Yet Another Lakeview Mansion Short Sale: 854 W. Oakdale
The number of short sales on million dollar homes in Lakeview seems to be mounting as this 5-bedroom rehab of a vintage greystone at 854 W. Oakdale is the latest to join the list.
The house was first listed in June 2008 and has been reduced $250,099.
The listing says “timeless elegance” and says the house has two master suites.
Chaz Walters at Sudler Sotheby’s has the listing. See the pictures here.
854 W. Oakdale: 5 bedrooms, 6.5 baths, 6200 square feet, 2 car garage
- Sold in May 2005 for $950,000
- Listed in June 2008 for $1,999,999
- Reduced several times
- Is currently listed at $1,749,900
- Taxes of $12,682
- OR you can rent it for $14,000 a month
1M profit in only 3 years? I’m a bit surprised that their realtor is a sudler guy. I always thought Sudler agents only handled high end properties; not regular properties with a high end price tag. They’ll be lucky to break even on this place.
Buy this one in foreclosure for $850K.
Sudler used to be a higher end brokerage but not since it bought a local ReMax office a few years ago. It has been sinking ever since and even though it has closed several offices over the past 18 months it couldn’t help but buy the even more rickety C21 Sussex & Reilly last week. Oh how 2 of the mighty have fallen…
Brutal!
Yeah those nonexistant SS appliances are gorgeous….
Actually, Sudler, Coldwell, ERA, and Century 21 are all owned by Realogy which is a private equity deal. Their debt is trading for $.30 on the dollar.
The only thing that screams mansion about this place is the price tag.
That is one of the ugliest, most boring & vanilla places I have ever seen. $1.7 million? Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaha! Good one!
not bad. but way pricey. is chaz still such a hot property that he demands a million dollar premium?
Don’t forget that the current owner of this house did a gut rehab job on the property (new kitchen, baths etc.) So there really isn’t a million dollar “premium” over the old purchase price.
Look at the pictures to see what I mean.
How could this possibly be a short sale? $1M in HELOC?
“Short sale” is the latest realtor gimmick apparently. They think even if its not a true short sale that by stating it is a “short sale” potential buyers will be lured in at the thought of getting a deal.
750k would be a short sale price for this, not 1.75. LMAO @ 1.75 ask.
Bob,
Can you point to a specific property where this is the case? I’d be really surprised as this ruse would be unveiled pretty quickly. More importantly, short sale can be the kiss of death as some brokerages and agents avoid them like the plague.
Gary,
I can’t, that was just speculation on my behalf. I don’t know how this owner could have -800k equity on a supposed 1.75MM property after only 3.5 years. Even with an option-ARM it seems infeasible that they could be that underwater.
There was a $1.615M mortgage at time of purchase which was presumably used for purch and rehab. There was a 12/05 mortgage recorded for $3.068M, a $922K mort in 9/08 and numerous “modifications.”
Hard to tell what is owed on it currently, but there is nothing to indicate that this isn’t a short sale.
speaking of Realogy and the debt trading poorly, what’s their method of turning that around their business? reducing agent splits in the name of so called marketing fees. Because the way to keep agents when they are making less money is to have them make even less money… they are bleeding agents. 6 months to doom for realogy and a lot of its brokerages if this is their strategy. oh yeah im a bitter agent who leaving one of these shit firms đ
Correction. Just read a two week old article that pointed out that Realogy debt is trading at $.14 on the dollar. That’s a pretty high probability of default. In my opinion most of the brokerages are irrelevant any way – just a commodity. The agents will just go elsewhere. They always do. They just change their name tags.
If their debt is trading at 14c on the dollar they have a lot less time left than six months! That means that they are going BK soon and after the lawyers handle the BK and get paid there will be little left for recovery for creditors. I’ve never seen debt trade that low before.
G-
If the mortgage was $1.615M, the current list price seems like it would be just right to cover fees and not be a short sale. As far as the $3M mortgage, what could that possibly be? Are you saying they refinaced at 3x of the purchase price, 7 months later?
“Correction. Just read a two week old article that pointed out that Realogy debt is trading at $.14 on the dollar. Thatâs a pretty high probability of default. In my opinion most of the brokerages are irrelevant any way – just a commodity. The agents will just go elsewhere. They always do. They just change their name tags.”
Well there’s two reasons that debt is selling so cheap right now.
1) mark to market accounting – so the value is determined by market value, but since EVERYONE is having to sell to raise capital, the values are insanely deflated.
2) Since everyone is selling due to lack of capital and credit, there are no buyers out there, well, except ol’ Uncle Sam.
I really think that the government needs to suspend mark to market accounting for a short period of time, 3 months or so. This would greatly help all the banks that are crapping their pants because it would give them time to make money and since everything wouldn’t be on sale all at the same time, values would be closer to the real value of the asset and you wouldn’t see shit selling at .14 on the dollar, and closer to the real value. That and if they did this, the freakin dow would probably go up 1500 points in a day.
Funny if 2 sides meet at .$14 that sounds like value to me.
Liquidity is a risk and you put it on the same way as everyone else be prepared to bend over and take it sans Vaseline. Suspending mark to market and pretending shit is worth what you want it to be is fucking retarded. Pushing everything onto an exchange and forcing transparency is what is needed. Up 1,500 points my ass. Just another reason for people to avoid the market even longer. No transparency = No trust.
But hey.. it’s Carnival!!! Enjoy life!!!
Now a legitimate question that I was pondering today…
If market tops coincide with Thrill and Euphoria… and Market bottoms coincide with Despondency and Depression. Then how does one know when Depression has occurred when half a country is on Prozac at the Euphoria time???
Bob.. thought you might like this… http://1-2knockout.typepad.com/.a/6a00e5505fc4968834011278de8dec28a4-popup
Now I must go fill my XBox quota for the day….
Agreed. Until all the “off balance sheet” gaming is put out in the open and marked to market, which will make clear which institutions are insolvent, nobody will trust the system enough to invest. The CNBC show televised this weekend, “House of Cards”, barely touched on the subject of Credit Default Swaps, other than the hedge fund manager in Texas who made billions investing in them. There was no discussion of who was on the other side of those bets, or who ultimately will be covering them. I’m hoping tonight’s Frontline “Inside The Meltdown” does a better job of explaining how leverage made the whole subprime meltdown into the nightmare we are dealing with. The taxpayers need to know.
Ze: “No transparency = No trust.”
“Iâm hoping tonightâs Frontline âInside The Meltdownâ does a better job of explaining how leverage made the whole subprime meltdown into the nightmare we are dealing with.”
Make it simple… Leverage up a bet 40:1 and if you lose more than 2.5% well then your capital is gone. Lose 20% and deep deep problem… As simple as that Jules…
p.s. avoid CNBC…
Ze, juliana:
Valid criticisms, but at this point I’m not sure thats for the best outcome overall. What if a substantial majority of our top banking institutions come back insolvent? WTF do we do then?
I am all for draconian penalties, so I could envision a scenario where the bankers are gathered up in a room like JP Morgan himself did back in the early 20th century and decide their fate then and there–who lives and who dies.
However what if theres too many insolvent institutions for the guillotines to keep up with? Also we don’t want to wind up with one megabank and nobody else left near them to compete.
If thats the nightmare scenario we’re dealing with I say let only _some_ of them fail, but save even some of the insolvent ones and keep them relatively intact. Also among the insolvent who lives and who dies should be completely arbitrary, without regard for any sort of ‘fairness’. As if they are insolvent they shouldn’t be allowed to play the fairness card as they already effed up. The insolvent ones we choose to let survive can count their lucky stripes.
This is the only way to keep the system relatively intact and still keep moral hazard at bay. IMO. Plus think of the awesome b-school case studies that could be generated for future generations. It would teach the future MBAs of the world that luck is as important as skill and hard work in life. Because it is!
One of the problems with nationalization is that it is the kiss of death. Consumers take their business elsewhere; that’s been shown with AIG, car companies, etc. I have a friend at AIG and one at AOn. The friend at AIG says it is dead, no new contracts are coming in while the AON friend says she gets calls regularly about customers moving from AIG to other companies. nationalize the larger banks and people will move to smaller banks. The large banks can fail and will fail and the solvent will pick up the slack.
Let the insolvent banks fail; let the smaller solvent banks return. Set guidelines for lending standards; regulate securitization.
OK no posting for an hour: inside the meltdown on Channel 11
I hope it’s good
What if a substantial majority of our top banking institutions come back insolvent? WTF do we do then?
Bob.. not sure what you are trying to say in that discourse.. but they “are” insolvent and pretending they are not doesn’t change shit.
“Let the insolvent banks fail; let the smaller solvent banks return.” Exactly!!
Okay fine they are insolvent. But they haven’t admitted it yet and likely won’t. It might not be in our government’s or country’s interest to have them all admit it either. There are still some people left who might be willing to contribute to any sort of bailout plan. And if over a few years they can dig themselves to solvency then it might be for the best to ignore the man behind the curtain.
The emperor’s clothes look nice, I say!
Looks like even Greenspan is pushing for nationalization of banks. I’m not sure I like the idea of the Treasury providing a backstop for all the off balance sheet toxic assets. I hate to think of zombie banks sucking up US taxpayer funded capital and doing little good for our economy. Mish thinks we should let them go bankrupt.
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/02/nationalization-train-has-left-station.html
I havent been yelling at the talking heads on there as much lately. Maybe thats because I leave the sound off most of the time. I always like to hear what Rick Santelli has to say and usually watch Fast Money because Dylan Ratigan is such a cutie.
Ze: “p.s. avoid CNBC⌔
“we should let them go bankrupt.”
I couldn’t agree more. You NEVER use public funds to support a private company without wiping out the stock and bondholders first. Bondholders are still receiving their coupons with public funds when they should have been wiped out. And that money to AIG if people understood really why they got it should be criminal!
“If market tops coincide with Thrill and Euphoria⌠and Market bottoms coincide with Despondency and Depression. Then how does one know when Depression has occurred when half a country is on Prozac at the Euphoria time???”
Sounds like you’ve been spending too much time mulling over a retarded Fidelity wholesaler brochure. đ I hope you got a free lunch from that knob like I did!
One more post for this thread.
Rick Santelli, the CNBC guy I mentioned above, reporting from his ususal spot on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, is calling for a Chicago Tea Party in July, planning on dumping in some derivative securities into Lake Michigan, to protest the stimulus/bailout.
Here’s the link to the CNBC clip of Santelli calling for the Chicago Tea Party:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1039849853
Santelli also made an oblique reference to the widespread practice of “teabagging” on the CBOT floor.
I’ll be there just name the time and place Rick!