Most Post-2006 Condo Buyers Are Underwater?
In an article describing how co-ops are much better positioned for the downturn because, unlike condos, their position in foreclosure proceedings is senior to the bank, comes this doozy of a quote from the president of a property management company in Manhattan: I think it’s safe to say that the value of any apartment purchased…
In an article describing how co-ops are much better positioned for the downturn because, unlike condos, their position in foreclosure proceedings is senior to the bank, comes this doozy of a quote from the president of a property management company in Manhattan:
I think it’s safe to say that the value of any apartment purchased in the last two years is less than its purchase price. The simple calculation is that if you bought an apartment a year ago and financed 90 percent of the purchase price, as many did, and now it’s worth 20 percent less, you’re upside-down as an owner.
That’s another reason why co-ops are in better shape: Most owners had to put down a minimum of 20 percent when they bought.
The Downside for Condos in a Downturn [NY Times]
well, yeah.. about the banking industry. I’m open to debate on it, but a big part of the industry supported an infrastructure to provide leverage that is no longer needed. lots of small leveraged firms popped up over the last 5-10 years, & most of those will disappear for the (i don’t know) “medium-long term”. Same true for banking jobs in leverage-related business like securitization. They’re gone for a long long time. I don’t have any numbers, but total staffing has to recede and stay back until the next comperable credit cycle starts…don’t know when that will be. I have a pretty good look into it, because I work in a credit markets job at a bank and I’ve watched my colleagues and clients get shot all year — but I think anyone would tell you that it’s worse for biz here than any time in their whole careers. So anyway no offense taken about the S-Bomb.
I don’t see how you can argue that NYC is working with limited land/supply.
Not in the least.
The reason prices are so incredibly high here are precisely because we have a housing shortage.
oh yeah — maybe I should be more clear — two separate points, one about the potential for people to leave, and the history of people actually doing it (we could argue all day about whether white flight is relevant to the future), so call it a “demand side” argument — but the land point was more a supply point, about the perennial boom argument that “they’re not making any more land” — this is always used to justify speculative RE pricing and further upside. I meant that we are not any more “out of land” than we were a long time ago, so the supply argument doesn’t justify prices higher than they were, say, a decade ago. you can’t justify a V recovery any better than you could justify the boom in the first place
“that the banking industry will be smaller for the medium-long term”
Just wondering how you know this with such certainty?
medium-long term?
Really???
Sorry to hurt your feelings, Joe.
I’ll put on the kid gloves next time, just for you.
sorry — also add the facts that lots of people are losing jobs and can’t afford to live here, that the banking industry will be smaller for the medium-long term, and that the city revenue crisis will make it kind of suck at the margins…and you get an even stronger case …and I misquoted you 11217, you said “so stupid”
I thought your point was that NYC ran out of land 100 years ago?
Wasn’t it?
Even though 100 years ago, we had 3.5 million fewer people…?
I don’t see your point, I guess.
Does John Lindsay ring a bell??????
Snark,
Two words explain that: white flight.
I hope we are beyond that at this point, however.