30s suburbanite buying a NYC studio for dating?

Sounds like a fun idea.

Also sounds fairly expensive for someone making 100k

I sort of did this: Lived in Nassau County, found dating tough because you're always running for a once-an-hour train, and moved into the city (in my case, back into the city) to date.

Two thoughts:

1) Sharing the apartment with someone else will be a problem, because probably the way you've structured it (getting a part-time roomie after purchase) will be a violation of the NYC hotel law. You should instead line up your roomie beforehand, declare to the condo board at purchase who that roomie is, and have them listed as an occupant.

2) It seems like you could achieve the same result of having a bachelor pad with a limited-term sublet rather than a purchase. For one thing, if you're successful with the dating, then you're going to be part of a couple that's stuck in a studio .. in my case, I met my husband and we stayed in our studio for five long years before we managed to rearrange our real estate more to our liking. Certainly, if you're bearish, I don't see the impulse to purchase.

Good luck!

ali r.
DG Neary Realty

@riversider. Why expensive if I am putting 100% down, and already living mortgage free in my primary residence? Even without a weeknight tenant, both apartments would cost me $600+$700=$1300. Doable on $100k, I'd think.

@porch: I am not looking to live with anyone. Just date casually. I would never live in a studio with another person at this age. Also, it's only for weekends. Also, subletting is less ideal b/c now you're in someone else's apt. Not vice versa. Plus, if it costs the same, I'd rather own the place, for long term ownership, inflation hedge, status, etc. (Sounds better if you own the apt?)

Rent a studio for two years. Less at risk money for something that's likely to be an idea that you may grow tire of.

Renting a studio for 2 years = $40k.
That's 17% of 250k.
So, you're banking on a 17% loss or more, in 2 years.

If it drops less than that or rises, renting loses.

And, no inflation hedge.
Theoretically, lets say I want to do this for 25 years.
Rents rise faster than co-op fees.

I ball park an extra $1500 a month in renting costs and a total savings on closing costs and protection from assessments and increased taxes. If after two years you like having two apartments I would consider it then. And if you this was a mistake, your costs of ending the experiment are far less.

Seems like a fairly impulsive idea. Any apartment you buy for $250k will be difficult to rent out if you lose interest and perhaps impossible if you do a coop.

Captive, *I* don't think prices are going to go down 17% in the next two years -- I was just responding to your "tons of room for a freefall" outlook.

You would probably enjoy my book, which is a memoir but has some good basics for first-time buyers. For $12, it's a pretty good tutorial on how to fish: http://tinyurl.com/2ag28z

ali r.
DG Neary Realty

Many coops don't even allow a "pied a terre", which is what you're proposing without the commuter-rental aspect. Add that in, and you're likely to find yourself denied admission or in a legal mess. And an ever-changing roster of commuters? Aside from being illegal, your fellow cooperators are likely to have a fit and out you, even if it's a small, doorman-less walkup.

Just get married and go to your kids' Little League games in Westchester -- it's much easier. If you're a Gay, you can get married in Argentina and then buy some Little League kids in Romania. Easier than the motion-picture comedy-plot arrangement you're contemplating.

@River I think there is a demand for a simply place to sleep in NYC. I could easily find a tenant among my own personal circle who commutes to NYC and wouldn't mind staying there 2x a week.

@porch: Thanks. I will buy the book. $2 used! As an author, doesn't that just tick you off?

@Alan: Sorry, no romantic-comedy fantasies here. Not looking for marriage/kids. Just single women without kids. And there are millions 35 mins. away. Simple.

"I could easily find a tenant among my own personal circle who commutes to NYC and wouldn't mind staying there 2x a week."

Only if this is a condo and not a co-op.

captive914, let's say you walk into a car dealership and asked whether it's a good idea to get a car to help with your dating situation. Think for a moment what the typical salesperson response would be.

I would think the salesperson telling you to rent a car instead of buying one would not be on that list of possible responses. However, if you did get such a response, perhaps you might want to stop and reconsider your plans.

@Sunday: Not sure I get your analogy. Not to be pedantic, but an apt is an (appreciating) asset. A car is not. Why would I rent, over the long haul, an appreciating asset? I am not looking to live in the city for just 2 years. Rather, this is a long-range lifestyle plan for my 40s and 50s as a bachelor. Maybe I wasn't clear on that part.

No, an apartment is a piece of a big deteriorating, aging, weather- and gravity-plagued man-made structure that requires constant infusions of cash to maintain. Unlearn the marketing hype of the real-estate-industrial-complex.

Rent a Ho for 2 yrs. Yes there are actual hos around for rent. I remember a Sandra Ho in high school.

I don't know, but I'd put out for a guy that's good looking, and flies 'me Miami on a whim. And rents two rooms. That's so hot when all the signals are let's sleep together, but then a 'slow down' signal. Oh my, my nipples are getting hard. Maybe I should put on a shirt.

captive914, my analogy is on the car salesperson and RE broker, not about the car and the apt.

I don't see a $250k habitable midtown studio dropping in value more than 30%. The biggest risk to housing values is if the government gets out of the mortgage guarantee business, or if interest rates spike higher. The problem with real estate as an investment asset is that we can go through period of illiquidity where you just don't get a bid for your home, even when it is priced at a discount to "market". This is more true of a small studio that you never intended as a primary residence than a more livable larger one. At one time the banks would not finance a studio under 500 square feet. Developers were building studios smaller than that recently.

Money aside, I think it's an excellent dating plan. I have plenty of single female friends in their 40s and if you want to keep things casual, a place in the city would be a huge plus. However, if this is about dating, the space needs to be female friendly. Make sure the bathroom is appealing (doesn't have to be new, original art deco baths are amazing, but the grout should be clean). I'm not joking. Casual relationships have ended over smaller things and it sucks to do all the work to get someone back to your place, just to have her turn tail once she sees the grimy bathroom.

'tail'

captive, I'm actually just happy my book never got pirated onto the Internet!

@Sunday, I am not asking RE brokers for advice. I am asking this forum. Big difference.

@Alan. And on the flip side to those expenses is capital appreciation. I doubt people who bought a 4-story brownstone for $350k in 1980 are crying about maint. costs right now.

@PMG There will always be some baseline inherent value to being able so sleep in NYC. And it does not need to be liquid. I view this as a hotel room. Commuters. Sex room to conduct affairs. Tourists. Whatever. Studios will be "dead" when the notion of a hotel room is also dead.

@looking Agreed. It doesn't need to be big, but it should be clean, updated/modern and tastefully appointed. Subtly, I will make it clear the studio is my 2nd residence. But yes, I would have the studio totally renovated. Gutted bathroom and kitchen is not costly. I am meticulous, and with less space, there's less to replace!

@Porch, I ordered your book. Looking forward to a nice light read that is instructive

Why not get a nice hotel room lined up for 2 nights every other weekend? You can easily negotiate repeat business room rates and make it a suite if you tend to the extravagant. You'll probably still spend less than buying a place, maybe even make it deductible as your new biz site. A real plus is the ability to change 'hoods for ones with more attractive potential date material as you age out.

How about someone who bought that 4-story brownstone in 1945? Crying in 1975? Very much so.

And what's your estimate for the cost of a gut-renovation to kitchen and bathroom? Let's save some time: you're wildly off in your estimate.

@raddoc Good point about mobility, however, but I can't afford hotels, and there's something totally different about living in a hotel vs. owning a place in the city. Tourist vs. resident. I think women will take you much more seriously with the latter. Did you see my numbers? If I put 100% down, the studio costs me $700/mo. And I can rent it out 1-2x a week. There is no hotel in NYC that is cheaper.

@Alan. Good point. As stated in my OP, I am leary of buying anything of significance after a 1000% bull run for 2 decades. Reversion to mean.

I redid my galley kitchen in Westchester for $5000 (prefab cabinets, countertops, sink, wood floor, 3 appliances, paint, lighting, etc). $5000 for the bathroom also. (vanity, sink, mirror, tiles, toilet, paint) I figure to double the cost in NYC? I agree, I might be overlooking something, b/c it makes no sense to see $800k apts in NYC with 30 year old kitchens and bathrooms. Enlighten me. Thanks!

captive, I'm a big believer in buying a studio in Manhattan if you are a single person. I wasn't trying to discourage you. But when you buy you should consider the downside risk and be willing to accept it. I bought an alcove studio condo for $179k in 1998. The sellers were willing to part with it for less then they paid new in 1990 because (1.) the developer went bankrupt and a comparable unit traded for $100k in 1995; (2) the tax abatement was nearing expiration and the sellers couldn't rent the condo with a positive cash flow; and (3.) the sellers viewed $179k, which repaid their mortgage fully, as an acceptable recovery on a sour investment.

captive, please give me an amazon review if you like it!

ali

If you don't plan to marry why would you care if a woman "took you seriously"? You seem to be wantng casual relationships so that type of woman you'd attract shouldn't be put off by you spending weekends in a hotel.

Captive, you won't find a studio that any 30 something woman would find attractive for $250k. I think you'd need to double that to get an appropriate shag-pad in Manhattan.

@PMG Again, I am getting a studio in midtown for $700/mo. It's hard to beat that. Until rents drop in 1/2, I think I will be safe. But yes, I am aware that a $250k studio might very well drop to $150k. This is something to be used for the next 25 years, however. Let friends use it, etc.

@Ali, will do, but you already have several good ones!

@kstiles A man needs to be taken seriously in order to casually date or marry. That's all. No one is dating some guy living in a hotel. It's just too weird. He might as well be a foreign tourist.

@downtownsnob Good point, but I will make it clear this is my "spare" apartment. My real apartment is much bigger and nicer. It's quite different than actually living in a studio 7 days a week. Frankly, I don't plan to have women hang out there. It's mainly for me sleeping there, and using it as home base.

mixing money and sex is a bad idea. while the price of RE will go down, the price of sex as you age will go up. So if you are asking about investment -cash is king (specifically with your full down p.) if you are asking about orgasm- Viagra is better investment than a studio.

captive914, I'm afraid that if you buy something really not that good but inexpensive, you might, just might not feel so great inviting your dates over. I mean, late 30s is almost early 40s, and a reasonable prospect might expect a bit more.
I apologize in advance for being presumptious about your dating plans/expectations/goals.

By the way, it sounds like you're married...

I agree - it does sound like you are married.

this is one of the most bizaro, hilarious threads i have seen in a long time...
not sure the lack of nyc apt is the issue here...

@Salut. Again, I agree. What can I do. I am not going to drop my entire $700,000 nestegg into a weekend NYC apt. Esp, when I think the prices are inflated from the credit bubble. I'd rather be rejected based on my modest studio in NYC than not be in NYC at all. That is the bottom line.

Ha, not married, but yea, I am sure lots of married guys do get spare apartments for their affairs. Common, I bet.

@007. I disagree. If a 40s man can stomach dating within 5 trailing years of his age range, there are millions of aging women who are hornier than ever, more relaxed about casual sex, and get less attention from men since their market value has dropped from their 21-34 peak. Guys in their 30s get more sex than their 20s counterparts, if they don't marry. I expect the trend to stay intact through my 40s. Esp. if the guy isn't interested in kids, and not forced to focus on 21-34 fertility. By my late 40s, I fully expect to not even care about sex one iota. Frankly, I barely do now, and am almost going through the motions while I still can enjoy the 21-34 bracket.

again, the apartment is not the issue

obviously he made up his mind buying already. Just need some support from this board.

This is getting creepier and creepier. I'm out f here.

I agree, creepy. good luck captive....can't imagine the "lucky" lady who gets to be with you!

> Frankly, I barely do now, and am almost going through the motions while I still can enjoy the 21-34 bracket.

uf, why on earth do you care about the career of the women you date if you only want to do it casually? paying for sex seems to fit your needs better imho. sorry for being so blunt.

I concur, this whole idea is cockamamie at best. Serioulsy, post your intentions on Craig's List, pay for the service, get a room at the Marriott Marquis one night a month for 24 months to act out your NYC dating fantasy, then find yourself a real Sally/Sue/Jennifer to have your 2 1/2 kids with up in Westchester. All the sex & none of the common charges.

captive,

no offense, but why did you ask for advice if you were going to reject, out of had, any and all opinions that do not correspond with the preconception you started with? you can make up your mind one way or the other regardless of what anyone here says. instead of arguing against anyone who doubts the merits of your plan, why not just listen and consider?

now, here's my advice:

a pied-a-terre is an extremely expensive and extravagant use of your relatively limited resources. even if you make the (totally false) argument that there is no opportunity cost to locking up your $$ and putting it at risk in this studio, the costs are far from negligible at your income level. You will be spending over $8,000 a year on monthly payments on this apartment--which, I should add, will be close to a dump at the price point you mention. You could spend $200 a night in a hotel that, even at that low rate for manhattan, will be much nicer, and you could do it 2 weekends a month, all year round, and come out close to even without putting a dime of your money at risk.

you could also rent and see how you like it. there are studios available in midtown for $1,300 a month. This does not add up to $40,000 over two years, but $31,000. Since you mention 2 years in one of your posts let's assume that's your time horizon. With no appreciation or depreciation on the asset, not including any costs associated with maintainging/refurbishing, and assuming maintenance doesn't go up, this would mean you would spend 17,000 in monthly payments, $3000 (probably more) in various closing costs to buy the apartment, $3,000 in closing costs to sell the apartment, and $15,000 (the standard 6% fee) to a broker to sell the apartment. At a minimum this adds up to $38,000.

you will also have to pay moving costs. you will have to buy furniture. now you are even talking about a renovation--and no matter how little you spent renovating your kitchen in westchester, i guarantee that you are not going to renovate a kitchen in new york city for $5,000.

now, you say that you can easily find someone to rent your apartment part-time to defer costs. if that is the case, you could just as easily do the same thing with a rental. you could also rent an apartment jointly with another person--for your use on the weekends and his during the week.

you could also do the obvious thing, go on craigslist, and find someone (there are tons) who has an apartment they don't use on the weekend. for $100 per night (or even less--some seem to be as low as $50 or $60 a night) you can use the apartment on weekends. if you guarantee that you will use it every weekend you could probably even get a better deal.

So, for less than the cost of your monthly payments alone you can have exactly the same thing: a studio for use on the weekends. the only possible reason to buy this studio is because you think real estate prices are headed up in nyc over the next two years. maybe they are, maybe they aren't. but without some major price appreciation this is simply a very bad deal.

one more thing:

even casual dating (unless what you really mean is casual sex) will be difficult if you are only in new york city two nights a week. i think you have a fantasy that once you own a studio in manhattan you women will be falling at your feet. it doesn't work that way.

i think it is a great idea for you to spend time in the city, but don't think that this $250k studio is your easy ticket to a great dating/sex life.

The personal attacks are bizarre, and I will just ignore them. No dating fantasies. Read carefully. I said it's better to at least be in the game than not at all. No more, no less.

@happy Thanks for trying to help. While I understand about putting $250k at risk, a $200 night hotel is simply not the same cost as $700 / 30 days = $23/day. It's almost a 1000% difference. Even if I only use it 8 nights a month, that's $87/night vs. $200/night. And, this is before talking about tax deductions or sublet income.

More importantly, like I said, staying in some hotel doesn't make you part of the city. You're a total foreigner. I'd be better off driving home.

In the same vein, even if the rental cost was remotely comparable (it's not), I'm not interested in the renter sublet thing. I prefer to have my own place. There's nothing weirder (esp. as a 30s male competing with other males) than divulging you don't really live in the city, and you're just renting some grandma's apartment on the weekends. Imposter. Talk about ZERO chance of bringing someone to your apt with her crap everywhere. No thanks. I can afford a better situation.

Also, I disagree it will be a dump. I saw some nice clean studios in that $250-$300k price point. It will be furnished tastefully and renovated. It's not hard to outfit 1 small room like a pro designer.

And no, 2 years was not my horizon, it is indefinite. I'd like to have a weekend place in NYC for my 40s, 50s, and maybe even 60s. All I would ever need is a 300 sq ft studio.

Captive, don't listen to the crap from SE posters that will say investing in a Manhattan studio is the highest risk, lowest form of investment. Frankly, in a world of greater austerity, studios will likely become more appreciated for their utility and economy.

These don't look like dumps.
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/543259-condo-212-east-70th-street-lenox-hill-new-york
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/527354-coop-25-tudor-city-place-murray-hill-new-york

@PMG This purchase something I will be using for 2 decades. So, I am not looking to make a short-term profit, and do not need liquidity. While not impressive as a primary residence, at my age, a studio serves its need as a crash pad.

SE people did make good points about no subletting with a co-op vs. a condo. It may be worth paying more for a condo to realize some rental income. I will have to run the numbers.

Tudor city offers the most charming, but tiny, very affordable studios for Manhattan living. The buildings are relatively close to Grand Central which may be important to you commute wise.

the 70th street place basically looks like a converted old-law tenement from the outside, and it's a walk-up - great for all those women you'll be getting ( with their stiletto heels), and you, when you're in your 60's and 70's.

That tudor city studio looks awfully small; sometimes smallish apartments sort of psychologically can be laid out to seem bigger, ....but that thing is like a little hotel room.

I've vacationed in 300 sq ft studios. They are ample in size when not crammed with all your day-to-day crap. As a weekend getaway, it's more than enough.

The walk-up is a good example of not knowing NYC RE tastes. See, I am fine with a walk-up. In fact, I prefer it. I love exercise, and hate the intrusive nature of hovering doormen.

This is like a car wreck on the road you know you should not look at but can't help... so here goes.
Why would you post that you want an apt for dating purposes to a group of strangers, why not just say you would like a studio because you love the city and do not want to live here due to the commute.
Then you argue with everyone that tries to give their opinion...
All this makes you creepy, and honestly a little scary.
I don't think an apt is going to help you in the dating world.

Women in your target age bracket looking for (or just accepting in desperation) the non-relationships you say you'll be going after in the next decade would rather date a tourist in a nice hotel room than some suburbanite's studio walk-up.

Test that staircase out in heels before you buy and you'll see why.

I wrote "decade" because you wrote "By my late 40s, I fully expect to not even care about sex one iota," which suggests this is a ten-year plan for pretending to yourself that you're not engaging in prostitution.

I've no problem with prostitution, by the way -- just the self-delusion.

re2009 if you keep your comments on real estate, that would be constructive. saying a poster is creepy is neither constructive nor true.

To clarify, I am just not looking for marriage or kids. A dating relationship is neither of those. Also, if a woman can't climb stairs, then she is disqualified. Problem solved. There are millions of healthy people in NYC. I am sure I can find some that are even capable of navigating staircases.

@Boss. You seem to be the one who is delusional here. I am talking about long-term dating in NYC. Basically, the same form that millions do every single day, for entire lifetimes. You are talking about exchanging money for sex. I am not paying a dime for sex. Perhaps you need a dictionary.

yes RE2009, it's one thing to BE creepy another to express your opinion someone is creepy.

> would rather date a tourist in a nice hotel room than some suburbanite's studio walk-up.

so true! at least there's something exotic about, say, a European tourist.

Captive, I don't get the judgmental projections of who you may or may not be either. Your decision to ignore them is wise.

I'm generally a bear for NYC RE, so read what I say in that context.

First, let's talk about what you're buying. Let's use the second apartment as an example. It's rental value is around $1300 (see asking rents for similar places in the building). It's maintenance is $650, but let's call it $550 after the tax deduction for property taxes. Let's say you sell after 10 years (I know you think 20, but many things can happen). In NYC, transaction costs run around 10%, so $25K or $200 a month amortized. Let's also amortize a $12K renovation, so another $100. Effectively, you'll be paying $250K upfront to save $1300 - $550 - $200 - $100 = $450 a month. Call this $5000 a year, or a 2.1% return on your money. This return is not flat, but rather grows with inflation which markets currently put at 1.5% going out. You can actually add these two together to get an effective fixed return of 3.6% on your money.

Now that's a crappy return on the face of it, even as unlevered. The highly-government-subsidized mortgage rate on the senior 80% portion is 4.5%, so I think something like 5.5% is more appropriate for such an illiquid higher-risk asset. That being said, that 3.5% is after-tax, and you're kinda pissing away money that is supposed to be there to cover your long-term liabilities (i.e., using the $750K for when you retire) in a short-term negative-return asset (cash, which loses 1.5% a year in real terms). To me, it's not a great place to put your money, but it's not a pure stupidity.

Think of it another way. Suppose I say that after account for risk and all costs, buying affords you 20% less bang for your buck. Would you care? I doubt it because (a) $300 ain't gonna break the bank for you, and you'll view it as money well-spent; and (b) your baseline view on your long-term capital right now is so skewed that you're willing to lose 1.5% in real terms on your money annually to avoid any risk. I.e., putting your money in a long-term place where it'll earn 2% anually in real terms, while perhaps a poor option in risk-adjusted terms, looks less bad.

One thing that's working for you, IMO, is that you're looking at the absolute bottom of the lower Manhattan market: small non-descript apartments in non-descript buildings in non-prime areas of the city. As soon as you start looking at, say, a rent level that is 10x higher, like $13000, you'll start seeing prices that are 16x higher, like $4M. On top of this, all sorts of government subsidies start getting pulled out at this price point. This is where the "NYC prices are stupidly priced w.r.t. rents" views are strongest.

On the question of whether you can afford it, that's a no-brainer. You have $900K in assets, $750K of which is liquid. You're looking to illiquify another $250K, leaving you with $500K liquid. You'll pay something like $15K upfront for closing costs & renovations and $20K at the end, which are drops in the bucket. Your monthly housing nut will be $1100 or so after-tax deductions, which will be like 20% of your after-tax income. Even if the value of your $400K RE portfolio drops by 30% to $270K and you're forced to sell for whatever reason, it's $130K on $900K. You can live with that kind of risk.

So, I think you can certainly go for it if that's how you'd like to spend your money. That being said, I think you should just rent for 3 months off a Craigslist sublet (the whole 3 months, not by the day) just to see if you actually like it. Doing it will give you a much better idea, and you'll feel more certain in your choice either way. You can get Craigslist sublets on the cheap at the last moment from people who have no other choice, and you can make the place your own. Yeah, you'll maybe spend $1000 more than you otherwise would, but it seems like money well-spent.

"To defray, I could rent it to a suburban commuter for a few weeknights, as well."

I don't think you should do this. First, you can afford not to have some arrangement with a stranger (or friend) sharing your place. Second, think about how it'd look if someone you're dating says "let's meet up Wednesday", and you have the unenvious choice of being evasive about going back to your place or saying "it's not my turn in the apartment". If you're going to do it, do it right: you're trying to give some normalcy to your Manhattan experience.

Your prospective apartment, used explicitly for dating purposes, if rented out during the week, would be a bit like a middle-aged version of the story from the "Promises Promises" revival on Broadway based on the move "The Apartment"

In terms of location, at $250K you're limited to a few places: Yorkville, upper upper UWS, midtown west, midtown east, and the un-hip parts of the LES. I'd stay away from upper upper UWS because it's too far from Grand Central for you. With Yorkville, it's out-of-the-way from Grand Central and anywhere you'd hang out. The un-hip parts of the LES, while having the advantage of being downtown, is far from Grand Central and won't be your cup of tea.

That leaves you with midtown west and midtown east. The advantage of midtown west (e.g., Hell's Kitchen) is that it's lively. The disadvantage is that some parts are less visually attractive, it can be touristy, you are farther from Grand Central, and it can be hell getting in and out on a Friday/Saturday night. It might be more attractive now, but less attractive in 10 or 20 years. With midtown east, the advantage is that it's much more "respectable" and closest to Grand Central. E.g., even though it may not be the prettiest area, it has its own charm, and you won't find a whole lot of graffiti: things you may care more about in 10 or 20 years. It's also an easier cab ride to most places. Think about it: a short ride to the east village dating scene now, a short ride to the UES dating scene 20 years from now. The disadvantage is that it's boring. Sedate, respectable, but boring. But, I think it might be the right fit for you.

I am not tethered to Grand Central. The apartment is not for weeknight commuting purposes, but mainly for weekends. In that case, I can either drive in, or take subways from Grand Central. If I was willing to commute from the city, I would just move in permanently.

> Renting a studio for 2 years = $40k.
> That's 17% of 250k.
> So, you're banking on a 17% loss or more, in 2 years.

Math is off.

First off, assuming a 12.5 buy to rent ration. Thats just off.

Second, you have to include maintenance/taxes in your calculation. You're not getting that back either if you buy. So that helps renting, too.

And how about closing costs? thats going to knock a whole lot of %%% off.

> If it drops less than that or rises, renting loses.

Except your number is wrong.

> And, no inflation hedge.

There are MUCH better inflation hedges than RE. Not to mention ones you won't leverage several times over.

If you're really doing this as an inflation hedge, then you really shouldn't be doing it.

> Rents rise faster than co-op fees

Not supported by facts, unfortunately.

Oh, and BTW, this has been the most interesting thread in a long while, so the natives thank you.

Hey w67th, I am underwhelmed by both the number and quality of your comments on this thread. It seems so ripe for w67th-style humor, yet it's been such a let-down from that perspective. Our job is to provide helpful insight, your job is to provide comic relief. Shape the fuck up, man! And where the hell is falco here?

@PMG "Shut up and deal". Some people here seem to have a hard time distinguishing b/w a sex room vs. a place that enables one to integrate into the NYC social scene. I guess it's projection of their own dating agendas/lives.

"I am not tethered to Grand Central. The apartment is not for weeknight commuting purposes, but mainly for weekends. In that case, I can either drive in, or take subways from Grand Central. If I was willing to commute from the city, I would just move in permanently."

I hear you, but I don't really think your choices farther away from Grand Central (e.g., upper upper UWS) really do much for you in terms of lifestyle. Given that, being near Grand Central has it advantages.

You know what, nix that whole thing on neighborhoods. I remembered this place, that ended up going for $277.5K.

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/502029-coop-308-mott-street-noho-new-york

You might be able to find something like this as well...

Wait a second. Somehow I cannot believe that after working for years in the city you couldn't find any woman willing to stay at your place (even in suburbia, say during some weekends) from time to time, taking turns whenever suitable staying at her place in Manhattan doesn't seem such a big deal.

Am i too old fashion? The studio doesn't seem needed at all when the sex appeal is there.

@inonada Thanks for the analysis.

Yes, I am in cash b/c I follow Buffet's rule #1 (and #2).
I am bearish on both equities and bonds.
So, correct, my perceived oppty cost might be skewed, but it is what it is.

And yes, it seems there is a very bearish vibe on this SE forum. Which actually makes perfect sense. People who are bullish or neutral, simply buy their apt, and move on with their lives. They don't spend years on a forum prognosticating if prices will fall. Self-selection bias. That said, I would never touch anything expensive in the NYC market. I agree prices will fall, and I'd rather take a percentage drop on a smaller stake. Anything more costly is a moot point anyways.

Good point about sharing, and the use of the word "normalcy" You get it. This is something I would have to feel out. I don't need to have anyone over on a weeknight, as I get up early for work anyways. If I wanted to meet someone out on a weeknight, I can easily come in for dinner/drinks/movie and then go home. I will be clear that I rent my apt out sometimes. If that's a problem, whatever. A woman that is turned off by practical asset management is someone to be avoided, in the end. Frankly, at my age, I don't really care about female judgement or approval. In fact, its quite the opposite, where I am vigilant about ferreting out the undesirable liabilities.

I have done the sublet thing. Looking for something a little less "transient", if we're talking about perceptions. (I think anyone who prefers a hotel tourist is still a capricious little girl, not an adult seeking a companion) I am not making any rash decisions, but will keep the idea of a studio in my mind. Once I get a feel for areas, and some more research, I might toss out a few lowballs over the winter. I have the advantage of not needing this transaction at all. This is entirely optional.

Looking at that Mott Street listing, a thought came to mind. The listing says "This is primarily an investor-owned building with many of the apartments rented to individual tenants." That is sometimes code for "lenders will not lend in this building", and such places trade at a discount because the cash-only requirement whittles away many propective buyers (now and in the future). Looking at ACRIS, the buyer on that place seems to have paid cash.

The downside to such places is that you if the sponsor owns too many places, you might get screwed at the board level in some way through maintenance. The upside is that you are a cash buyer, you'll get better value for your money, and you'll be in a neighborhood much more conducive to your lifestyle.

$800 in maintenance....

posts like inonada are the reason i read through 500 useless posts and keep coming back to SE.

"Yes, I am in cash b/c I follow Buffet's rule #1 (and #2).
I am bearish on both equities and bonds. "

Here's inonada's rule #1: follow Buffet. Rule #2: see rule #1. Rule #3: except to the grave.

Penned a mere 13% ago in S&P-500-time:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/opinion/17buffett.html

@inonada Yea, I like the Mott street idea. Seems way more social than midtown, Sutton, United Nations, etc. If I am coming in for entire weekends, commutability is moot (mott?) and I'd actually prefer to bury myself deep inside the city. Mott apt is easy b/c its right near the 6, if I happen to take the train in.

Thanks, when I posted this thread, I had a feeling it would be a nice departure from the "Is this a good deal?" b/c there is a qualitative side to this story (which notadmin just broached above).... In fact, the original title was "dating, frugality, suburbia, life philosophies... and buying a studio" (but it was over 50 chars) I am enjoying this forum outside this thread. I love to learn anything new.

Thanks, urine ;).

lol, inonada, way to reset the counter... :)

If this is a long-term plan and you already are in your 40s and you want to date within 5 years of your age, spend a little time around Mott Street. I don't think you will see much of what you are looking for.

ha.

@notadmin A friend once convinced me to try speed dating. Can you guess the first thing they ask? Almost without fail. (Hint: It's not what do you do?) Many women are lazy. They don't want to leave NYC unless its on a plane. Frankly, I don't blame them. An attractive woman will have multiple suitors every time she goes outside. So, why bother with some guy who's got a "story" or a commute? I probably wouldn't either, unless there's a cosmic connection. But that self-defeats, b/c it's short-circuited once they hear you're not from the city. But, to answer your question, yes, I have dated women in NYC, and had them come up to my place, as well. However, I soon learned that it was a mark against me, so I try to be the one who does the travel, in order to level the playing field with all the other guys living in NYC. It can work, but I think its a win/win to just suck it up, and be a part of the NYC scene. I am tired of being the outlier. And, of course, you simply don't meet new people if you're not in the city in the first place! And my motivation to date is sharply waning with age. So, this weekend thing is a way to force me to stay in the game. B/c coming in for a happy hour, or some phony charity event, etc. I have much more interesting things to do. If I am already in the city, I am more apt to get out, etc.

@malthus Good point. But, people are willing to travel within NYC, I assume. For now, I am late 30s, but I have aged well, and keep myself in great shape. I can attract 20s and 30s. I said trailing 5 years to be realistic, and for when I can't fish in that age group anymore.

> However, I soon learned that it was a mark against me, so I try to be the one who does the travel, in order to level the playing field with all the other guys living in NYC.

got it. tough to be a man, seems to be an eternal interview. for a while i thought men had it easy, how wrong i was! now, if i were in your situation, i'd just travel out of NYC during the weekends. there has to be group travels with people you don't know to fun places. the city is ok, but men, the whole process feels too much like an interview to me.

i don't buy the idea of speed dating for a second, smells like BS. i know the woman from columbia biz school that designed the thing, but for a while heard the concept at other universities. friends of mine were convinced about their ability in knowing somebody in the first 2 minutes. for god sakes, they don't even know themselves after what? 30 years or +...

@inonada
Actually, SPY and DIA are up 20%+ since that 10/08 Buffet article.
BRK.A is only up 3% in the same time frame.

clearly you are convinced, and were from the beginning, that this is a good plan. so i have to ask: why did you come here for advice? you have rejected, out of hand, every piece of advice that contradicted your original idea.

if you really want to put 1/3 or your liquid assets into a studio in manhattan, then do it. just recognize that any way you slice it a second home is an expensive luxury and highly unlikely to be a good investment. if this is how you want to spend your money, go for it.

@happy Please scroll up to the top, and read paragraphs #3 and #4 of my first post. That is why I posted.

Also, I disagree with your 2nd home = bad investment thesis. Unless you're saying it's just bad timing. Otherwise, people who bought studios in the past are sitting on massive capital gains that wildly exceed carrying costs (ignoring enjoyment of use)

@notadmin I don't understand what you're trying to say. I am not interested in travel groups. I already spend 7 days a week outside of NYC. I am interested in spending more time in NYC to meet new people.

Speed dating is just an ice breaker. An efficient, albeit contrived, way of having a 1-1 conversation with a bunch of new people. If you're grounded about the whole thing, it can be fun. No one is claiming to "know" anyone inside of 2 mins.

captive,

just because something may have worked out as a speculation does not mean that the asset class it represents (Second homes) is a good investment--and it's worth noting that when you take carrying costs into consideration the supposedly incredible long-term return on nyc real estate is really not that great.

Just think about it: we judge the sense in buying residential real estate against the cost of renting--cost being the operative word. renting an apartment is a cost, and at times, it makes economic sense to buy an apartment rather than to rent one: it's worth the opportunity cost and the risk to forgo the cost of renting.

with a second home this comparison no longer works: you always have the option to buy nothing, stay in your primary residence, and forgo your cost of renting and sit on the money, invest it in economically productive assets, etc. like i said, renting is an expensive luxury.

if you want to make a real estate investment in nyc then buy a cheap apartment and rent it out. buying an apartment for your own use as a second home is a luxury, not an investment.

>(I think anyone who prefers a hotel tourist is still a capricious little girl, not an adult seeking a companion)

So you're looking for an adult female under 34 who likes climbing stairs, wants to stay over at your pied-à-terre only on weekend nights, doesn't want any kind of long-term commitment from you, and doesn't mind (or notice) that you barely care about sex now and "fully expect to not even care about sex one iota" within ten years?

And that's just the SHORT version of your story?

"clearly you are convinced, and were from the beginning, that this is a good plan. so i have to ask: why did you come here for advice? you have rejected, out of hand, every piece of advice that contradicted your original idea."

its just like most of the bulls in '07...

But I do think the guy is right about dating. My femals friends who online date all eventually shifted to manhattan only. It wasn't that they were averse to the idea of a suburbanite (though none loved it) it just became a royal pain in the ass with setting up dates.

"Otherwise, people who bought studios in the past are sitting on massive capital gains that wildly exceed carrying costs (ignoring enjoyment of use)"

Certainly not in the last few years.

If you're making decisions based on a bubble and expecting the bubble factors to continue, you are in for a world of hurt.

Btw, the second home in this case isn't a bad investment... because its actually just not an investment, by definition. Your logic is just rife with inconsistencies.

If you want the place for dating, fine. But thats consumption, and there is a cost.

There is no way to magically turn your cost into a gain, as you seem to wish to do.

Its an expense, and treat it that way. No financial maneuvering is going to fix that.

@happy Agreed. This is a absolutely a luxury expenditure strictly aimed at quality of life issues. I will decide if its feels good to piss $700/mo to own a studio, while tying up $250k, which I may get more or less of when I sell. A risk worth considering vs. spending twice as much in rent.

@Boss, yup, that pretty much describes most single man living in NYC, except they're much more desperate for sex than me. And, if you had any experience/clue with regards to women, you'd know that women are more attracted to men who aren't desperate for their sex.

As a single woman in her early 40's I can attest that I won't date a man who is not geographically desirable. Also, guys, if you are over 30 you should live alone...having a roommate is a big turn-off.

> A risk worth considering vs. spending twice as much in rent.

Only if your math is bad. Its the other way around.

You are simply making bad mistakes in estimating the cost of buying.

Your whole argument seems to be predicated on really lousy assumptions.

captive, there's something wrong with your definition of dating and women. One of the most juvenile, not to say sociopathic, approaches to the whole idea.
"Fess up, are you a stalker?

@somewhere I have plenty of experience and have extensively researched bubble psychology. If you read properly, I was refuting your delusional notion that everyone loses money in a 2nd home purchase. Can you find one example where I said I expect to sell the studio for a profit? I have stated several times that I am bearish on NYC real estate after a historic bubble, but am willing to risk a small stake in exchange for an ongoing 90% discount compared to renting a hotel room per diem. (and 50% discount to renting)

@kstiles This lazy/rigid female mindset is exactly why I am shopping for a studio in NYC.

>@Boss. You seem to be the one who is delusional here. I am talking about long-term dating in NYC.
>Basically, the same form that millions do every single day, for entire lifetimes. You are talking about
>exchanging money for sex. I am not paying a dime for sex.

Captive, you're absolutely right. You don't want to pay a dime for sex. You want to pay thousands of dollars for a shag pad for your "companions."

@somewhere Other way around? How is paying $700/mo in maint twice as expensive as renting? (Yes, while tying up $250k in a 0% interest rate environment)