some of you chattered in August about renting this out as an investment.

Did someone get a good deal?

Coya Smith at Smith Partners Associates had the listing. You can still see the pictures here.

Unit #1403: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, no square footage listed (#1303 is listed as 1300 square feet however)

  • Sold in May 2004 for $413,000 (included parking)
  • Lis pendens filed in February 2010
  • Bank owned in January 2011
  • Originally listed in May 2011 for $314,400 (parking included)
  • Reduced several times
  • Was listed in August 2011 for $249,900 (parking included)
  • Sold in September 2011 for $242,000
  • Assessments of $464 a month (includes heat, doorman)
  • Taxes of $4490
  • Central Air
  • In-unit washer/dryer
  • Fannie Mae Homepath property
  • Bedroom #1: 14×12
  • Bedroom #2: 11×11

18 Responses to “Bank Owned 2/2 in Old Town Finally Sells: 222 W. Division”

  1. Yep, that’s a good deal.

    I didn’t look at the prior chatter but from the current pics, does one of the bedrooms have a partial height wall?

    0
    0
  2. Does anyone have info about Atrium Village? It’s right across the street from this. Supposedly, the owners want to sell or work with a developer to tear the place down and build highrise buildings on the property. 30-40+ stories.

    0
    0
  3. This is a good deal.

    0
    0
  4. Attrium Village is rental and I thought in the past there were a lot of low income housing units in the building (there still might be). I have heard horror stories about the building’s management and people’s cars getting robbed in the parking lot

    0
    0
  5. Very good deal for 2-2 in newer building in prime neighborhood, especially downtown, even if it has a windowless bedroom and all the charm and grace of the typical B-class office building.

    0
    0
  6. HOW MUCH DID EVERYONE LOSE IN THE STOCK MARKET TODAY? I BET IT WAS A LOT MORE THAN ANYONE LOST IN REAL ESTATE IN THE PAST YEAR!!!!

    0
    0
  7. “Does anyone have info about Atrium Village?”

    Here:

    http://www.archpaper.com/news/articles.asp?id=5634

    0
    0
  8. Neither bedroom having a full wall bedroom with windows = a rental quality unit. This only made sense for landlords and investors.

    0
    0
  9. clio: “HOW MUCH DID EVERYONE LOSE IN THE STOCK MARKET TODAY? I BET IT WAS A LOT MORE THAN ANYONE LOST IN REAL ESTATE IN THE PAST YEAR!!!!”

    Yes, they are completely the same. :rolleyes:

    Listen, looking at a RE property and a stock as an investment vehicle shows they are completely different.

    First, unless you are an “advanced” investor your portfolio is highly unlikely to be leveraged (whereas most buyers of RE are highly leveraged due to their mortgage). In stocks, you can lose your investment, but you will never owe money, which as we’ve seen here time and again can happen with RE.

    Second, financial markets fluctuate much faster than RE markets, giving RE a pretense of stability. I guess this is a checkmark in the “pro” column of the comparison for RE. But…

    Third, liquidity is *much* different in the two markets. Want to get rid of that stock that has tanked over the last two days? Go to etrade, click a button and you’ll almost certainly be out of your investment (barring a rare set of circumstances). In RE? Good luck selling that property. You might get lucky, or you could end up watching the days tick up on Redfin for the next two years.

    IMO, the liquidity and leverage issues should make anyone considering a purchase think twice. These are not minor points.

    Also: quit yelling, man. You are annoying enough as it is.

    0
    0
  10. seriously sabrina can you ban this spammer clio, he posted the same thing in like 4 different threads

    0
    0
  11. sonies,

    it is an important point to make – people don’t know where to park their money (and there is a lot of cash out there). What makes better sense:

    – investing in the stock market and risk losing a HUGE percentage of that investment (on a DAILY) basis?

    – keeping it in a savings/checking account (remaining stagnant)?

    – buying real estate (something that is a long term investment and, more importantly, something you can enjoy and utilize)?

    It really is a no-brainer for anyone in the market or interested in buying right now. Real estate is probably the BEST and most secure investment out there.

    0
    0
  12. “In stocks, you can lose your investment, but you will never owe money, which as we’ve seen here time and again can happen with RE.”

    1.) You can if you are leveraged. Highly unlikely, but possible. But oveall I agree, your point is valid. I’m just being picky.

    2.) Real estate is an asset class, similar to equities. A smart investor is diversified.

    3.) This stretch of Division is less desirable. Although overall, it’s nice. Will this new Atrium Village proposal do things to make this part of Division even more desirable?

    0
    0
  13. clio: “It really is a no-brainer for anyone in the market or interested in buying right now. Real estate is probably the BEST and most secure investment out there.”

    This is mind-bogglingly, completely and utterly untrue. It is a pitch from an obvious insider that should not be trusted. You don’t even give an inch of evidence to support your absurd sales pitch.

    There is much more volatility in the financial markets but volatility isn’t the whole story. Just speaking in terms of price movement of the asset in question, short term volatility can be meaningless for an investor when compared to a long term trend. Volatility in RE is much lower, but that doesn’t mean it has a favorable trend for your investment period.

    You don’t know what you are talking about.

    0
    0
  14. Looking to buy: “2.) Real estate is an asset class, similar to equities. A smart investor is diversified. ”

    Very true.

    Now ask yourself: if a person buys a 400k home with 80k down, how much money do they have left over to diversify their portfolio. For most people, I’d guess they wouldn’t have much at all left over.

    But go ahead people of America, follow clio’s advice! Put all of your eggs in one basket! Real estate is the *perfect* investment for all situations, incomes and occasions. Be like clio and never lose a dime! Buy, buy, buy!

    0
    0
  15. “It really is a no-brainer for anyone in the market or interested in buying right now. Real estate is probably the BEST and most secure investment out there”

    This statement is a fail.

    0
    0
  16. Now ask yourself: if a person buys a 400k home with 80k down, how much money do they have left over to diversify their portfolio. For most people, I’d guess they wouldn’t have much at all left over.”

    Maybe that person should think twice about buying a 400k home then.

    There’s something about living below your means that is so unappealing…..

    0
    0
  17. Looking to buy: “Maybe that person should think twice about buying a 400k home then. There’s something about living below your means that is so unappealing…..”

    100% agree. But ask clio what he/she/they would do. 🙂

    0
    0
  18. i’m not even going to bother arguing with the obvious troll/spammer

    0
    0

Leave a Reply