This space has had a steady succession of bad idea business that are unappealing and poorly run. Ill conceived. Ill executed. Ill will befall this new business as well.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at September 18, 2009 3:23 PM in response to StreetLevel: Slope's Drama Cafe Becoming a Latin Joint

Another reason I believe points matter is that on a multi-family house, the proportion of points paid which are allocated to rental units (i.e., 3/4 in an evenly divided owner occupied 4 family) are not deductible in the year of puchase but must be amortized over the life of the mortgage.
So you're not getting a tax break on 3/4 of your points right away - which sucks. Check this with an accountant - maybe the rules have changed.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at May 14, 2009 1:56 PM in response to Refinancing: How Sweet It Is

What is all this measured retaliation nonsense? An eye for an eye and all that? Proportionate response just drags things out. What your "friend" wants is to end it.
Old lady stole spot - Friend stole spot - Old lady vandalized - Friend should vandalize - Old lady's turn.
This old lady is committed to winning and not afraid to escalate. So the question is, is your friend certain she'll still be walking much less able to parrot the old lady after whatever the old lady does to her next? Get out of the game, because even with the foundation poured and dry at Third and Bond, your "friend" will still fit in a dumpster.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at May 5, 2009 12:01 PM in response to Keyed Car Incident

CAUTION: The Red Hook House had a constant vibration during the day in 2002 when it was last for sale. I wrote a long post about it 1.5 hours ago, but my post isn't showing up. Interesting story about the factory next door and a questionable broker and some craptacularly dishonest sellers. Don't know why my post from over an hour ago isn't showing up. Hmmmm.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at May 1, 2009 5:04 PM in response to Open House Picks

Spare yourself the aggravation of trying to come to agreement with your neighbors over choice of fence and division of cost. Do it yourself but first insist that each neighbor (provided they are the owners of the properties) sign a simple document stating that the fence is entirely on your property (odds are, this alone will make them reconsider). Then, if they sign, suck it up and pay for the whole fence. Then assert ownership over the fence - both sides of it - for the next ten years (clean and paint it occasionally) - then, in ten years, file an adverse possession action to secure legal ownership of the extra few inches you just took from your neighbors - and then, paint the side of YOUR fence facing their property hot pink. The universe is expanding slowly, why shouldn't you?

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at March 19, 2009 10:31 AM in response to Is this my fence???

Without expressing a judgment on Park Slope, everyone knows its boundaries perfectly well: Flatbush (South side) to Prospect ExpWy / 4th Ave (East Side)to PPW. Only the real estate agents and the folks who bought outside those boundaries hoping to be annexed-in would have us think otherwise.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at February 5, 2009 5:21 PM in response to Closing Bell: Best New Name for Park Slope

Targhetto.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at January 7, 2009 12:03 PM in response to Closing Bell: FIPS Goes Undercover

Likewise - thanks for the info Gary. I've been watching your project for years and in my eagerness to speculate on the business aspects I failed to say that everything I've seen from outside and my peeks in, make it look like this job was done right and with a lot of attention to detail.
As for the fence, you might consider electrifying it - those middle schoolers around the corner on 5th Ave are little hormone-soaked hellions.
Good luck with the sales.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at December 4, 2008 12:38 PM in response to 392 3rd Street Goes Condo

i disagree: a friend of mine, hoping to find a rental apt on a great block, asked someone (a workman I think) coming out of the building just this past fall how many apts were vacant and under reno. 3 was the answer. Obviously, this might have changed since then.
Plus, two years ago while renos were in full swing, I stopped at a stoop sale out front and got an earful from an entrenched RS tenant.
Sorry - didn't mean to sound concrete and facty.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at December 4, 2008 11:32 AM in response to 392 3rd Street Goes Condo

And another thing: does anybody else think it is odd that they completely landscaped the front yard with flagstone and benches but didn't install any fence/gate at the boundary with the sidewalk?

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at December 4, 2008 11:03 AM in response to 392 3rd Street Goes Condo

A few things interest me about this listing since I walk past this place on my way to the subway every day. The two duplexes are composed of ground floor and basement. I watched them digging the hell out of those basements 2 summers ago (I peeked in once - poor workers) - they made them much higher ceilinged than the ordinary basement conversion and it looked pretty nice down there.

The patios could only be little squares of earth just behind the building since the footprint leaves very little property in back and it backs up against another big apt building on 4th St. (thanks Google Earth!)

The other 5 apts must be rent stabilized - otherwise why not vacate them and sell the whole place? And one assumes, given the quality of the reno that the rent stabilized apts must be well below market otherwise they'd have more easily bought these folks out if they could have - though the MCI's for new mechanicals must be pretty whopping. In any case, I wonder what sort of cash reserves they put in place.

Per Property Shark, they bought the place in 2005 for $2.3M and I assume have been carrying 5 rent stabilized apts for 3 years while renovating 3 apts. Unless they worked some financing magic with the seller, I'm guessing they're ready to get some cash out of this place already.

Anybody know anything about the effects on quasi-luxury apt valuations in a small building that is 5/8ths rent stabilized tenants?

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at December 4, 2008 10:59 AM in response to 392 3rd Street Goes Condo

True, but after taking some blame for the bubble and its effects, I suspect banks will look not only at the loan amount and the buyer's debt/equity ratio and ability to make payments, but also at the "reasonable" value of the property. I expect they won't want to be seen as continuing to ratify exaggerated valuations.
The last property I bought was financed by the seller and I haven't borrowed from a bank for a while, but I imagine there will be some unexpected lending policy changes relating more to appearance than economics.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at December 3, 2008 5:23 PM in response to House of the Day: 505 1st Street

I'm a little afraid to weigh in here, but here goes. Much as I'd like modest 3 story brownstones not on park blocks to go for over $3M, this seems wildly overpriced to me. I like 1st St. (actually 1 St. on the sign) plenty, but between 7th and 8th, I think 3rd St. is the better block, what with the double wide sidewalks, and there have been a few listings on 3rd recently priced well under this one (http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2008/09/house_of_the_da_556.php).
Honestly, $3M seems outlandish to me. But if anyone is buying at that price, I'll definitely consider selling.
Plus, with lending the way it is right now, is anyone going to lend on houses that are near the high end even of a reasonable range? And how will it appraise?

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at December 3, 2008 5:01 PM in response to House of the Day: 505 1st Street

Great question. Might be worth mentioning why you need salvage or used and don't just buy a new one - as I discovered while renovating two bathrooms last summer, they don't make tubs with two aprons anymore. They only seem to make them with no apron or with one long-side apron and a choice of right or left side drain. The reason is that almost all tubs these days are fit into a three wall enclosure with only one side visible. Needless to say, this SUCKS.

Working with a one apron tub ends up costing inches in a bathroom redesign because after you fit a side-apron tub into a corner, you still have to close off the open end and the low head or endcap wall you have to build where the apron should have been is inevitably thicker than the old apron was, thereby lengthening the tub footprint and impinging on sink or toilet space.

And then the little wall you build tends to have much sharper edges than the soft curves of your old tub, which creates a toe-stubbing hazard in your naked-barefoot space.

My bathroom renos were planned on the assumption that everything could be replaced with size-identical items. Had I known that we couldn't just replace the tub, I would have re-configured the bathroom entirely to move the tub along the short wall rather than leaving it in the corner against the long wall. But my contractor had his head up his ass and instead of just telling me he couldn't replace the tub, he spent a week arguing with me that he could re-glaze it good as new. RE-GLAZE? In a brand new bathroom? Screw that!!

In the end my contractor built a low wall at the open end of the tub and edged it with bullnosed marble to try to create a roundy toe-stub-free effect. I don't love it, but it is the best we could come up with.

Sorry I'm no help. But maybe we can save the next folks from ending up in the same crap spot. If anyone wants pics, let me know.
MaxOmoxx

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at August 14, 2008 4:49 PM in response to Looking for 2-sided Tub

Whoops! I was logged in as Guest. Sorry. Just let me know the digits you're looking for and I'll check. MOxx

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at March 13, 2008 12:56 PM in response to gold decal numbers

First of all, I am a lawyer and having seen how Brooklyn Housing Court works on several occasions, I wouldn't for anything in the world set foot in there without an experienced shark on my side.

Second, I have used a couple different firms and wasn't very happy with either (both were expensive and not very responsive). So I just finally switched to the firm recommended by RSA (the Rent Stabilization Association), Horing Welikson & Rosen - 516-535-1700 - and though they are just starting on two actions for me, they are already much more professional and responsive than the last couple firms (returned calls within two hours each time I've called).

Ask for MaryAnne, the office manager and she will explain the program to you. They have a flat fee schedule for most housing court related actions and they will go to work on a $450 retainer (that is cheap!). It is only $59 for the required 3 or 5 day notice and the rest of the prices make me feel like the old firms were ripping me off.

Anyway, I don't work for these guys but they are the first firm I've used that makes me feel like I'm not just getting jerked around by a Kafkaesque system designed to ruin my life. I'm not a big landlord, but have about 8 apartments.

Still, my last thought is this: if you don't enforce your rights, you risk losing them.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at January 23, 2008 4:37 PM in response to Non-payment of rent

A couple years ago I saw a nice old 8 family apt. building in Park Slope with 7 stabilized apts and one rent controlled. The total rent roll was under $6K. The seller wanted something like $1.5M. Since more than 4 apts means it has to be a commercial mortgage and commercial mortgages are based entirely on income it was an absolute non-starter at that multiple. Even the most flexible lender wanted us to put down at least $600K.
Figuring it was a pipe dream, I went back to the seller with a low offer contingent on his (a) carrying the mortgage and (b) accepting a downpayment of less than 20%. Turned out his tax situation made that good for him and we ended up with a much better mortgage, lower rate and lower down than even a residential mortgage would have provided. The only downside is that we agreed to a pretty severe 5-year no-ReFi clause - but since we took the mortgage through an LLC we could theoretically sell the LLC with the building, mortgage and all provided we get covered on our personal guarantys.
Anyway, I felt pretty smart at the time for suggesting it and it has worked out well. The guy seems to be living off our monthly payment and his risky and continued involvement gives him some incentive to call me back and answer my questions about oddball wiring and heating issues that come up.
Short of a suitcase closing with one of the cash-heavy locals, it seems like it was the only way for him to get anything close to his price and us to be able to carry this loser of a rent roll long enough to work the building.
Now I just wish the tenants were as flexible.

Posted by: MaxOthermoxx at January 3, 2008 4:41 PM in response to When the Seller Also Writes the Mortgage