You could have all the ambassadors over in a place like this.

Robert Pelletreau adapted to life in Bahrain, Tunisia and Egypt during his long career as an ambassador and diplomat, but apparently the one place he never adjusted to was Lenox Hill.

Mr. Pelletreau and wife Pamela, who is also deeply involved in Middle Eastern affairs (so was a Middle Eastern co-director of Search for Common Ground), have sold their three-bedroom, three-bath co-op at 401 East 65th Street. The Pelletreaus bought the 16th-floor apartment for $1.5 million in 2007, , according to city records. They must have been eager to sell as they listed the apartment for just $1.3 million this March—a decision that seems out of character a man who built a career on making carefully-considered moves.

Buyers Mitchell Price and Christine Perney were so happy to scoop up the co-op that they didn't even quibble on the price. But Brown Harris Stevens broker Elaine Clayman wasn't taking any chances with this one. "The extras become indispensable!!" she screeched in the listing. "You will love the electrifying city lights and the Chrysler Building lit up at night. There is no substitute for perfect. This fine home is in a class by itself. Just wait until you glimpse at the glorious views capturing the river and the 59th street bridge. Isn't it time you did not settle? Just cross the threshold and you will be struck by an extraordinary home - your new home." It goes on from there.

Alas, the apartment wasn't exquisite or perfect enough to keep the Pelletreaus. But then, the couple is solidly invested in the D.C. life. While Mr. Pelletreau is no longer smoothing over delicate relations in the Middle East, he still sits on the U.S. Advisory Council of Israel Policy Forum and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

No doubt the co-op board will be loathe to see these skilled negotiators go.

kvelsey@observer.com

Don't take this away from us. (kletch, flickr)

Are nosy New Yorkers in danger of losing one of their favorite weekend pastimes? The New York Times sent a reporter to investigate whether open houses—a staple of so many Sunday afternoons—are soon-to-be scuttled relics of the pre-internet age. You know, when people began their days by reading actual newspapers.

Brokers, at least, would be happy to abandon the ritual—a practice that is as detested by real estate community as it is beloved by the common man. After all, in a city where so few of us can afford to buy, open houses are downright therapeutic, an opportunity to fantasize about a future that doesn't involve endless rent hikes and increasingly diminutive apartments.

“It’s a form of entertainment,” Michele Kleier, the president of Gumley Haft Kleier told The Times. “It’s cheaper than Broadway.”

Elaine Clayman, a managing director of Brown Harris Stevens, said that brokers who want to attract serious buyers hold open houses on weeknights, a time generally considered so miserable that only the truly driven will turn up: “On the weekends they may come because they saw a movie in the neighborhood. It’s a Sunday sport.”

After all, brokers note, those actually in the market to buy can better spend their time scouting possibilities online via video/photo tours. Or their broker can. They can set up appointments. They don't need to schlep around the borough pushing a baby carriage.

But what about the rest of us? The ones who just want to see how other New Yorkers live? Who want to connect with our fellow man by checking out what he keeps in his closets and judging him based on his wall art?

Things may look bad, but not all hope is lost. Because guess what? Sellers want to have us in their homes, snooping in their closets, judging their taste in books and decor. The Times reports that the continued existence of such events is basically all the sellers' fault—who misguidedly believe that an open house is a great way to find a buyer—and pester their brokers to spend their Sundays tying balloons to front doors and herding guests through their house.

They even leave all kinds of nice things for their visitors, The Times tells us: candles, fake flowers, never-read books and an apparently ubiquitous black and white photo of a solitary tree propped (never hung) against a wall. Do they really believe open houses will work? Or are they making an offering to their fellow New Yorkers, feeling a kinship in their desire for a bigger, better place to live? Are they cognizant of the despair that would grip the city if New Yorkers were reduced to spending sunny Sunday afternoons in their apartments, huddled over virtual tours of bright two-bedrooms with hardwood floors that they know they'll never set foot in?

kvelsey@observer.com