Open House Picks
Greenpoint 131 Milton Street Douglas Elliman Sunday By Appointment $1,250,000 GMAP P*Shark Windsor Terrace 38 East 2nd Street Douglas Elliman Sunday 1-3 $850,000 was $899,000 GMAP P*Shark Crown Heights 1241 President Street Corcoran Sunday 12-1:30 $825,000 GMAP P*Shark Flatbush 254 East 23rd Street Fillmore Saturday, Sunday 2-4 $465,000 GMAP P*Shark
Greenpoint
131 Milton Street
Douglas Elliman
Sunday By Appointment
$1,250,000
GMAP P*Shark
Windsor Terrace
38 East 2nd Street
Douglas Elliman
Sunday 1-3
$850,000 was $899,000
GMAP P*Shark
Crown Heights
1241 President Street
Corcoran
Sunday 12-1:30
$825,000
GMAP P*Shark
Flatbush
254 East 23rd Street
Fillmore
Saturday, Sunday 2-4
$465,000
GMAP P*Shark
“What you should pay depends a lot upon what the risk free rate is.”
Damn, there HE goes. Mean reversion automatically takes care of the risk free rate, DIBS. By the time we hit bottom, mortgage rates will go back to where they were to make fundamental home values 10 x annual rent. You think these low rates will stay like this forever? Come on, DIBS. You’re smarter than that.
***Bid half off peak comps***
I’m outraged! Is that all you got for me, moreteasir @ 4:09!!!
Look, we both pay taxes (Switzerland/Cayman accounts are now under the microscope) so that cancels out, moreteasir. The tax savings in ownership pales in comparison to the risk of net loss in buying/refinancing near peak and then being forced to sell (divorce, relocation, etc.) for much less, let alone unrecovered costs.
And yeah, 11217, where’s the support for that 15X number? A link please. I rented a floorthrough in prime Clinton Hill for $1,200/mo (the prevailing rate at the time) when homes were selling for not even 10 x 1,200 x 4(floors) x 12(months) = $576K. That’s fact for yo’ ass.
***Bid half off peak comps***
What you should pay depends a lot upon what the risk free rate is.
“The average ratio for 1987-2007 has been about 15”
That range includes the bubble (2003…) which has obviously skewed the normal number, 10, to 15. What was the number at the beginning of the bubble here in NYC, say 2003. Let’s take a look (NY Times RE, 10/5/03)…
http://www.gmaloneco.com/oct5nyt.htm
“With certain properties producing incomes far below their potential, some buyers have been willing to pay as much as 12 or 14 times the current rent roll in Manhattan. That is not the norm, however. The more typical range in recent sales in Manhattan is 9 to 12 times [average about 10] the annual rent, brokers and investors say.”
“The concept of ”multiple of the rent roll” is a standard way of speaking of sale prices in rental buildings in New York City. It means, for example, that if the average rent is $1,000 a month in a 60-unit building — or rent of $720,000 a year, assuming full collection and full occupancy — the building would sell for $5.76 million at eight times the rent roll. At 10 times [LOOK EVERYBODY!!!] the rent roll the same building would sell for $7.2 million.”
See, 11217 and all, they were using the normal 10 times rent in 2003 before the market took off. Nobody wants to look at history. 2003 nor the 1930’s.
***Bid half off peak comps***
BHO, ….just like your tax dollars are bailing out homeowners now, if housing prices go to zero your tax dollars will be used to help bail them out later. If they then double 40 years…no 50 years later, you’ll see zero benefit.
It’s lose lose for you.
> I don’t find the phrase “slight double dip” to be all that terrible.
When it comes from a real estate shill, I assume he honestly expects much worse.
“Things in life that aren’t fair:”
#2359181702387490832741 – Hunting for Red October
“New York City are on the rise for the third consecutive month.”
That was from September’s reading. It rose two more consecutive months but then fell according to last month’s reading (prices are now back on the fall). One, your information is two months old. Two, Case-Shiller lags by two months anyway. Three, the same thing happened last year, a few months of “recovering” YOY (false glimmer of hope) and a return back to reality. They’re obviously not properly adjusting for the seasons.
“New York has the seventh healthiest housing market of the 20 cities measured in the study.”
As in 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7!!?? Only SEVEN? Seriously disproportionate to what the bulls say about the NYC market. This strengthens the argument for further declines here. We’re supposed to be the last market to be affected but we’re ranked seventh in health out of only 20?
Your last paragraph is beautiful spin! Appreciation maintenance – ha!
“since ASK has been dropping for a while already, have to assume closed prices has been dropping too” – M4L @ 3:30
You “listening”, 11217?
***Bid half off peak comps***
Well according to this, NYC was at a 36x price to rent ratio…
http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/19/real_estate/investment_prop/cuckoo_condos3_0509/
Snark,
I don’t find the phrase “slight double dip” to be all that terrible. Do you? I guess everyone’s idea of slight is different…
“(And that 15x is for the U.S. as a whole. NYC was always higher than that).”
Where is the support for that? Not to say I don’t agree with you, just want to see the evidence.