discount_191009.jpg
Jonathan Miller posted a neat little graph over at Curbed on Friday, which attempts to show the savings of living in Brooklyn vs. Manhattan over the past seven years. Mr. Miller acknowledges that the graph is “simplistic and fraught with problems,” but it gives an approximated view of how much buyers save by living in Brooklyn, and that saving’s relationship to the boom and bust years. Using median sales price data (of condos? co-ops? houses? all available residential sales?), Mr. Miller concludes that the peak time of Brooklyn savings relative to Manhattan was the second quarter of 2008. Again, it’s an approximation, but an interesting one. Take a look at the original article for more details.
Three Cents Worth: Manhattan to Brooklyn Value Proposition [Curbed]


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. BHO, insurance seems cheap. Why not buy if you can pay 25% (1.5%) of what you’d pay to a broker (6%) and effectively put a bottom on your investment.

    signmeup but not yet available in my ‘hood.

    you’ll have to come up with a new excuse not to buy…

  2. The Manhattan boom/bust led Brooklyn, that’s all. I don’t see the retroactive significance of a past temporary Brooklyn value abnormality. Fun with numbers?

    ***Bill Thompson for Mayor***

  3. This chart was simply comparing the residential sales of the entire borough against one another and how the trend changed over the boom years – all property types. It’s not meant to compare specific locations. The take away for me was the relationship between the boroughs did change, with the price differential compressing during the boom period as demand soared.

  4. Jonathan Miller posted a neat little graph over at Curbed on Friday, which attempts to show the savings of living in Brooklyn vs. Manhattan over the past seven years.

    replace “living” with “buying a home” plz…

1 2