Tips for Renters From Tomorrow's New York Times

THANK YOU!! i finally have my answer to the question of how citihabitats determines vacancy rates.

it's from 25 to 30 BELLWETHER existing buildings. they aren't even looking at the new units. perhaps a reasonable sampling pool in a market with no new supply, but not even close to accurate for today's market.

"CitiHabitats, which last year signed leases on 13,000 apartments, has a unique method of tracking what is happening in the market: it monitors rental activity in 25 to 30 buildings, ranging from luxury towers to small walk-ups, in 11 Manhattan neighborhoods.

The “bellwether buildings,” as CitiHabitats calls them, not only provide a snapshot of what landlords are charging, but highlight how quickly apartments are turning over, whether property owners are willing to bargain and other emerging trends."

What a joke interviewing the biggest scam artists in the business - citihabitats - oh be very scared that there are fewer and fewer incentives. Just look in the magazines and there are offers of months free in new buildings. What a bunch of bs. Let's see what happens after the summer if unemployment continues to be high and the market keeps dropping. Rents again will most likely decline.

Good observation, aboutready.

Stratified statistical sampling, which is what it sounds like CH is doing, is a highly developed science. If the sample is biased, then the conclusions from it will be wrong, too.

Statisticians know it's perilous to pick and choose a sample that seems fair and representative to the chooser. We humans just cannot be trusted with this task, we are influenced by friendships and convenience and who will cooperate with us and many other things collectively called bias.

So the right way to do it is to stratify the population according to relevant characteristics--a little minefield right there, but it's doable--and then to choose a RANDOM sample of buildings within each stratification class.

Anyone know if this is how they did it?

Karla Harby, VP
Charles Rutenberg Realty
kharby@RutenbergRealtyNY.com

Of course. They hired McKinsey and commissioned a mutual year, multimillion dollar mutldimensional analysis.

Then, when they didn't like the result, they made up the numbers.

karla, i just don't see how 25-30 buildings purporting to cover 11 neighborhoods and apartments ranging from walk-up to luxury, especially given that there are so many new buildings, could possibly accurately reflect the entire manhattan rental market.

the stratification classes would seem to total well over 25 alone.

I understand that when you live in a rental complex that contains 35 buildings it is hard to fathom that a snapshot of 25 to 30 buildings could be an adequate sampling. But if you are not willing to live in retail deprived zones near Hudson Yards, Northwest Chelsea, Far West 42nd St or Downtown Brooklyn, then new housing stock vacancy is more or less irrelevant. In my neighborhood, which is neither prime nor up and coming, but has a good mix of residential, retail and transportation, has experienced only modest vacancies. Rental rates while softer than the peak a few years ago, have held up relatively well.

When you know nothing of math and have an agenda, it is not hard to fathom that you'd consider 25-30 samples to be adequate. Pray tell, PMG, how does one determine if 25-30 samples is adequate in this instance?

Aren't we snotty today? midrise walkup luxury doorman non-doorman midtown uws good school districts hipster neighborhoods buildings with varying sized units buildings appealing to families buildings for college grads

I took a fair amount of statistics classes and did very well. this gives me zero confidence in their numbers

Most of Manhattan rents for $40 to $70 per square foot, depending on the finishes and neighborhood. How many types of buildings do you need to follow to get an accurate sampling of that fact? I don't know the answer, perhaps because I haven't rented in over 20 years.

I thought the article was written by jim hones like most of the Times RE "journalism".

Nielsen's national ratings panel, the one TV lives and dies by, consisted of 2000 homes until the 1980s when it increased to 5000--small samples if developed on a statistically valid basis, can be credible--but I highly suspect the selection of "bellwether" buildings was at least partially subjective.

Fair number of statistics classes. And I was specifically referring to their claims for manhattan vacancy rates, not prices. An d you're a fool if you think that adding over a third of a years demand won't have any effect

The US Census Bureau puts the NYC free-market rental stock at 187.5K as of 2008. Call it 190K to put that number in 2010. Streeteasy shows 8500 apartments available for rent with "must have address" to filter out the likely fishing-expedition listings. That alone puts the vacancy rate at 4.5%. Throw in the fact that much of the rental stock from rental buildings doesn't make it's way onto SE, and you're looking at something in the 5-10% range. Yet Citi-Habitats reports 1.xx%.

By Citi-Habitat's own April numbers:

http://www.citi-habitats.com/market.php

There were 9974 rentals available in April 2010 with a vacancy rate of 1.23%. This translates to 811K rental units in Manhattan. Two questions for you, then:

1) Should the vacancy rate only reflect free-market apartments or the entire rental stock, including rent-controlled, rent-stabilized, Mitchell-Lama, and public housing units? I'm pretty sure the average prices being reported only include free-market rents.

2) Assuming we go with the vacancy rate overall, the Census Bureau puts the total number of rental units in Manhattan at 587.5K as of 2008. Where do the other 811K - 587.5K = 223.5K units come from???

Liz, did you ever see The Ratings Game with Danny DeVito and Rhea Perlman where they were gaming the Neilsen ratings? Un classico.

On good statistical samples, one thing that most people might not understand. The accuracy of the sample has more to do with the number of samples you take (25-30 vs. 5000) than with the fraction of the market you're sampling. The fraction of the market doesn't really matter at all.

More on the idiocy of the vacancy rate numbers. In the March report, there were 10,002 vacant apartments. In the April report, there were 9974 vacant apartments. The difference is 28 apartments.

What was the difference in the vacancy rate reported? It was 1.38% in March vs. 1.23% in April. If a 28 apartment difference amounts to a 0.15% difference in vacancy rates, then that would imply a rental stock of 18.6K apartments. Yet the 9974 vacant apartments vs. a 1.23% vacancy rates implies a rental stock of 811K apartments.

Uhh, that's some good statistics -- the 2 pieces of data they provide don't even line up within a factor of 10.

I read the article looking for a reference to nybits.com, the best source for NO FEE rentals.

Funny they didn't mention them - because it's more real-estate shilling from the Times, rewarding citihabitats for the ads they place.

I was thinking the same thing, Steve. That site is is pretty well-quoted on SE, but for an article meaning to be helpful to new renters, its omission was disappointing.

The truth is, the real estate industry loves the opacity of the Manhattan market. The less transparent, the easier it is for them to - shall we call it - obfuscate.

I guess the NYT advertisers would like their renters brainy, but not too smart or informed. How could an article written to help new renters omit nybits and streeteasy?

i'm pretty sure that the census report that nada referenced indicated that there were around 12000 rentals that year. how citihabitats could have over 13000 pretty much astounds me. alchemy, i guess.

there were around 3500-4000 new units in rental buildings this last twelve months, not counting condo owners renting their units, and not only in marginal areas. there were quite a few downtown and UWS, and you really can't place a value on the drug lockbox provided by OHM in sohell. pmg, how are your math skills?

AR, my math is fine. I just noticed a standard rental type prewar small one bedroom was on the market for 6 days, at $2800 and it has been rented. My friend doesn't vacate until the end of the month, so the landlord will have no lapse in rent. Seems to me that the rental market is pretty strong for well located buildings.

And while it wasn't listed, the size is approximately 700 sf, so the rent was $48 psf, very much the standard for older market rate units in the west 80s/90s

and you know what it was rented at? the terms? give me the listing, the details. you often throw out claims that are unprovable by you. such as vacancies haven't increased much in my neighborhood. how the fuck would you know?

at this point you have no credibility for me.

oh, and yes you've not rented for 20 years. but you've also consigned yourself to living in a studio. i guess many of us have to compromise.

here's your proof:
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/658086-rental-21-w-86-street-upper-west-side-new-york

but what about those vacancy numbers? how about you respond to that, rather than bring up a single unit, which you won't identify.

you amaze me. "seems to me that the rental market is pretty strong for well located buildings." but you admit that you haven't rented in twenty years, and i see no evidence offered other than one apartment that went quickly during the summer season.

agenda, much?

I highly doubt the LL accepted a discount when the listing was less than a week old.

sorry, i looked at the rental history for the building, and they're never 100% clear, but i'm not impressed with the recent results.

and you have no idea what a landlord would accept to get a quick deal done. none.

My observation of buildings in my neighborhood, is that vacancies are modest with the exception of one: The Lyric on West 94th st and broadway, which tends to be expensive. Still, Related, the professional LL, knows what they're doing.

Since my friend was paying less, there was probably some bargaining room. Still, he hasn't moved his furniture out yet. That is a quick turn around

LO! Way too emotional here so don't get depressed. Manhattan is a great place, but isn't for everyone so if you can't afford the rent, work harder and you'll get there eventually. The vacancy rates and things are just a distraction that are for the elite to worry or argue about. Just focus on yourself.

stevejhx is correct "The truth is, the real estate industry loves the opacity of the Manhattan market. The less transparent, the easier it is for them to - shall we call it - obfuscate."

If you are in a $3000/month rental, that's $72K over 2 years. Do your homework. Check out the market some months in advance. Do it directly - email some buildings, look at streeteasy, stop in and ask. Just avoid saying you are looking for 3-6 months from now, because you won't get attention.

best tip for renters.....get your checkbooks out

my office did 16 full 15% fee deals in 5 days of business so far this week, and only 2 owner paid deals. of course we concentrate our efforts south of 23rd st. and there were a number in the 10-13% of annual rent range. but still, lots of commission collected

Preying on the suckers.

Way to go.

Perhaps you may want to move up.

Submit your resume to BP?

I have an Indian friend who's got a saying from his old country. It goes something like this......

You may make a million rupies as a toilet cleaning caste member, but you are still cleanig toilets.

No cc. At bp you spill oil into the sea. as hones the rental broker the oiliness has a different feel. still toxic. but different.

That's horrid. How many people are needed to clean toilets? How muh shit is there in a country with over a billion people?

hey, no one forces people to look for apartments in the most expensive neighborhoods in the city. this a supply and demand issue, nothing more. there are ALWAYS middlemen when you deal with a valuable commodity.
w67, i think a million rupies is like $50 or something, otherwise, not a terrible analogy.

Stupid, stupid jumbo.

One million rpees is around 22,000 bucks. Your annual take home.

cc, something about you makes me think you are fat, dumb, and take a bridge or tunnel to your home.

What leads you to that conclusion?

The fact that I find you to be a revolting leech?

That iPad spell check is almost enough to drive you to be institutionalized and medicated.

just....something. i'm sure i am not alone in this, hence your current status of unwanted (officially unwanted) guest here.

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/18719-hfscomm1-jimhones09-rufus

do you think they will let you create a new discussion thread?

What's your point, you lying scumbag?

i've been right all along, and you're stupid (and probably fat). those are my points

And no doubt you're responsible for this new infestation.

what are you talking about?

The cockroach.

dont blame me for the state of your apartment

So hones, how come you keep changing your login? Did you ever ask SE why they banned your login, and why didn't you just get it reinstated if it had been a mistake?

i've changed it twice. kind of fitting anyway, since it is 2010.

Hones give no helpful info and should be ignored. Management co's are definitely looking eagerly for renters with good credit and jobs. And if you apt-searchers have to deal with brokers, definitely tell them to be super polite and super helpful and super non-oily with you or you'll walk. They're dying for your business. This jim hone poster is just an industry hack-ho ----

Did you ask SE about why they banned you? Seems like a strange thing for them to have done, no?

Also, why change your login at all, especially twice? Seems kinda like a loser thing to do.

Dogismy
about 4 hours ago
ignore this person
report abuse Hones give no helpful info and should be ignored. Management co's are definitely looking eagerly for renters with good credit and jobs. And if you apt-searchers have to deal with brokers, definitely tell them to be super polite and super helpful and super non-oily with you or you'll walk. They're dying for your business. This jim hone poster is just an industry hack-ho ----

an industry hack who keeps his landlords buildings full of qualified renters.

Oh, come on. Give it up already. You barely know the difference between a management company and a landlord, and you barely know the difference in management companies managing rental vs. coop buildings. The one time you tried to actually post a specific piece of evidence, you fell flat on your face.

You admit to having switched names multiple times, you first started with the same "get rid of ar, w67th, cc" MO as hfscomm1, you got banned and then put up smoke-and-mirrors to hide the fact, you answered to comments directed at rufus.

Can you please come back as another troll? This one's MO is getting stale and boring.

I liked colonelklink.... and miss shrimpie dearly... jimnutz.. come on you can do klink10 or shrimp10... or howz about a lozerborkerfathercantpleasemyaccountantwife10

w67thstreet, your post didn't have words ending in a z or any other references to inappropriate sex or bodily noises.
Also, you didn't tell us about your Rolex or your Porsche or your yacht or your wife who is a doctor or your teaching assistant position when you were at Columbia Business School or how you started out poor but now have trust funds for your kids.
What the heck is going on with you these days?
That last post wasn't hardly even provocative. What has happened? You used to be such a strong manly man. And now?

I'm going to bet that our doggie can't even squat as much as last year. That testosterone seems to be drained. Is it hibernation, waiting for the opportunity to dance on the graves of the less fortunate? Or is that big four oh creeping up and you are starting to re-evaluate what is important in life? Or something more sinister? Have you considered asking the misses for a referral to see a specialist?

right on cue jimnutz..

hold on gotta bake some cookies for my daughter and friends and then cut my son's nails... they're getting too long....

then I'll put on my skirt and beat the crap outta shrimpie/jimnutz.........

FLMAO... welcome back shrimpie....hahahahhahahaahahaaaaaaaaa

I know i know, it's just cruel playing mental games with a mentard like you.... FLMAO...

tag your it jimnutz....

Thanks, troll. I appreciate the resurfacing of shrimpie right on cue, he was a real good one. However, I'm kinda hoping for a new type of troll altogether, something visionary.

I really don't know who those people are. I've always been jim_hones. Either 09 or 10.

Nada, wtf are you talkimg about? What "test" did I fail and when?

Your talking about the david frankel post. I guess you must think that there is a law that states a property owner can't manage their own buildings AND manage other properties.

Did you ask SE why they booted you?

Also, why do you now say you only have had two names when before you had claimed more?

"jimhones09
about 9 months ago
i really think that this board would be a better place without: west67th, columbiacounty and aboutready. i would settle for anyone of the three finding a new hobby but all three would be most ideal.
i am not a new poster...i am an old poster sick of all of your antics
i am a real estate professional (if that matters at all)
i do seek and ocassionally try and give guidance on this board, but find all three of you beyond intolerable"

How long have you been posting? Do you find it odd that you sound just like hfscomm1, and that you got banned alonside him?

"Your talking about the david frankel post. I guess you must think that there is a law that states a property owner can't manage their own buildings AND manage other properties."

Nope, the strange part was that they were managing a bunch of coops with some vacancies, an that you were somehow saying that a set of coops with only a few vacancies meant something. Except you didn't know they were coops. Any decent broker would know the type of buildings managed by someone they work with.

Nada your really really dumb. The list had both rental buildings and coops on it. Look up the difference.

Whoa! One of the dumbest multiple personality nimrods calling one of the smartest financial guy on se, dumb. A true reflection of jimnutz' overwrought sense of self. Flmao.

Stop it 2484 open houses. Wooooot!

some of the "smartest" people i know are also some of the stupidest. a ten year old understands what i'm talking about.

jim_hones ---- and Homer Simpson.

yes a ten year old likely does. that's about your level

ten year olds just want and have little understanding of how to spend wisely. nice analogy honesy

Did you ask SE why they booted you?

Did you ask SE why they booted you?

Did you order the Code Red?

Is 10 years old too young to take Paxil? If you take Paxil at 10, when are you over it?

Infestation

Does it pass to a child?

I'm all for Oedipus and Jim Morrison, but incest ain't my thing.

On the other matter, would you like me to ask SE for you?

sure. it'll be funny as hell when you realize that you were wrong about this too

nada, this is what you found so confusing (smart?). though god knows why. follow the link and try and pay attention. please contact me with questions.

http://www.davidfrankelrealty.com/about.aspx

Amazing. Someone comes here to get some tips on renting from the NY Times and the whole set of "recent posts" is entirely meaningless.

I think SE is a resource that needs wider distribution. In part to counter Jim Hones. And more importantly the landlords. And then to improve the quality of housing stock in NYC.

But to read what would otherwise seem a helpful thread ... its both him and ---

I hear you, splaken.

In hopes of bringing this discussion back to a helpful place: In my searching for apartments in Harlem this week, I found that the overwhelming majority of apartments in the category I searched required the broker to obtain a fee from the renter. There were very, very few "Owner Pays Fee" options.

Renters who wish to avoid paying a broker's fee may need to work broker-less, to do the searches themselves, and then get out there and look at apartments and negotiate with owners directly.

It's all supply and demand, and right now is probably the height of the demand for rental housing.

But if renters go to brokers for help, I'm afraid they are going to have to accept the possibility that they may need to pay a broker's fee. I personally am becoming more strict about requiring renters to sign an agreement with me before I invest a great deal of time helping them secure a lease. Hiring a broker is of course optional, but if you hire one, renters, you do need to pay them for their services.

You don't pay a broker for what they do. You pay them for what they know.

kharby2
2 minutes ago
ignore this person
report abuse I hear you, splaken.

In hopes of bringing this discussion back to a helpful place: In my searching for apartments in Harlem this week, I found that the overwhelming majority of apartments in the category I searched required the broker to obtain a fee from the renter. There were very, very few "Owner Pays Fee" options.

Renters who wish to avoid paying a broker's fee may need to work broker-less, to do the searches themselves, and then get out there and look at apartments and negotiate with owners directly.

It's all supply and demand, and right now is probably the height of the demand for rental housing.

But if renters go to brokers for help, I'm afraid they are going to have to accept the possibility that they may need to pay a broker's fee. I personally am becoming more strict about requiring renters to sign an agreement with me before I invest a great deal of time helping them secure a lease. Hiring a broker is of course optional, but if you hire one, renters, you do need to pay them for their services.

You don't pay a broker for what they do. You pay them for what they know.

i do find it highly amusing that prospective renters like to use a resourse, then quibble about what it may cost them. i completely agree that at any point one can find an apartment on their own. the part that you didn't explain is that if they chose to do so, they are not seeing everything that is on the market by a long shot. they are settling for a smaller percentage of available apartments. also, the sledding is alot more ardous than people might expect it to be.
i never stopped getting people to sign fee agreements. i've had people walk out and refuse to sign, but i just figure they aren't worth doing business with anyway.

kharby, let me ask you. since deciding to not pay op's any longer, do you think that is has hurt any of the landlords who made that decision? you see the daily updates, etc.

This is like asking BP to characterize the impact of the oil spill.

It's a big ocean.

The exclusive deals that some buildings sign with brokers always amuses me. Are they merely doing it to cut down on red tape and farm out the cost of having someone on site show units, or is this a revenue sharing agreement where the building gets a cut of the brokers fee?

riversider, like any business, it boils down to relationship building.