They Sold 700 35th Again

MBC's been around a while, which is how we end up talking about multiple trades on the same properties.

Today's subject is 700 35th (5br/4ba, 3675 sq. ft.), which just sold off-market for $2.190m.

We've raved about this house in the past, even while questioning its public list price. (See "Pricing Poll: 700 35th." Remember, it was late 2008; a lot of people were getting it wrong.)

Besides being a very nice execution of a Cape Cod-ish home (2003 build), it's got a 5400 sq. ft. corner lot along Flournoy, meaning a substantially bigger (south facing) back yard than you'd often find in the Trees, with no neighbor to the west to block your afternoon sun. A part of that 2008 rave:

One of our favorite aspects of 700 35th is the very sense of trees from each room. Whether by design or happy coincidence, in each room you have the sense of being surrounded by woods, not just neighbors. If we may overstate it, the feeling is more of a woodsy cabin than [of being] just one of many homes along a row of similar homes on a semi-urban street.

So, in sum: Delightful, big house on a "big" lot in the northern part of the Trees.

The backstory is one partly involving some significant failures to gauge the changing market post-bubble (2008-09).

Here's a price history:

• Spring 2000: Older home acquired for $582k; custom build completed in 2003.

• June 2006: Sold for $2.482m

• June 2008: Offered for sale at $2.697m (+$215k/+8%); later cut to $2.649m before quitting

• March 2009: Back on market at $2.349m

• Aug. 2009: Sold for $2.250m (-$232k/-9% from acquisition, over 3+ years)

• June 2012: Sold for $2.190m

Did you notice that this new resale was for a little markdown off the 2009 price?

Down from 2009?

You might fill some of that gap between 2009-2012 with reduced commissions. Remember, the market price for a publicly sold property will usually reflect about 5% in sales commissions. If an off-market sale is arranged with lower commissions for a dual agent (same agent representing both buyer and seller), the reported price is probably less than you would have seen in a public sale.

Put it this way: The net to the seller on a public sale at $2.250m, with 5% total commissions, would be $2.137m. Meantime, the net to seller of a sale at $2.190m (this deal price), with 2.5% total commissions, would be $2.135m. Same net, if not the same "price."

Of course we don't know any arrangement between the sellers and the agent, but it'd be sporting to charge less than full fare when representing both parties.

Long story short: We'll look at this one as flat to 2009, rather than down, but still a pretty nice deal for 2012. And on a house that would have had a lot of market appeal this year had it gone public.