Issue 100 – The Evolving Cycle of Sales

Just like the seasons change, so do sales cycles. This year, we are seeing a vast diversion from the standard norm in certain areas.

In the past, there were usually very distinct cycles for sales. One could expect a natural slowdown during the summer (from Memorial Day — or at least the end of June — to Labor Day) because that is when folks tend to travel, focus on family, and generally relax and unwind.

After Labor Day and the start of the school season, people would resume their searches and get serious about buying and selling property again. We would see an uptick and frenzy of activity, with listing inventory increasing and serious buyers seeking to snatch up a property, whether to live in themselves or for investment purposes.

Then, once the winter holiday season commenced with Thanksgiving, Hanukkah, Christmas, and New Year’s celebrations, the sales cycle would likely dip again, only to become frenzied once more right after the new year.

As during summer, this end-of-year holiday period was traditionally a time for family, travel, social activity, or just plain relaxation, with many putting off buying and selling property for those few weeks.

The post-holiday return to work was when many people learned what their bonuses would — or would not — be. This was also when they might receive a portion of the vested stock, which would determine what they would look to buy and invest in. 

Lately, however, we can throw those scenarios right out the window. There no longer seems to be any standard sales cycle at all; lines have blurred. We are seeing far busier summers in terms of buying and selling, and even during the winter holidays, deals are being pushed through. Still, it is nuanced and specific to different price and size segments.

This is neither good nor bad, but those in the sales market need to be aware that what may have been the norm years ago has now changed. We can no longer expect a complete flatline from Memorial Day to Labor Day. These once-slower turndown times are now times of opportunity.

While it is possible to time sales in the summer “off season” to capture buyers who are looking to snatch up “bargains” by racing in while others are away at play, I am instead telling many sellers to take their listings off the market and bring them back on right after summer — depending of course on their location, price segment, and market type. My rationale is that certain types of buyers will not be in the city during these hot summer months. For that market segment, fall will be far more robust.

Sometimes you can even time sales so that summer is surprisingly positive, but given the continuing high mortgage interest rates, that scenario isn’t playing out for the most part this season. Sure, there are some buyers — anomalies — who need to find a place quickly and prefer to buy instead of rent, especially since they might be able to negotiate a good price based on the seller’s anxiety about the market.

My overall takeaway is that there is no one-size-fits-all way to buy and sell right now. Some sellers may initially feel they want to push on during summer, not wanting to miss a prime opportunity to get eager buyers to their doors, while others will sit out from looking during the summer or winter holiday seasons.

Real Estate timing seems to becoming a customized approach — one that can yield well if time correctly.

Issue 125 – The $5 Million Question: What’s Actually Worth Owning in New York Right Now?

The New York real estate market is entering a period where the old rules of valuation are becoming less reliable. Price per square foot and comparable sales still matter, but buyers are weighing those factors differently — rewarding some attributes while quietly discounting others. The question is no longer simply, “What did the apartment downstairs sell for?” It’s “What are buyers willing to pay a premium for now — and what have they stopped paying for?”

I could identify at least seven factors being repriced in Manhattan right now: outdoor space, views/greenery, turnkey condition, monthly carrying costs, new development versus resale, second-home ownership, and the increasingly important distinction between a great apartment and a great building.

Confusing matters for buyers is that the NYC market is sending contradictory signals. Manhattan inventory is changing by price band, mortgage rates remain challenging nationally, and NYC’s new pied-à-terre tax is creating another potential dividing line in how buyers assess ownership costs.  

In the luxury zone, one way to test those shifting valuations is what I call “The $5-Million-Question.”

I can take $5 million and show clients what that buys today in six completely different versions of New York: Think:

  • $5M on Central Park West
  • $5M downtown
  • $5M in Brooklyn
  • $5M in a new development
  • $5M in a great prewar co-op
  • $5M for something compromised but spectacular

Same amount of money. Same city. Radically different value.

The questions to ponder are:

  • Which one would I buy?
  • Which one would I avoid?
  • Which one has the greatest upside?
  • And which one will be easiest to sell five years from now?

That comparison is more revealing than a market-wide statistic because it shows what the same $5 million actually buys — and what it might be worth to the next buyer.

On the surface, the questions are simple. In practice, answering them requires a sophisticated analysis — price per square foot, carrying costs, taxes, liquidity, buyer pool, neighborhood trajectory, architectural quality, and exit strategy. Buyers should seek out an expert broker not only for information but also for interpretation.

For a long time, value was assessed through familiar metrics: price per square foot, comparable sales, neighborhood, floor, light, views, condition, and building pedigree. Those factors still matter. But buyers are now weighing them differently. We are in a repricing phase — not necessarily of New York City as a whole, but of the individual components that define its value.

At Central Park West, $5 million typically trades square footage for permanence: park frontage, architectural significance, scarcity, and long-term stability.

Downtown, the same budget may secure a more contemporary product — larger windows, amenities, and outdoor space — but often at a higher price per square foot and with higher ongoing costs.

In a new development, $5 million buys condition, services, and immediacy. The question is how much of that price reflects a “new development premium,” and whether the resale market will recognize it when the time comes to exit.

In Brooklyn, the same capital can deliver scale, outdoor space, and architectural character that would be significantly more expensive in Manhattan.

None of these is inherently superior. The real questions are: What are you actually buying, and who will want it next? That second part is often underweighted: Which market is offering more rewards?

Based on buyer behavior, several attributes are becoming more defensible:

Light and views are not replicable. While layouts can be changed, exposure and outlook cannot be transformed.

Functional outdoor space is valuable. Usable terraces connected to living areas are materially more valuable than secondary or awkwardly accessed outdoor areas.

Strong floor plans are key. The pandemic reinforced that usability matters as much as size. Proportion, flow, and flexibility are now critical.

Condition has always mattered — now more than ever. High construction costs and uncertainty have increased demand for finished product. However, there is a ceiling — buyers will not indefinitely overpay for someone else’s design choices.

Low carrying friction is persuasive. Taxes, common charges, assessments, and long-term building health are now central to valuation. High monthly costs can materially impact resale liquidity.

Scarcity can be the tipping point. A strong apartment does not need to be perfect. It needs to be difficult to replicate.

So, where would I be most cautious today?

I would be disciplined about paying a premium purely for newness. New does not hold value on its own — architecture, location, and scarcity do. I would closely evaluate buildings where carrying costs are disconnected from underlying asset value. I would avoid trophy pricing unless there is a true trophy attribute. And I would be careful about pricing that is anchored primarily to renovation cost.

A $2 million renovation does not translate into a $2 million increase in value.

The market does not reimburse cost. It prices outcome.

If I were allocating funds at this level, the guiding principles should be: light over finishes, proportion over decoration, irreplaceable views over amenity packages, and ultimately, best-in-class units in proven buildings over average units in trending ones.

The strongest purchases do two things at once: they function as exceptional homes today and remain desirable assets tomorrow. That means thinking about the exit before the entry — and recognizing that New York isn’t one market, but a collection of micro-markets defined by neighborhood, block, building, floor, and orientation.

While real estate is inherently emotional, value is what remains when emotion fades.

Whether the budget is $1 million, $5 million, or $25 million, the question is ultimately the same: What is actually worth owning?

That is the question the next phase of the market will answer — and it will reward analysis over generalization.

Recent Reports

SUBSCRIBE TO THE KATZEN REPORT

UP-TO-THE-MINUTE PULSE ON REAL ESTATE