« Atlantic Yards Case Starts in State Appeals Court Today The Co-Op School Finds a Home in Clinton Hill »
February 23, 2009
NYC Real Estate Market 'Most Challenged'
"When we look at New York City, we look at a price-income ratio that historically has been four times income, versus three times nationwide... If you want simply to get back to the median, it would be a 46% correction...If I had to pick one market in the country with the most challenge and the most substantive rate of decline [ahead], it's New York City. It has the greatest number of job losses among the higher earners." — Ivy Zelman, a former Credit Suisse analyst, in Barron's via Curbed.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/8537
Comments
Leslie Norton is a good friend of mine. If you trash her I'm gonna tell. :)
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 9:51 AM
Great news! Maybe now we can get some of that stimulas money to cover my mortgage that seems all the rage these days.
Posted by: newsouthsloper at February 23, 2009 10:00 AM
Hiya Retards! Looks like the Zombie Banks are about to take a Dirt Nap!
Obama Bank Nationalization Is Focus of Speculation (Update3)
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=an.TP4kSHkuo&refer=home
Feb. 23 (Bloomberg) -- The Obama administration, which says it doesn’t want to nationalize U.S. banks, may find itself taking another step in that direction if it converts the government’s preferred shares in Citigroup Inc. into common equity to help the firm withstand losses.
Citibank, Bank of America and Wells Fargo are Zero's!!!!!! I wonder something? Do the retards still believe that housing prices will hold up in Brownstone Brooklyn???????
"Bank shares plummeted last week, with Citigroup sinking to an 18-year low of $1.95. Bank of America fell to $3.79, the lowest price since 1984. Both firms gained more than 10 percent today at 9:34 a.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading."
I remembered a year ago I told you that these Banks were Insolvent and some Asshead told me to "Stop spreading rumors". Well what about now?????
Buh bye retards! Nice knowing ya!
The What (BAC and C flavored skittles)
Someday this war is gonna end..
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 10:08 AM
I like this 4X of income figure... and the fact that it's higher than the national average for NYC makes sense. Now, someone who earns $70,000 should buy a home for $280,000... Right?
But as this post suggests, this basically isn't possible. (Show me all of those listings for $300k -- and doesn't require $800-1000 a month in maintenance and so on)
Now, I'm the first person to acknowledge not everyone should be able to own... that's fine. But if $300k properties barely exist... or rather, were $300k five years ago and now are $700k.
Mister $70k soon won't be able to find rent that glorious figure of $1750... that's the 40x monthly rent that folks like to use.
Posted by: tybur6 at February 23, 2009 10:10 AM
Hey WHAT....BAC +15% today, C +12%, WFC +17%. That was last Friday's story.
Get you skittle colors correct.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 10:14 AM
"Hey WHAT....BAC +15% today, C +12%, WFC +17%. That was last Friday's story."
I knew the seals would bark at the pop but these institutions are Zero's Asshead! Why would you buy stocks when the Government is going to wipe you out?????
The What
Someday this war is gonna end..
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 10:18 AM
did anyone watch Frontline on PBS last night? It was about the Bear Stearns/ Leahmans melt down.
The root of the whole problem "toxic assets"
How there was no regulation is insanity.
The money NEVER actually existed in these mortgages/insane prices...it was all paperwork and speculation on the continued rise of the market.A huge gamble that never came off.
Posted by: binnyG at February 23, 2009 10:19 AM
You may be correct on that but you have no idea what's going on in the market on a day-to-day basis so you shouldn't really be commenting on it.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 10:21 AM
I really think we'd be better off just having inflation catch everything else up to housing prices, painful as that would be.
Of course, I have no idea what I am talking about...
Posted by: Heather at February 23, 2009 10:22 AM
well according to popular sentiment it seems that "mister 70k" doesnt belong in the city and should move to newark or paterson where he belongs. :-/ so what is one to do these days who even makes significantly less than that if they work in nyc already? is it feasible to be a single person making 50 K or less and continue to rent forever? im slowly losing faith in the fact that someone like me will make it at all in the city and wonders how much longer one can sustain a living. i've never lived through such depressing times and it really gets to my head hearing such doom and gloom non stop coming from every single direction. sometimes i feel like my only reprieve is turning on vh1 and watching stupid reality shows with people who seem to be even more clueless than i am!
*r*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at February 23, 2009 10:23 AM
This article mentions homes and apartments >$5MM in the beginning, but then the arguments become muddled. Is the author keeping the entire article for so-called luxury properties, or is this about the entire market?
I think it makes sense for the top of the market to come down 50% or more. The prices went up 400-800% in the last 5 years.
In 2001, you could have bought a townhouse in GV for $2MM, now the same costs $10MM. How many people will be "helped" if that price comes "down" to $5MM? It's silly to talk about trophy properties for billionaires in the same breath as we discuss affordability in general.
It's also pointless to compare NYC to the rest of the country; we have rental vs. home ownership rates that are exactly reverse. A lot of people come to NYC for a few years and then leave. They don't want to buy an apartment here. People who buy in NY tend to be older and richer (in their 30's and established in their career as opposed to in their 20's and just married elsewhere.)
Do we really think this is going to change? That the fresh-eyed graduate will be able to buy a 1 bedroom in Chelsea on his $70,000 salary? That would be the real revolution.
Posted by: Maly at February 23, 2009 10:24 AM
"did anyone watch Frontline on PBS last night? It was about the Bear Stearns/ Leahmans melt down. "
Hells yeah!
"The root of the whole problem "toxic assets"
No! It was greed and delusion that got us into this mess! We could've done it without the Assheads!
"The money NEVER actually existed in these mortgages/insane prices...it was all paperwork and speculation on the continued rise of the market.A huge gamble that never came off."
Now the Mutant Asset Bubble is collapsing the Assheads are trying to escape gravity!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end..
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 10:24 AM
How much NYC will revert to the mean is, in my book, the $64,000 question. How much does the geography of the city mess with that 4x multiplier? How does the decapitation of the wealth creation industry in NY (Wall Street) exacerbate the decline in housing prices that needed to happen anyway.
One can imagine a model in NYC that sees dramatic further price erosion.
Full disclosure: reversion to something like 4x income would be very, very good for me, so that obviously colors my thinking.
Posted by: 2br_or_bust at February 23, 2009 10:28 AM
Heather - You are actually more correct then you seem to know. In about a year we should see serious inflation in the states. The US mint is currently printing more $$$ then ever before.
Posted by: landlord at February 23, 2009 10:29 AM
Damn wish I had caught Frontline. how did I miss that??
Is Barron's a good read for a total newbie like me? I've been thinking about testing the waters of the stock market a little, just for the hell of it. I like studying and learning new things and I think it's time for me to indulge my business jones.
Posted by: infinitejester at February 23, 2009 10:33 AM
"Leslie Norton is a good friend of mine."
Did ya read the article? With friends like that (ratting out the MAB) who needs enemies?
***Bid 46% off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 10:36 AM
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/
program title
Inside the Meltdown
Posted by: binnyG at February 23, 2009 10:38 AM
What's going on BHO???? You can't get anything at 50% off?? Team Bear blinks.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 10:38 AM
"Damn wish I had caught Frontline. how did I miss that??"
Here you can watch it with the rest of the retards!
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/story/2009/02/banking-at-the-brink.html
The What
Someday this war is gonna end..
***Bid 76% off peak comps***
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 10:41 AM
"The Obama administration, which says it doesn’t want to nationalize U.S. banks..."
He also said, during the TARP debate, that we weren't going to write a blank check ["include bonuses here"]. How'd that work out?
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 10:43 AM
Yes....Bid half (or 76%) off peak comps and continue renting
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 10:43 AM
4% skittle credit.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 10:44 AM
DIBS, do you really work front office at a hedge fund? It's hard for me to reconcile your comments with what's going on in the market.
Posted by: the chicken at February 23, 2009 10:45 AM
And Ivy Zelman basically has it right. Remember that it was her (or her junior analyst's) chart that woke the world to the ARM-reset tsunami that really got the ball rolling.
Posted by: the chicken at February 23, 2009 10:47 AM
Are there "skittle points" like mallow cups??? I loved mallow cups...can't find them anywhere anymore.
Yes, chicken. RE prices in Brooklyn will not be down 50%. What else can I tell you??? Keep buying YCS.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 10:49 AM
"DIBS, do you really work front office at a hedge fund? It's hard for me to reconcile your comments with what's going on in the market."
Yeah scary isn't it???!! Imagine you let this Asshead handle your money!!!!!!
"He also said, during the TARP debate, that we weren't going to write a blank check ["include bonuses here"]. How'd that work out?"
Like this, like that!
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/02/treasury-major-us-banking-institutions.html
"Both [Fannie and Freddie] are adequately capitalized, which is our highest criteria."
James Lockhart, director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise on CNBC July 8, 2008
Of course both Fannie and Freddie were put into conservatorship (edit) in September.
The What (Dave is a Asshead!)
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 10:52 AM
"Is Barron's a good read for a total newbie like me?"
It's OK if you want to make sure you get exposed to a lot of different ideas, but I find a lot of times they write articles that lay out an argument in favor of an investment rather than discussing the pros and cons in a neutral way that could help you make a smart investment choice based on your goals etc.
Obviously it is more interesting to read an article that says "Buy GM! You can get rich!" than an article that says "GM is a high risk, high return investment. You could lose all of your money or 10 years from now this could be the best investment of your life", but unless you know enough to fill in the gaps in their analysis their articles can be dangerous if acted upon.
They assume you know what P/E ratios are and what they imply as well, so if you are completely new to markets, some of the articles will be full of jargon that means little to you. If the Wall Street Journal is interesting to you, Barron's probably would be too.
Funny thing: my copy of Barron's gets delivered every Saturday morning, and it just about NEVER* has my address on it. It is always someone else's address somewhere in Brooklyn (not even in my neighborhood). If I'd been saving all those address labels, I'd have contact info for a few dozen Brooklyn Barron's subscribers.
*I have gotten a copy of Barron's with my address label on it exactly once. I assume my usual delivery person was sick that day.
Posted by: northsloperenter at February 23, 2009 10:53 AM
PitBull... I agree with you. I make "significantly" less than $70k, but I thought I create Mister $70k because if he can't make it, then I'm doomed.
And I like how Maly went right to a 1 bedroom in Chelsea... Yeah, clearly a "fresh-eyed graduate" making $70k... cough... can't buy in Chelsea. What about ANYWHERE in this city?
I guess I'm moving to Paterson. Oh wait. No I'm not. That's not an option. Soon the NYC market is going to wake up and realize this city is becoming less and less attractive by the minute. Many of the wonderful "perks" everyone lists when asked to justify this city are QUICKLY becoming available in MANY MANY other places.
Posted by: tybur6 at February 23, 2009 10:57 AM
Ultrashort yen ETF? trades less than $2m a day. Why bother?
Posted by: the chicken at February 23, 2009 10:57 AM
Thanks northsloperenter. I meet these dudes who seem to have no visual means of support, always reading Barron's and Investor's Business Daily. I'm like, tell me how you do it man!!
Posted by: infinitejester at February 23, 2009 10:59 AM
Investors Business Daily might be more informative about the specifics of investing and what all the ratios & jargon mean.
You should start with something that will teach you the basics. I think there's an "Investing for Dummies" book. I'm not trying to be snarky or condescending....those books are very informative for people unfamiliar with the subject. A friend of mine wrote "Hedge Funds for Dummies."
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:00 AM
There is nothing in this article I haven't pointed out a few times.
DIBS, are you really that easily baited? If you think you are right about your outlook, then relax. Time will be an impartial judge. You sound insecure about your decision to buy when you get into all of this heated "team bear" and "team bull" stuff. I am comfortable with my own views (which differ significantly from yours) and am happy to let the anti-renter and anti-bull commentary roll right off my back.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 11:01 AM
Stupid comment chicken...what the hell difference does it make to you if the volume is less than $2 MM??? It has only been trading since November. Not a lot of people using it yet.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:04 AM
lechacal...we all know your position from the same type of comments that you make. Baiting isn't the issue. I voice my opinion the strongest and you think I'm insecure?? LOL
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:06 AM
"Yes....Bid half (or 76%) off peak comps and continue renting"
Yup. That's the plan until somethin' sticks. BTW, you know what's due tomorrow?
YOY
Jun-06 9.13% ACTUAL PEAK (see Case-Shiller site)
Jul-06 7.70%
Aug-06 5.94%
Sep-06 4.52%
Oct-06 3.20%
Nov-06 1.87%
Dec-06 0.52%
Jan-07 -0.34% PEAK CALL (changes sign)
Feb-07 -0.91%
Mar-07 -0.91%
Apr-07 -1.56%
May-07 -2.35%
Jun-07 -2.94%
Jul-07 -3.20%
Aug-07 -3.35%
Sep-07 -3.61%
Oct-07 -4.08%
Nov-07 -4.50%
Dec-07 -5.29%
Jan-08 -5.64%
Feb-08 -6.62%
Mar-08 -7.47%
Apr-08 -7.95%
May-08 -7.90%
Jun-08 -7.29%
Jul-08 -7.06%
Aug-08 -6.67%
Sep-08 -7.28%
Oct-08 -7.66%
Nov-08 -8.69%
Dec-08 -?.??% OBAMA PLEASE!!! BACK TOWARDS ZERO!!!
***Bid half off peak comps until NY Case-Shiller YOY returns to zero***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 11:09 AM
"Like this, like that!"
Like a wiffle ball bat!
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 11:10 AM
"BTW, you know what's due tomorrow?"
Killer Cam index?? Holla!
The What (Dave blows dogs)
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 11:13 AM
DIBS, you are often a level-headed and intelligent commenter, but not when the bull vs. bear discussion is on. It's like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. I think you let The What bait you. Just my $0.02.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 11:14 AM
This article, in the quoted section, isn't suggesting that NYC will revert to the *national* ratio but its own historical ratio. Its definitely a bummer for people that bought in (or otherwise locked themselves into) the artificially inflated prices of the last several years, but BHO, et al, are probably closer to the truth than the nervous cheerleaders who seem to be growing increasingly frustrated with his/their antics.
Posted by: betterside at February 23, 2009 11:17 AM
it's not a stupid comment. There are plenty of ways of shorting the yen, not least of which is actually selling the forwards for which there is a ridiculously liquid market.
With ETFs, you are exposing yourself to counterparty risk as well as tracking error (as you can clearly see that the correlation is less than perfect).
The only two reasons I can see to buy this ETF is either because you are stepping outside of your mandate (as it is technically a US-traded stock) or you are a retail investor with access only to domestic equities.
How is liquidity not critical in today's market? I would not want to be more than a third of the market in any of my positions, with a two day cap. If your unit size is 2% then you are talking sub-$70m hedge fund.
Posted by: the chicken at February 23, 2009 11:17 AM
lechacal....I think the Bull vs. Bear discussion is "on" in almost every thread here!!!
I don't let the What bait me. I occcassionally ask him a question for which there is never a sane answer coming and I usually point out that his cut and paste is already old news. Other than that I try to refrain from talking about his mother's reputation and his obsession with his time in prison.
I think maybe you miss the facetiousness in many of these posts anyway.
That said, Brooklyn prices will not come down 50%.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:18 AM
DIBS, you are often a Assheaded and Dumbasses commenter, but not when the bull vs. bear discussion is on. It's like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. I think you let The What bait you. He just PWNS you!
The What (Dave Blows Cats)
Someday this war is gonna end..
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 11:20 AM
I'd hate to see my home go down 45% in value, (which would pretty much reduce my equity to zilch) but a part of me thinks it would be better for the city as a whole if housing were a lot more affordable. (Of course, I'd also like to see rent controls disappear as well).
We are at about 4.5 x income in our place and like the rest of the country we're nervous as hell. I'd feel a lot more comfortable right now at 3x income, obviously, but 5 years ago the rental market was so grim that honestly, buying looked like a really good deal, even if the gains were only on paper. My problem with renting in NYC then (and maybe still now) is that most places are depressing dumps. I have a harder time spending 3k a month for a disgusting 2 br in a decent neighborhood than i do paying that much in mortgage plus a monthly co-op fee.
Posted by: Bolder at February 23, 2009 11:20 AM
why does everyone feel like they have some kind of god-given right to affordable housing in the neighborhood of their choice? I don't get it. There was an article in the times about 200K apartments in riverdale, inwood, and flatbush. what's wrong with that? is brownstone brooklyn really that great? I think all the brownstone cheerleaders have some kind of selective vision. Drive around "prime brooklyn" and REALLY look at what you see -- there are a few little spots of charm that break up a massive toxic urban sprawl. Screw it!! If I had an income of 70K I would be all over the 7 train in Queens.
My other rant for today: please everyone find a source better than TV to learn about the economy and the financial markets.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 11:21 AM
chicken...it was a recommendation for just that...the retail investor. We sell the forwards. Many friends of mine running their own personal small hedge funds use YCS now.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:22 AM
We can agree that Brooklyn prices will not come down 50%. As I have said many times, prices are coming down in Brooklyn and will continue to do so for some time, but on the whole prices Broolyn prices will hold up meaningfully better than Manhattan prices.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 11:23 AM
QOTD...."My other rant for today: please everyone find a source better than TV to learn about the economy and the financial markets."
Truer words have never been spoken.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:24 AM
fair enough. Sorry if I came across defensive - I just don't like my comments being called "stupid".
Posted by: the chicken at February 23, 2009 11:24 AM
"I voice my opinion the strongest and you think I'm insecure??"
Oh, those were opinions? I thought they were emotional, defensive, knee-jerk responses. Sorry, dave.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 11:25 AM
Agree, lechacal. Its also an issue of townhouses (brownstone, brick, limestone) vs. condos...and an even bigger issue for new construction condos by developers with less than stellar product or reputation. As we are seeing, the latter are taking a real ass-kicking.
I don't think we're that different in our actual views of what reality is likely to look like 6-12 months down the road.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:26 AM
Pot = kettle, BHO
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:27 AM
"Killer Cam index?? Holla!"
Harlem! Stand up!
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 11:27 AM
"We can agree that Brooklyn prices will not come down 50%. As I have said many times, prices are coming down in Brooklyn and will continue to do so for some time, but on the whole prices Broolyn prices will hold up meaningfully better than Manhattan prices."
No not 50%, lets try 65%!!!! Take a look at this!
Nov-07 -4.50%
Dec-07 -5.29%
Jan-08 -5.64%
Feb-08 -6.62%
Mar-08 -7.47%
Apr-08 -7.95%
May-08 -7.90%
Jun-08 -7.29%
Jul-08 -7.06%
Aug-08 -6.67%
Sep-08 -7.28%
Oct-08 -7.66%
Nov-08 -8.69%
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 11:28 AM
dave thanks. No snark taken...altho those "dummies" books have too many side graphics for my taste. My lunchtime book browsing approaches...
Posted by: infinitejester at February 23, 2009 11:32 AM
While we are arguing this point from what point are we talking about 50% drops from? I mean are we talking 50% down from Jan 07 (as BHO has identified this month as the "peak") or are we talking 50% down from now? Because at least as far as the Clinton Hill market has gone prices have been going down for a while now. Therefore, dollar value wise, it means a big difference saying 50% down from Jan 07 or 50% down from now.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 11:35 AM
hey lechacal & dibs -- what's the argument for brooklyn prices holding up better than manhattan? I haven't seen it spelled out. Looking straight down at it, I would think people would generally want to move closer to work, and pick up a bargain in manhattan once they're not priced out anymore. If there was a state of "disequilibrium", it was that people were living further away from the city than they wanted to be. wouldn't that support manhattan prices better?
is there some stat I don't know? maybe the prices grew faster in manhattan than brooklyn? never heard of that though.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 11:36 AM
Serious question here... If you think Manhattan will drop 50%, why do you think Brooklyn will fare better? That seems, shall we say, counterintuitive.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 11:36 AM
Yoo Hoo Retards! I think the market loves the Obama Bank Nationalization Thang!
http://www.bloomberg.com/?b=0
Say Buh Bye Assheads!
Hey Dave I heard the was opening a Buttermilk Channel store in Bed Stuy...
The What
Someday this war is gonna end..
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 11:38 AM
"Soon the NYC market is going to wake up and realize this city is becoming less and less attractive by the minute. Many of the wonderful "perks" everyone lists when asked to justify this city are QUICKLY becoming available in MANY MANY other places."
OK, using that same rationale, why would YOU want to buy an apartment here?
Posted by: East New York at February 23, 2009 11:39 AM
The reason for Brooklyn prices holding up better than Manhattan prices is a one-time shift in popularity. Brooklyn is hot. It wasn't so long ago that it wasn't socially acceptable to live on this side of the river. Now I have friends who come here from Manhattan on Saturday nights. I'm not saying Brooklyn is hotter than Manhattan or has the faintest hope of ever being so, just that the collective force of this one-time shift in popularity will benefit the Brooklyn market relative to the Manhattan market.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 11:40 AM
"If there was a state of "disequilibrium", it was that people were living further away from the city than they wanted to be. wouldn't that support manhattan prices better?"
"Serious question here... If you think Manhattan will drop 50%, why do you think Brooklyn will fare better? That seems, shall we say, counterintuitive.'
Wow the Assheads are waking up!!! That coma was a bitch huh??
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 11:41 AM
I think I get what you are saying Lechacal. Certainly from the perspective of people putting down long term roots with kids and such Brooklyn has experienced a renaissance in the last few years. Unless all of these people pull up roots and sell this year, they are all going to be riding out the storm. Hopefully is the operative word in any discussion about this phenomenon however.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 11:44 AM
OK, lechacal, but given that the primary draw to Brooklyn (for a large number of people) has been relative affordability, do you not suspect many people will go back to Manhattan as prices drop there? Will that not put more downward pressure on Brooklyn prices?
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 11:44 AM
Manhattan is dominated by condos. I'm talking brownstone prices which at all times over the past 5-10 years have remained well below anything of comparable size (including condos) in Manhattan. My argument is primarily that brownstones will not fall like anything in Manhattan because they represent such a huge value in terms of space.
I also rant about the ability of tens of thousands of Manhattan condo owners who, if even a small portion might want to opt for the Brooklyn brownstone lifestyle and still have huge gains locked into 1 , 3 and 3 BR condos and they can sell them and buy a Brooklyn brownstone oftentimes for cash and with money to spare!!!!
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:45 AM
snark....right?
hey what, aren't those year-on-year changes? Your #s show a two year drop of 1 - (1 - 4.50%)(1 - 8.69%) = 12.8%, from Nov 06 to Nov 08.
that's a classic mis-rep that the TV news keeps throwing out there. They report virtually the same annual change every month, because the headline is more eye-catching.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 11:47 AM
snark---I think its as much about space as price, at least for family type buyers.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 11:49 AM
The reality is the "Last Week's Biggest Sales" thread here every week. There aren't that many brownstones that trade on a weekly basis. There never were, not even at the top, compared to condos here or in Manhattan.
The market is back to reality with sellers asking prices, for the most part, where an accepted offer is going to be 10% or so less than ask...a normal market.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:51 AM
"The reason for Brooklyn prices holding up better than Manhattan prices is a one-time shift in popularity. Brooklyn is hot. It wasn't so long ago that it wasn't socially acceptable to live on this side of the river. Now I have friends who come here from Manhattan on Saturday nights. I'm not saying Brooklyn is hotter than Manhattan or has the faintest hope of ever being so, just that the collective force of this one-time shift in popularity will benefit the Brooklyn market relative to the Manhattan market." ~lechacal
a statement like this, my friend, shows that you are unequivocally a retard...
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 11:52 AM
Yeah DIBS, except nobody is buying those Manhattan condos, are they?
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 11:52 AM
a statement like this, my friend, shows that you are unequivocally a retard..
Your statement shows that you have nothing to add to the discussion. If you paid attention you would know that lechacal is someone who has a very realistic appraisal of the market.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 11:54 AM
lets see the last remnants of cheerleading, ie. dibs, bought a speculative ghetto property. Enough said...
heres another dose of reality:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/118333-predicting-60-decline-for-manhattan-property-tarp-for-trump
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 11:54 AM
And I ask again, are we talking 50% off Jan 2007 or 50% off now. That would make a big difference dollar wise.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 11:55 AM
There will be plenty of downward pressure on all prices in the coming years. There are a great many factors at play in each borough, neighborhood, block, and individual property. One of those many factors is the shift in popularity in favor of Brooklyn. There will presumably be some reverse flow back to Manhattan if prices there drop enough to pull back people who moved to Brooklyn based on affordability alone. However, that presupposes a sharper drop in Manhattan than Brooklyn, which is exactly my point.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 11:55 AM
lech, that makes some sense -- gentrification is permanent because it re-brands neighborhoods, and manhattan (below say 100th) wasn't gentrifying during the same boom.
but we haven't seen a good example of the "blighting" process in decades -- I wonder if it works exactly in reverse, as the "gentry" cuts its losses to keep the kids away from crime.
dibs yeah maybe if this trend of thrifty americans and a stable and growing population of "creative types" takes hold, more people will appreciate the outer borough lifestyle.
I dunno. this may sound unscientific, but I think if I had a loft in the village I'd be so laid...
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 11:57 AM
Lechacal---can you answer my question? You seem to be paying attention today and I am genuinely curious to know whether or not there is any consensus as to what the peak was and therefore from where a 50% drop is measured?
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 11:59 AM
cornerbodega again illustrates to us why he is such a douchebag.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 11:59 AM
> "gentrification is permanent"
That was a joke, right?
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 11:59 AM
Wasder: My guess, for the Brooklyn neighborhoods that are most discussed on this board, is that in hindsight we will see that prices peaked summer 2008. I don't know of any consensus on this point.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 12:01 PM
wasder...peak was when I paid $820k for a really nice place in Bed Stuy...then sank another $100k into it and am still happier than ever!!!!
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 12:02 PM
What about the Case Schiller numbers that BHO is so fond of? They show the peak in 07. I am just curious how the actual peak is arrived at...
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 12:02 PM
and that was May, 2007.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 12:03 PM
Dave I hear you. Peak is in the eye of the beholder.
I got my house for about 25% less than the ask but that means nothing as we know. In the end I think that I paid an amount that will prove to be inflated but not so much so that I will regret it forever. I assume I bought a little ways into the downslope but who knows. Had I really been concerned about such things I wouldn't have bought at all but done a BHO and crammed my family into a too small space while waiting the crash.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 12:06 PM
wasder...the C-S numbers are for the country as a whole and will not be representative of any particular city or neighborhood.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 12:06 PM
lech -- you're saying that a reverse migration requires a steeper drop in manhattan prices. lemme spin it this way: take someone like me who wants to pay a certain amount for a 2BR -- I consider that a basic living space, but I can't afford it in manhattan. if I can get it there, I will, before I consider a 3BR in Brooklyn.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 12:07 PM
I thought the C-S numbers were for NYC specifically...
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 12:08 PM
I went to a bunch of open houses yesterday - beautiful 4 story homes in Clinton Hill for 1.3-1.6 million. Hard to see how they are going to get that, especially as there were very few people there.
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at February 23, 2009 12:08 PM
Now let me anticipate the intellectual responses from BHO, cornerbodega and the What...
Dave gets assraped in the ghetto
PWNED
Baseball bat to gentrifiers heads (as an aside, oddly Bed Stuy was gentrified by its own residents and long before I arived, but no matter)
Please Mt. Obama more skittles for Dav'e home
Someday this war is gonna end....
cornerdbogega doesn't understand anyhting actually.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 12:09 PM
Joe--you don't have kids though, right? This is where Lechacal seems to be on to something. Even if relative affordability becomes close between BK and Manhattan the amount of space one gets for the buck will favor BK.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 12:11 PM
Hi folks;
My mind and body are undergoing the readjustment process of being back in NY after a week in Japan. Ugh. As such, I don't have the ability to weigh in too deeply today. Let me just throw in one contribution on the permanence of the newfound popularity of Brooklyn.
This weekend there was a party in my condo complex (in Park Slope). At the party I met a new neighbor, a recently-married young couple who moved in about 1.5 years ago from their previous place in Mnahattan. I was chatting with the the wife, and she was telling me how much she enjoyed living in Brooklyn, specifically citing the fact that it is a more friendly place, where one can actually get to know your neighbors. She made a statement to the effect that she would never go back to Manhattan, even if she could afford it.
I know that this data point is completely anecdotal, but my gut feeling is that she is not alone in her sentiments.
By the way, I have to welcome Joe the Bummer to the scene. I like your temperate, friendly posts.
Posted by: benson at February 23, 2009 12:13 PM
snark I was kind of paraphrasing to make sure I got the argument -- I don't think it's permanent. I think you and I are on the same page.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 12:13 PM
Joe: Perhaps you will move if that happens. But I don't think you can extrapolate a city-wide trend from one person's reaction. Layered on top of the individuals who might move back to Manhattan if there is a particular drop in prices there is an overall increase in the status and popularity of Brooklyn relative to Manhattan, and I don't expect that to go away any time soon.
To be concrete, I just don't think prices for brownstones on park blocks in prime Park Slope are going to fall that much. Those prices will be sticky. Prices for new condos (new contruction or conversion) will take a heavy beating. There is lots of stuff in-between.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 12:16 PM
There will not be a drop in price of a townhouse somewhere in Manhattan such that I would move back. It will not happen. Manhattan townhouses will always sell at a "multiple" of comparable Brooklyn townhouses.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 12:19 PM
benson--were you in Kyoto on your trip. This is perhaps my favorite city to visit on the planet.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 12:21 PM
Wasder;
Didn't make it to Kyoto this time, though I have been there before. I'm due for a revisit.
Have you ever been to the Kamakura area? I made it there on my previous trip to Japan, and I really loved it. It has managed to maintain a rural, small-town feel that is so rare in Japan, and it also is chock full of shrines and other cultural sites. There are also alot of nice bed-and-breakfast type inns. I heartily recommend it.
Posted by: benson at February 23, 2009 12:25 PM
Haven't been to Kamakura. Only been to Japan twice but dying to get back. Love that rural japanese feel too. Thanks for hte tip. Did a photo essay in Kyoto that I should put up one of these days.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 12:27 PM
lech -- I'm not trying to say everyone's like me, I'm just trying to present a case.
I don't think that just because something is beautiful and made of brown stone, it is immune. I agree the new condos are going to get waxed, but:
apples to apples...
a) If you don't see brownstone prices falling by that much, then you have to explain them tripling over the last 10 years (ok you have a "sticky gentrification" argument)
b) why is a brownstone near prospect park in a better pricing position (%-age wise) than a brownstone near central park?
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 12:28 PM
benson--
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1155414861#/photo.php?pid=1465784&id=46273244339
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 12:29 PM
Because the PP brownstone will run you $1.2-2.0 MM and the one near Central Park will run you $10.0-60 MM
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 12:29 PM
Joe:
(a) I guess "sticky gentrification" is a good summary.
(b) The brownstone near Prospect Park is much less likely to be owned by a former Lehman banker.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 12:31 PM
dibs-- ok, a floor of a brownstone on west 110th street, to correct for income.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 12:33 PM
"a) If you don't see brownstone prices falling by that much, then you have to explain them tripling over the last 10 years (ok you have a "sticky gentrification" argument)"
***
I'd just like to point out (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that brownstone price increases in Park Slope at least have been relatively gradual, when compared to housing in Manhattan.
I remember when I first moved to Park Slope (the first time) in 2000, prices of Brownstones were already over a million dollars.
Now they are about 2 million, nine years later. That doesn't sound outlandish to me, especially when a large chunk of Park Slope (5th Avenue and environs) has had a full 100% renaissance since 2000.
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 12:33 PM
"I mean are we talking 50% down from Jan 07 (as BHO has identified this month as the "peak") or are we talking 50% down from now?"
No, Jan 07 was the "peak call"/top pick (when YOY passed through zero). Jun 06 was the actual peak (the absolute highest reading from the Standard and Poors site).
Another paramter to clarify is whether in real terms or nominal terms. Clinton Hill townhouses, for instance, are already down -15% nominally (Source: Halstead). If things get significantly worse and it seems like they will, -50% nominally and -76% really (as What calls out) is not too far fetched. So, whatever the numerical prediction, it could be in either terms depending on how the economy deflates/reflates.
I'll be shocked, though, if the market declines more than -50% nominally from the peak. Interesting debate.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 12:39 PM
> "I was kind of paraphrasing to make sure I got the argument"
Ahh, got it.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 12:43 PM
lech - OK I'll buy that. you know what else supports your arg? the euro and the ruble. I read that 1/3 of 07 sales in manhattan were to foreign buyers, and now USD looks a lot more expensive to their friends (and they have made a currency gain that offsets the RE loss, so they can still sell at a profit. Also, the fact that more of manhattan depended on non-fannie-eligible jumbo mortgages.
did you know that some of these lehman folks and others are going to be taxed on stock grants using the value at the time they got the stock? (of course the stock is worth 0 now)
for all you banker-haters, careful what you wish for!!
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 12:43 PM
11217 with more of his "life experiences" to explain why housing is a buy in bk
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 12:43 PM
Yep, that's right CornerB.
By the sound of every post you've ever written on this blog thus far, sounds like you could stand to have a few more life experiences of your own. They are what life is all about, you know...
Ask your mom to let you out and play, will ya?
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 12:47 PM
Dave tries to pass his Jekyll/Hyde thing off as insouciance; it's not, it's panic. Dave does not manage anyone's money but his own; it's obvious from his comments he is an odd lot-trader with no depth of financial experience. As to the This Week's Biggest Sales, the zombie banks, if you didn't notice, gave out bonuses, so cheers, you "bitter renters" out there helped pay to keep prices unaffordable --though for some reason Panic Dave chooses not to decry white collar welfare.
Peak to trough, prices down 40% in premuim Brooklyn. All ask, no bid in Bed Sty. Panic Dave, where will you move the goalposts then?
Posted by: Whuh at February 23, 2009 12:48 PM
"is there some stat I don't know? maybe the prices grew faster in manhattan than brooklyn? never heard of that though."
No no. Even if people wanted to BS and say they prefer Brooklyn over Manhattan because of the rawness, prime Manhattan still has the allure of a higher ROI. Despite what owners say about only wanting a place to live, 99% of buyers are banking on a return.
Also, especially for brownstone customers, preference is biased by affordability. Of course you prefer a Brooklyn brownstone because even in your most wildest dreams that's all you could afford below Central Park North.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 12:49 PM
BHO--so you are saying 50% down from "peak" as defined by Case Schiller, which means Jun 06. In that case haven't prices come down fairly substantially from June 06? Seems to me they have. Also, what about what DIBS is saying re C-S being national numbers rather than NYC specific?
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 12:50 PM
"Wow the Assheads are waking up!!! That coma was a bitch huh??"
ROTFLMMFAO
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 12:51 PM
I ask these questions not to suggest that I think prices won't continue to drop because it is obvious that they will but to find out whether or not people think at least a chunk of this big drop has occurred already or not.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 12:53 PM
"Wow the Assheads are waking up!!! That coma was a bitch huh??"
ROTFLMMFAO
Of all the many insulting things that What has written over the years this does not strike me as worthy of the ROTFLMMFAO designation. Your standards should be higher BHO.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 12:54 PM
Enter Whuh, as usual with the assinine comments. People that do nothing but manage their own money usually have a fair amount of it; and they don't accumulate it by being as uninformed as someone like you.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 12:55 PM
I rented years ago in Manhattan (before kids) and bought in Brooklyn. Now many years later with 2 kids in (public) school in Manhattan, if it was a financially equivalent proposition to trade our house for a smaller place in Manhattan, it would look attractive.
If prices are down 15% (or 12.8%) from peak, they'd need to go down about 40% from today's prices to make the 50% off the peak mark. That's impossible according to team bull, but down 20% this year and down a similar percentage in 2010 ... doesn't sound implausible. (Disclaimer - have not joined team bull or bear ... no realistic plans to be a seller or a buyer in the near future).
Posted by: Bklnite at February 23, 2009 12:56 PM
11217 fair enough -- I said earlier that a smaller bubble would be a good justification for that argument.
BHO I think my 11:47 got missed. pretty sure those stats are mis-used.
I think your "half off" thing is pretty spot on. the details aren't that important - infl has been low so nominal and real are close to the same, and we're still close to peak.
but the doubling (we'll call it doubling, tho I think it's more) started around 2000, when the OTHER asset price bubble burst (dot-coms), right when the fed began its low-IR assault to lessen the 2001 recession (it worked, and you can read greenspan's gloating in his book...cue "Jaws" theme). I think a base case that we return to that level makes sense.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 12:57 PM
wasder, he can't think of anything creative to say himself so he needs the What here as his mentor.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 12:57 PM
A Glass Box Shatters a Record
NYTIMES
By JOSH BARBANEL
Published: February 20, 2009
A NEW duplex penthouse built on top of a converted loft building in TriBeCa has sold for $30 million, setting a record for the highest-priced Manhattan apartment sold to date south of Columbus Circle.
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 12:57 PM
"I think your "half off" thing is pretty spot on. the details aren't that important - infl has been low so nominal and real are close to the same, and we're still close to peak."
Again, the question is, from when do you measure the half off?
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 1:00 PM
11217....like I've maintained, there's hardly going to be a mass of people leaving Brooklyn for lower prices in Manhattan. That's just crazy talk.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 1:00 PM
In the past two weekends, I have seen people swarming like vultures around the listings for sale in the windows of real estate offices on 7th and 5th Avenues. They seem like they are on a mission.
There are SOME people who know that buying in a down time is an opportunity to snag a deal.
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 1:04 PM
the last remnants of the delusional:
dibs - ghetto speculator who stands to lose 75%
11217 - "life experiences" proves that bk is the envy of the world
lechacal - "Brooklyn is hot. Now I have friends who come here from Manhattan on Saturday nights.
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 1:05 PM
Nice anecdote, 11217. Here's another:
"PRICE CUTTING HAS BECOME SAVAGE. The 14-room Park Avenue apartment of the late socialite Brooke Astor -- which Barron's highlighted in that earlier story after its price had been cut from $46 million to $34 million -- is now down to $29 million and probably has to be cut further."
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 1:05 PM
I'll say it again bodega, if you think lechacal is a cheerleader for undentable brooklyn prices you are really misreading his posts.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 1:06 PM
Snark,
The thing is...even if that place ends up going for 20 million, it's still ridiculously high. We've been inoculated on these high prices to the point that 29 million seems like a bargain basement price cut or something just because it started at 46 million.
I appreciate ALL the anecdotes though!
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 1:10 PM
11217 it was the weather. nobody stops on the sidewalk when it's 20 degrees.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 1:11 PM
any guesstimates on what Dibs will lose? What if we helped him out a bit and applied the median income/price ratio to bed-stuy? DOH! On second thought, maybe we shouldn't as I don't condone violence...
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 1:13 PM
cornerbodega....I hope you don't think your social security check will cover your rent when you're old!!!!
Try and learn something here...you'll be less bitter.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 1:16 PM
Cornerbodega...How many homes do you own?? Please answer the question.
Because even if Dave lost his shirt in Bed Stuy (which I don't think will be the case) he has 3 other homes, from what I gather.
Are you REALLY this crazy? Or is this all an act?
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 1:16 PM
"Also, what about what DIBS is saying re C-S being national numbers rather than NYC specific?"
wasder, you can look through a lot of the data (and methodology) online:
http://www2.standardandpoors.com/portal/site/sp/en/us/page.topic/indices_csmahp/0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,0,0,0,0,0.html
Here are some data points of home prices from the New York market with the year 2000 defined as having a value of "100":
Jan 1987: 74.42
Sep 1988: 85.54 -- this is a peak
Apr 1991: 72.29 -- this is a bottom
Jun 1998: 86.58 -- back above Sep 1988 for first time
Jan 2000: 100.0 -- still going up from 1991
Jan 2002: 125.19 -- up
Jan 2003: 146.55 -- up
Jan 2004: 163.63 -- up
Jan 2005: 187.19 -- up
Jan 2006: 213.50 -- up up up, more than doubled in 6 years!
Jun 2006: 215.83 -- this is a peak
Jan 2007: 212.78 -- down a little
Jan 2008: 200.44 -- back to summer 2005 level
Nov 2008: 186.81 -- back to Dec 2004 level (12% below peak)
The larger 20 city composite index peaked at 206.52 in July 2006 and is down to 154.59 by Nov 2008 (25% below peak).
Obviously, NYC has come down more since Nov., but at that time it had only fallen 1/2 as much as the broader market. Chances are NYC has caught up a bit. December numbers get released tomorrow, I believe.
Note that RE prices went down from 1988-1991 and took til 1998 get to back to 1988 levels.
Will prices drop for only 3 years this time (2006-2009?) or will it be longer?
Will it take til 2016 to see 2006 prices again?
We shall see...
Posted by: northsloperenter at February 23, 2009 1:17 PM
wasder -- no one answered you. My money is on january 2000 levels, which conveniently were the reference point (100) in the case schiller index. The max in NYC was 215 in June 06 (meaning prices more than doubled), and in November of this year it was 186, down 11% from peak, but still up 86% over Jan 2000. I don't think the index is corrected for inflation.
So I think it has fallen 11 of the 54% it needs to fall. give back a little for inflation and you get BHO's number.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 1:17 PM
(Reading this thread is like watching an all-star game)
Posted by: infinitejester at February 23, 2009 1:18 PM
> "I have seen people swarming like vultures around the listings for sale in the windows of real estate offices on 7th and 5th Avenues."
Do you seriously take that as an indicator of market health?
People always do that.
I myself always do that, and I'm not looking to buy for 12-24 months while I see how things sort out.
Actually I did go to an open house this weekend. It was the end of the open house, and there were only three names on the sign in sheet above mine. That's the low level of attendance that I have been seeing for the past few months.
I think that many people, like myself, are watching and waiting.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 1:22 PM
DIBS,
I don't think you need "a mass of people leaving Brooklyn" for prices to fall. Obviously, people who bought in the last 5 years will NOT sell if they're going to lose 20% or more off their home (investment) UNLESS they absolutely have to. With unemployment rising (especially in NYC because high paying Wall Street jobs are disappearing, my prediction 9% unemployment in NYC by the end of 2010) some (not all or in mass) homeowners will not be able to afford their homes and will be forced to sell but the demand (available buyers who can afford the down payments and monthly mortgage payments) will not be there ---> price reductions (maybe free fall).
"sticky gentrification" vs Market forces (Supply and Demand) --> I'm pretty sure market forces will always win out!
ZooLander
Posted by: ZooLander at February 23, 2009 1:23 PM
alternatively, take the 46% number from the article that started this think, and adjust for the fact that incomes are falling. I think someone else made that point.
the argument has been made for price/rent as well as monthly ownership cost/rent, by a golman economist named jan hatzius.
the last one (monthly ownership cost/rent) is crushing, becuase common charges are going up while rents are going down, further impacting the price result.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 1:24 PM
I suspect that I could sell my house now for about $775...I paid $820 and put another $100k into it. that's a loss of $145k but I'm happy living here for the next 5-10 years and eventually I'll make some money on it. As it is, my net cash flow from moving from Manhattan to this place has increased dramatically. Whereas I was paying $5,000 in taxes and $7,200 in common charges in Manhattan, I am now making about $11,000 after rental income, utility and tax deductions!!!! The actual mortage amounts were about the same...$2,600 per month. A net positive cash flow of $23,000 a year...which will cover the current estimated loss of ewuity in 6.25 years!!!!!!!
WHAT DO YOUR NUMBERS LOOK LIKE CORNERBODEGA????????
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 1:24 PM
Just what is "sticky gentrification?"
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 1:25 PM
snark, why do you have to go and be serious for once? Haha, I actually like your non-snarky side.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 1:26 PM
Joe,
So you don't take into account the gentrification process in all of this?
Riverside, California was the same boring suburb with a 2 hour commute into Downtown LA in 2000 as it now is in 2009. It's just packed now with even more cookie cutter homes. Prices are down 40-50% there.
Do you not think that the incredible change and improvement in most of NYC's neighborhoods in the last decade with regard to improved schools, a dramatic decrease in crime (making it the safest large city in the U.S) and the continued diversity of people, retail, restaurants, nightlife, etc would account for something?
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 1:27 PM
"Because even if Dave lost his shirt in Bed Stuy (which I don't think will be the case) he has 3 other homes, from what I gather."
OMG!!!!!! Your quote was to support Dibs but instead you've made him look IMPOSSIBLY more retarted!!!!!! Bed stuy -75% is enough humiliation, 3 others? If this is true, Sebb is einstein compared to this guy...
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 1:30 PM
The only person on here who "looks retarded" is you, Cornholedbodega.
Want us to take a vote?
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 1:34 PM
dibs you have a sweet pad. if you ever want to sell it you can buy another one cheaper anyway, so don't let these haters get you down! how cool is it not to have a landlord!
11217 I do agree -- I was just putting out a base case based on raw numbers -- I think you can layer on a lot of arguments in both directions. those case-schiller numbers are for the whole metro area. Brooklyn Heights will probably do a little better at yonkers' expense, why not..
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 1:34 PM
Don't get me wrong, Joe. I still think prices are going down in a substantial way, but I think it has some impact.
Prices always overshoot on the way down just like they do on the way up.
It all seems to be boiling down to confidence right now. The majority of people are still employed and the actual numbers of people laid off in the Finance industry are not horrific yet. They really aren't.
The media is creating an environment where it seems negligent to buy a pack of gum right now, much less a house, but I suspect many people are aware that a lot of this is about perception. I think I already mentioned this once before, but I have a friend who works for a major news outlet and they are all but banned from running any "good news" stories right now, because that's not what's going to bring in the viewers. Sad, but true. We are in a spiral of only wanting to talk doom and gloom, and personally I think it's counterproductive in addressing the real issues and problems facing our country and the world.
The U.S. needs to change its ways substantially in the coming years. Hopefully most of us can agree with that. If you do, in fact agree with that, then you must recognize that NYC is in a great position to prosper in the mid-long term.
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 1:43 PM
right on! cornerbodega
quote of the day
"OMG!!!!!! Your quote was to support Dibs but instead you've made him look IMPOSSIBLY more retarted!!!!!! Bed stuy -75% is enough humiliation, 3 others?"
LOL
Posted by: ZooLander at February 23, 2009 1:43 PM
right on! cornerbodega
quote of the day
"OMG!!!!!! Your quote was to support Dibs but instead you've made him look IMPOSSIBLY more retarted!!!!!! Bed stuy -75% is enough humiliation, 3 others?"
LOL
Posted by: ZooLander at February 23, 2009 1:43 PM
whos the retard that used this "life experience" as to why bk real estate is a buy?
"I have seen people swarming like vultures around the listings for sale in the windows of real estate offices on 7th and 5th Avenues."
Oh it was the pseudo intellectual 11217
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 1:44 PM
Anyone have any brownstone-specific pricing stats? Someone above mentioned that Halstead thinks Clinton Hill townhouses are down 15% (period unknown). Prudential Douglas Elliman mailed me a report last week that said townhouse prices in "Brownstone Brooklyn" (exact boundaries not defined) were up Q4 2008 over Q4 2007, but volume was down. Anything else out there?
Posted by: NorthHeights at February 23, 2009 1:48 PM
the other three were bought in 1992, 1998 and 1999. There are no mortgages on any of them and the 1992 property I still have an offer for it (I'm not selling) at over 6 X what I paid for it.
How you doin cornerbodega???? Those aisles getting cramped with all that shit you gotta sell to make ends meet and pay your rent????
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 1:49 PM
NorthHeights...that's the big problem....there doesn't seem to be brownstone specific data compiled anywhere. The Brownstone Brooklyn data includes all sorts of condos too but they do break out single and two family homes.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 1:50 PM
Didn't say they were buying anything Cornerbodega. I said they were looking. If I had no money like you, I wouldn't even be out looking.
See my point...?
You don't see how idiotic it is to call someone "retarted" and not even spell the word RETARDED correctly?
Neither of which is an especially PC term these days, mind you.
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 1:51 PM
cornerbodega calling someone a psudo intellectual...NOW THAT"S REALLY FUNNY.....
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 1:55 PM
> "snark, why do you have to go and be serious for once?"
I... I... I don't know what came over me. Must be low blood sugar levels.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 2:06 PM
11217 I agree with all that and NYC rocks the f-ing world and always will. I'm only bearish for the 5-10 horizon. I'm still raising my kids here.
there was one thing that kind of understates the financial problem though -- the layoffs. true we've only lost 10% of financial jobs, but we've lost probably 50% of related income. my total compensation for example has been cut to a third of its former level (that's a real ball-buster if you've never had that happen to you). the other thing is that SO many people had been paid in stock -- they have all lost previous years' income as well. a lot of people are broke and bummed. the supply of "good jobs" by their own definition of "jobs that pay what I made in 2007" has been butchered, and they can look forward to the government setting their future pay. it's a real bummer.
but to your point, it's all a confidence thing and maybe people are a little overly glum. I don't know if you're a financial person, but if you really believe that, go buy some stocks!
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 2:08 PM
"Will prices drop for only 3 years this time (2006-2009?) or will it be longer?"
The bigger the boom, the bigger the bust.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 2:08 PM
Mission Control we have 1 hour of Oxygen left... Please Advise....
U.S. Stocks Fall, Sending Market Below Lowest Close Since 1997
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aPvaYKTd90pQ&refer=home
"Feb. 23 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. stocks fell, sending the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index below its lowest close in 12 years, as concern that the deepening recession will erode earnings offset the government’s pledge to give more capital to banks."
I just love the retards. The S&P 500 is at a 12 year low and Brownstoner Asset Prices will hold up in Asshat Hill. Gentrification is on life support and Guess what, Assclowns? People are starting to move back to Manhattan! Wait until the spring when those "Condo Developments" go rental, offing Free Rent, Flat Screen TV, Gym Membership and other goodies just to rent out the imploding Condo Development!
Whuh, Your assetmentt of Dave is spot on. This retard trades his own money!
BHO I thinK your PWNING WADER! Wasder I thought you brought your house as not an "investment"? So why go after BHO?? maybe you see panic....
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 2:09 PM
"...from when do you measure the half off?"
It's in my tagline.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 2:10 PM
Serious question, cornerbodega: Have you actually come to the conclusion after reading my posts that I consider Brooklyn real estate to be a "buy?" If so, you honestly don't belong on this board. Different viewpoints are fine, but failure at basic reading comprehension is not. Even The What seems to at least understand that my basic thesis is that Brooklyn prices are falling and will continue to do so. And if you fall below him in the pecking order of Brownstoner contributors you might want to pick up your toys and go play somewhere else.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 2:17 PM
Ouch, that's gotta leave a mark.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 2:21 PM
Yes, lechacal...I had to read that a few times. LOL cornerbodega really hasn't a clue on anything.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 2:24 PM
Lydia.....which one are you????? I got your note to Leslie LOL
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 2:33 PM
I'd also like to note that Corndogbodega responded to all but my question about if and/or how many properties he owns (you know...since he's such an expert on the subject of real estate).
And even with my "please respond to my question" this was the only part left untouched.
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 2:35 PM
Clean up on aisle 9, please.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 2:56 PM
LOLOLOL.
While I love the not so snarky, Snark as well....the snarky one is flippin' highlarious.
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 2:58 PM
There aren't 9 aisles in any bodega.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 3:03 PM
4 TIMES INCOME SEEMS LIKE A 90 PERCENT CORRECTION... lol. I doubt we see that. I would think we get a good 30-40 percent correction... If we break 740 on sp 500
I think 690-710 would be the next resistance level. Unless there is no resistance. That would be nice.... I am looking to pick up HP for 5 dollars a share... I would like to get the BH townhouse for 400k... HOW IS EVERYONE DOING TODAY?
Posted by: HOBOKENROCKS at February 23, 2009 3:10 PM
I'm confused here...what is the 4 times income figure mean?
My place I bought in 2006 is 3 times my income. Almost exactly.
Posted by: 11217 at February 23, 2009 3:15 PM
Hey Assheads! It just keeps getting better!!!!
AIG lost 60 BILLION Dollars last quarter!!!!
AIG Seeks More US Funds As Record Loss Looms
http://www.cnbc.com/id/29353282
"American Insurance Group, the insurance giant that is 80-percent owned by the US government, is in discussions with the government to secure additional funds so it can keep operating after next Monday, when it will report the largest loss in U.S. corporate history, CNBC has learned."
Tinkerbell is dead.... The clapping did not work...
Sources close to the company said the loss will be near $60 billion due to writedowns on a variety of assets including commercial real estate.
"AIG has borrowed roughly $40 billion from a $60 billion credit facility provided it by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. if it can find a way to pay that down by swapping equity, it hopes to take it back up to a level that will allow it to meet its collateral and capital calls."
But.. But.. the housing values will be up in Brownstone Brooklyn, Right???
The What (Buh bye Retards)
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 3:29 PM
damn dibs, you're gonna lose over $500k on a place you spent $920 on and you're still cheerleading away. RESPECT!
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 3:29 PM
Where'd you get $500k from??? Besides, I'm not going to lose anything if I'm not selling it for 5-10 years but you can't seem to comprehend that and for that, I feel sorry for you.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 3:33 PM
11217 you freakn' idiot, like what I claim to "own" on a blog means anything. Like anybody believes Dibs when he says he owns 3 properties. The only thing thats fact is Dibs bought his ghetto property for 920K. Nobody is stupid enough to make up sh*t like that. The other fact is you're nothing but a newbie nyc transplant wannabe talking of "life experiences" in ny...
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 3:34 PM
I guess you've been told, 11217.
BTW cornholedinthebodega, I'm in good company since B. Corcoran bougth down the street for over $1.1 MM. You wouldn't know a long term real estate deal if it bit you in the ass and for that, I feel sorry for you. What an ignorant fool.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 3:39 PM
IT MEANS FOUR TIMES AVG YEARLY INCOME IN AREA, I GUESS..
Posted by: HOBOKENROCKS at February 23, 2009 3:41 PM
As far as newbie, I've been here 15 years....long enough to make a lot of money on my Manhattan condo purchase. I moved here to milk the market from saps like you. Bitter???
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 3:43 PM
"my prediction 9% unemployment in NYC"
We're already there. Government numbers are cooked like their denial in 2008 of a recession.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 3:43 PM
DIBS, you're letting yourself get baited again.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 3:46 PM
" I'm in good company since B. Corcoran bougth down the street for over $1.1 MM."
ROTFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dave now I feel sorry for you. AIG just lost 60 Billion dollars and you don't think you can lose money...
Dave is a Mother F******ing Retard!!!
Cornerbodega please leave the retards alone.....
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 3:46 PM
When all else fails, roll out the conspiracy theory. Good job, BHO, commendable.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 3:47 PM
Dibs, thats great that Babs has a place near you. I already knew you're a prototypical sucker. $920K x a conservative 40% ny drop = - $368. Add the pretty much consensus that bk will be hit harder and even harder in the fringe areas. Safe to say you're gonna have a nice fat $500K trim. With current reports you're even at more risk. Barrons says 50% for nyc. Ghetto would be wacked 70%. Have fun in your head on that sweet "deal"...
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 3:50 PM
"done a BHO and crammed my family into a too small space while waiting the crash"
Husband, wife and infant in a floor-through. We're fine.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 3:50 PM
bummer about that stock market, huh?
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 3:52 PM
OK - and, freeze. Now DIBS, the rest of us read cornerbodega's post and just write it off as not really worth paying attention to. He clearly isn't credible and doesn't add anything to the debate. Now if you get your Irish up and get in a cyber-fistfight with this guy, it will simultaneously raise his credibility and lower yours. Don't know why I'm so concerned with your decorum, but there it is.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 3:54 PM
dibs, congrats on being in nyc for 15 yrs and ending up in Bed Stuy for a $mil bucks. Brilliant, just brilliant!
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 3:56 PM
Yes, lechacal, you're partially right. But everytime he responds he looks like an even biggger idiot. Besides, its fun poking at him at his own expense. I really find it hard to believe that some people are so stupid though.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 3:57 PM
With lots of money to spare, cornerbodega. Very, very happy. Something you obviously cannot understand. read Warren Buffett on long term investing and the subject of not having lost anything in a down market if you haven't actually sold.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 4:02 PM
so now it's official -- US stocks at 1997 levels.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 4:04 PM
warren buffet lost his whole left nut this year.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 4:05 PM
"When all else fails, roll out the conspiracy theory. Good job, BHO, commendable."
Yup. But that's only when it fails, DIBS. The theory tested brilliantly when the recession was retroactively called A YEAR LATER!!! Unemployment numbers exclude job hunters who's benefits have run out. And, not everyone qualifies for benefits (fired, etc.). That means not everyone gets counted. Government reporting lags big time. You havn't learned by now?
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 4:07 PM
"so now it's official -- US stocks at 1997 levels."
Ugh. Seriously, who is selling here?
I mean, my MSFT has gotten destroyed, and I sure wish I sold it a year ago, but I'm certainly not selling it now, yet 57,000,000 shares were sold today...
Posted by: northsloperenter at February 23, 2009 4:08 PM
GOT MONEY IN THE BANK, GOT MONEY IN THE BANK, MONEY IN THE BANK. Better get it I think. Most banks are going boom.. Hey If you love your home than I would not sell. I think prices are going down but I prefer a good life to some more money... there is one to grow on....
Posted by: HOBOKENROCKS at February 23, 2009 4:09 PM
No, BHO. I don't believe anything until I hear it on TV.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 4:09 PM
"BHO I thinK your PWNING WADER! Wasder I thought you brought your house as not an "investment"? So why go after BHO?? maybe you see panic...."
What, I have never attacked BHO for saying housing is declining. My main beef with him is that he is posing as you, albeit in a lamer, less original form. That should bum you out more than anybody. I didn't buy my house as an "investment" but at the same time I don't want to see it precipitously drop in value. This is why I am trying to wrap my head around "50% percent off peak".
"It's in my tagline." BHO--with all due respect, your dumbass tag line is pretty non-specific. What is peak? I bought at approx 20% off the ask of my house. Is that 20% figured into the 50%? That makes a big difference in the bottom line.
"Husband, wife and infant in a floor-through. We're fine." Having lived in this exact same configuration (husband, wife, infant in 800 sq feet, about same as floor through) I know damn well that you need more space, especially when the infant isn't an infant any more or your wife wants to have another. Good luck with that.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 4:10 PM
"bummer about that stock market, huh?"
Uhhhh, not really. Looking great from my view. Means to an end.
DOW6000 would be very psychological.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 4:13 PM
"No, BHO. I don't believe anything until I hear it on TV."
That BABS is pretty convincing.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 4:17 PM
I figured you'd take the bait on that one, BHO.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 4:18 PM
hey wasder -- I want a brooklyn co-op and two kids. I already have a wife and a job. what's enough space for two little mutants? I'm kinda holding out for the brownstone duplexes to drop into the 500/foot range. Is that enough space to be confident that my wife won't freak out, turn the kids against me, and run off with the handy man? that's the last thing I need in a down economy.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 4:19 PM
bho what do you mean "very psychological"? you mean good? how do you figure?
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 4:21 PM
Joe--I have two kids and enough space for us seems to be about 1600 square feet, at least for now. If/when we need more we will take over another floor of the house if we can spare the rental income. Although something tells me you are being snarky here....
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 4:22 PM
joe - Depends on the hotness factor of the handyman.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 4:25 PM
I live in a 3-bed floor-through with Mrs. Jackal and two little jackals, with a third on the way. I find it perfectly comfortable. It's a 20' wide and very deep building, so we're talking about more space than your average floor-through. I moved here from the suburbs, where I had almost 5000 sf, which just felt unnatural. I am more comfortable in my current space than I was in that place. Not to say I'm not in the market to upgrade once I pounce and buy. I will probably pick up something in the 1400-1700 sf range (or more, depending on how far the market falls).
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 4:26 PM
joe....there are lots of places under $500 psf
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 4:26 PM
No fighting, I am back on this site ,so is What and DOW 8000 whom I guess is BROWNSTONES HALF OFF... ANYWAY I THINK MANANA IS A big day. If we can bounce off of 740 strong that is a great sign. Crazy thing is the USA is in better shape than all the restof the countries. Well at least temporarily.
Posted by: HOBOKENROCKS at February 23, 2009 4:28 PM
wasd -- no not at all, that was sincere, except for the thing about the wife -- I worked hard to convince myself that 800ft was enough, since that's all I can afford, and I was curious about others' experiences. 2 floors sounds about right to me. Seriously when I see families of 4 in these 4000ft McMansions out in the fly-over states it makes me a little nauseous.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 4:28 PM
Lechacal--I have never seen a three bedroom floor through before. My 800 sq ft co-op was two bedrooms and I was going crazy before the second kid came so that is why I bought when I did.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 4:29 PM
HOBOKEN...which is why the dollar has been strong against EUR and GBP and now finally JPY
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 4:30 PM
Joe--I mean you CAN do it (pull a BHO and live with a kid or two in 800 square feet) but do you WANT to is the question. If you can deal with your kids' stuff taking over every square inch of space then you will be fine. I have a four floor house that I live in two floors of and its working well so far. Per square foot it only came to about 300 per.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 4:32 PM
Wasder: I suppose it's more like a 2 1/2 (the third bedroom works for a baby with a crib and dresser but not much more). I would guess that the place is around 1100 or 1200 sf, although I am guesstimating from work and have never measured. It's actually quite comfortable how we have set it up. Two kids in one full bedroom, parents in another, the half bedroom waiting for the third kid, separate dining and living rooms. The only real problem from my perspective is that there is only one bath, something that will be remedied with my next move.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 4:34 PM
thanks lech, I'd do that trade any day.
dibs, I think we have kind of a different family sitch...
If I don't drink the PS321 punch it's gonna be 5K a month for school and then the whole thing is f*cked anyway. Otherwise I'd live in bed stuy any day.
I'm holding out for one of those juicy garden duplexes with a yard near the park, for, say, 800K. 500 a foot.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 4:35 PM
Lechacal--sounds like you have it pretty well worked out. Not that i am nitpicking but that would be an awfully deep building to be 20 feet wide and yielding 1100/1200 sq foot floor throughs. The older kids sharing is key so that you have that nursery waiting. When is Mrs Jackal due? Congrats to you!
I think I could deal with the one bathroom thing but it must be said that two is working well for me.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 4:39 PM
"your dumbass tag line is pretty non-specific"
The highest comp you can find per property on record, aka THE PEAK, is quite finite and pretty damned specific. My tagline is only "dumbass" because it's your worse nightmare.
"I bought at approx 20% off the ask of my house."
Now that is a dumbass tagline. Your own team will tell you that when confronted with reduced natefind listings.
"I know damn well that you need more space"
Hi hater. Maybe we need more space by kindergarten (damn, that's like 4 years from now!!!) or if we pop out another one. But until then, we're fine (1.5 BR). No rush over here. No luck needed. Families of four or more do it all the time in the hood. Get to know your neighbors. I'm rental-rich. Bye hater.
***Bid half off wasder's comp***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 4:43 PM
Yes joe. No kids here...which is a really big issue. I was just looking for the architecture, the space, the yard and a neighborhood that was likely to increase in value longer term despite the gospel according to someone in a bodega!!!
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 4:43 PM
Maybe it's 25' wide then... All I know is that when I see 1000 sf places my place always feels spacious in comparison. Third due in a few weeks now, thanks.
Posted by: lechacal at February 23, 2009 4:44 PM
snark watch out for my post in a few years
"seeking fat handyman. must have seriously funky breath, like the medical issue kind that can bring down a whole subway car. warts a plus. fix-it skills not important"
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 4:44 PM
"I figured you'd take the bait on that one, BHO."
Better that than a $920K Bed Stuy brownstone.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 4:45 PM
I would be inclined to go after the guys who work for the contractor.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 4:46 PM
"bho what do you mean 'very psychological'? you mean good? how do you figure?"
No, I mean bad. Very bad. Very fearful. A lesson in the markets is a lesson in psychology. That of crowds.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 4:49 PM
You've become tedious, BHO, repetitive and tedious. Nothing new, nothing to add. Pathetic, really.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 4:50 PM
hey bho I guess you meant dow 6000 is good cause you are on team bear? b/c not a lot of good will come of it....
I have to go -- thanks everyone for helping me torch another day.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 23, 2009 4:55 PM
Sorry lechacal--not trying to bust your chops. glad you guys are set there and I really send out my best to you on the new kid! Boy or girl?
BHO--your tagline is not that specific because nobody knows what the peak is, that is the point. If sales declines were 50% off 2006 pricing I would feel pretty OK about my house declining to that point. If it were 50% from now that would be pretty tough (ie "bid half off wasders comp"). And you can be as smug as you want to be but I know you are cramped in your house. That is your choice, just the same as I made a choice to buy rather than to rent. They both have strengths and weaknesses.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 4:56 PM
"You've become tedious, BHO, repetitive and tedious. Nothing new, nothing to add. Pathetic, really."
I know. Multiple warnings about the markets and Team Bull still doesn't get it. Sad. Oh well, repetition is key. One asshat at a time.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 4:58 PM
"not a lot of good will come of it"
But some good, like brownstones half off. Again, it's a means to an end.
"nobody knows what the peak is"
Because they can't comprehend it to be either the peak Case-Shiller reading per nation, per city, or the peak comp for whatever it is you're trying to buy. When I say "peak" I'm talking about the set of peaks or an average of all sets. You have to look at the context. We can talk about national home prices, Brooklyn brownstone prices, or Clinton Hill prices. Depending on the scale or scenario of what we're discussing, there's a finite peak price point from which to measure a collapse. Got it?
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 5:07 PM
I guess you have it all figured out, BHO. It'll be too bad if prices never get that low and then you're shit-out-of-luck.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 23, 2009 5:10 PM
B-H-O...
S-O-L...
M-O-U-S-E...
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 23, 2009 5:15 PM
Got it?
I think I do. The peak comp for a house like mine would have been between 1.3 and 1.5 or so I would guess. But even that variation is enough to make a big difference once a potential 50% drop is factored in.
Posted by: wasder at February 23, 2009 5:16 PM
"It'll be too bad if prices never get that low and then you're shit-out-of-luck."
Naw, it'll still be all good. Just because I can afford to pay $5 for a coke at the movies, it doesn't mean I won't try to sneak it in for $1.50 instead. If I get caught, I'll come off that $5.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 23, 2009 5:23 PM
Back to the Mr. 70K a year question, I am always amazed when people post this. There are a ton of highly affordable one-bedroom apts in the Bronx and Queens, not to mention two-families in Brooklyn. No need to worry about Mr. 70K a year. He's doing fine.
As for the Barron's article, all you can really take away from it is that contract prices for luxury property in Manhattan have dropped 15 to 20 percent since August 2008, that volume is down, and inventory is up. This is all significant, but everything else in the story is rumor and speculation.
As for Brooklyn, so far we have very little hard data. What we know: Clinton Hill brownstones down 15 percent (poster above). Subprime Brooklyn down 40 percent since June 06 peak (my own analysis).
Posted by: mopar at February 23, 2009 5:37 PM
bottom line;
When all the morons of the world are crying that the sky is falling and all is lost. That's when you know the opposite is actually more likely.
Or put another way;
As the consensus among morons approaches totality, the chances that the opposite hypothesis is likely, approaches certainty.
Posted by: Legion at February 23, 2009 9:32 PM
Legion! Legion! Legion! Legion! Legion! Wake up ! Wake up !Wake up !Wake up !Wake up !
"When all the morons of the world are crying that the sky is falling and all is lost. That's when you know the opposite is actually more likely."
No Assneck! This is "What's Happing ", Bruh...
Stocks Slump on Corporate Woes; Indexes Fall by 3.4%
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/24/business/24market.html?ref=business
On a day when two leading stock indexes sank to their lowest point in more than a decade, Wall Street did not need the dire problems of banks to lead the way to the bottom.
A broad sell-off on Monday sent the Dow Jones industrial average tumbling 250.89 points and pulled the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index to its lowest close since April 1997. In the last five trading days, stocks have fallen about 10 percent.
Legion is a 'Tard...... Go away little boy...
Oh and go night Assturd!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 23, 2009 10:15 PM
Yes Legion, buy buy buy! Weren't you cheerleading last month? In another month it'll go up up up! The hysteria is all made up by the media!
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 23, 2009 10:26 PM
Anymore homeowners saying I have a million dollor property?
Posted by: hannible at February 25, 2009 1:50 PM
Latest Restaurant Additions
-
Le Barricou
added November 20, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Der Schwarze Kölner
added November 19, 2009 12:00 PM in Fort Greene -
Oak Wine Bar & Café
added November 18, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Mr. Wonton
added November 17, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Casa Rosa
added November 16, 2009 12:00 PM in Carroll Gardens -
Cousin John's Café & Bakery
added November 13, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Elote
added November 12, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Miracle Grill
added November 11, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Phoebe's Cafe
added November 10, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Ruthie's
added November 9, 2009 12:00 PM in Clinton Hill, Downtown Brooklyn
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.