New York City
Washington DC Metro
Northern New Jersey
open house planner
manhattan condo market index
submit your listings
why sign up?
Become an Insider
post your listings
In Manhattan i know of 3 different women in their 40s (kind of desperately) wanting to buy houses. Thinking that it's their only ticket to solve their lack of retirement savings... Same old, same old? Didn't we learn anything?
One works for a non-profit she hates and constantly flirting with divorce. The other in BAC and lost her job 3 times during the Crisis (not sure why she thinks it's over). The 3rd one has been unemployed for the last year and still looking... As borrowers, none of them seem to have a better profile than subprime vintage 2006 borrowers.
Do you guys see a similar tendency? Somehow it feels to me like "gambling for resurrection". Their only choice to not die poor or have to work till they drop. Another thing I noticed is that they are more eager than younger women with their "nesting" hormones at their peak. The 3 complain about meager savings going nowhere (thanks to Ben!).
Also noticed that as a high tax area the allure of saving in taxes blind them. They confused the after-tax cost with the much higher real costs, that pops up during unemployment. That's exactly when you need your fixed costs to be the lowest, not the highest.
Simply amazed at how irrational women (maybe men too) are with money.
MAYBE men too? Sexist much?
Are you hearing guys in their 40+ desperate to buy?
According to homebuilders women tend to decide which house they want, men how to pay for them. Women pay attention to the kitchen and bathrooms, hence that's where the attention is put. I've heard over and over again about the nesting impulses of pregnant women, but not about RE eagerness of 40+ women.
About women and money, those that work on it tend to be better than men (a la Ms Watanabe) but those that are not into it can end up making the biggest mistakes. It's a pity, women hold most of the wealth in USA after all (due to living longer).
BTW Kudos to you if you don't behave this way!
A very large percentage of homes in the US are bought by single women. It is not unrealistic
for such women to believe that owning a home as opposed to renting increases the likelihood
that they will eventually be able to furnish the home with a man.
I know a woman who didn't buy in her 30s because, in part, the right man might come along. As she neared 50, still single, she bought and decorated a place. She may have bought at the market peak, but she got her classic 6 in the e 60s west of third. It's a penthouse and it's absolutely stunning. I'm very happy for her.
great for her PMG!
funny the discrepancy though:
rb345: buying today helps finding a man in the future
PMG: finding the right man in the future means better not to buy today
Imho the 3 40+ women I encountered feel a total lack of safety net with decreasing living standards compared to what they took for granted (the 3 graduate students from Ivy leagues). A microcosms no doubt, but find it remarkable. It's exactly the opposite of what I'd have expected psychology to be right after the crash of the biggest Real Estate bubble in history. It says a lot for the lack of alternative investments or their access to them.
Do you not know any reasonably successful women of any age who bought a home with their own money?
Also how do you know that these women in their 40's want to buy a home only as a means for financial security? Maybe they want to own their own home for quality of life reasons? Why do men (I'm assuming you are a man) always question why a woman wants to own their own home? Why not let these women make their own financial decisions without your oversight?
I thought this would be an interesting discussion of women who own homes instead of blatant sexism. But I am guessing that you are making a joke and do not really believe what you wrote.
More single women buy homes than single men, for whatever reasons. We're not questioning
their judgment for doing so. But understanding motives is key to successfulo marketing.
>It's a pity, women hold most of the wealth in USA after all (due to living longer).
Not much interaction with reality over there, huh?
Women now control 51% of private wealth. Due to longevity, they inherit 70% of all estates.
I don't see the point of the complains about sexism when it comes to describing current reality. I'm female myself, finance is my area. You have to be blind not to realize finance is a male dominated area. Check out how many females hold top positions in Wall Street. Women control more than half of USA wealth, yet the lack the interest or confidence or expertise to handle it.
The homebuilders research about women choosing their homes sounds like the stereotype from the 50s... well ladies, maybe we didn't come that far yet.
"Do you not know any reasonably successful women of any age who bought a home with their own money?"
Yes. They are called "unattractive women". Attractive women can get men to pay their bills! Did you see this year's editiion of Fortune's "50 most powerful women in business"? For the first time ever, they left out pictures. THANK GOD! The last 10 yrs they published photos and it just proved my theory: These are women who had plenty of time to stay home and study on a saturday night! And who realized at an early age that no man was ever going to pay their bills! The attractive women married well and got some man to pay their bills (and their children's bills, too!). Many of them divorced well, also. That game is about up, though: No self-respecting or half-way intelligent man marries without a pre-nup anymore (if they marry at all - see Charlie Sheen and George Clooney for insights into the amount of fun a single man of any age can have with a big enough bankroll! Or did you think those 22 yr old pornstars hung out with old Charlie because he had a good supplier of blow?)
"I don't see the point of the complains about sexism when it comes to describing current reality".
Finance fan: If you really are into "describing reality" (not to mention, if you truly are a woman), you'll know that NOTHING makes a woman angrier than when you share truthful insights into their character (as opposed to the phony view of their unblemished character they cultivate amongst the unknowing). Women are never more chagrined than when the pretty lies they hide behind are pulled back. The little rationalization hamster in each woman's head spins away madly on its wheel, creating fictional narratives women hide behind which just happen to blame men for everything - their lack of financial success, the affair they had last tuesday -- all some man's fault!
clearly, you are all adolescent men and/or male identified people. as a 'middle-aged' crone who is (a) a first wave feminist (b) bought/sold/rented since I was in my late twenties (the first time women were allowed into B schools, law schools, med schools - I was one of them) before you all were born - know this:
'40's' is NOT middle age - it is youth....if we do not develop a new paradigm re men and women - never mind your ageist, sexist ridiculously moronic and sophormoric blathering - we will all, in fact, be lost.
Moreover, the idea of a woman 'marrying up' is from the dark ages. Indeed, it is now culturally impossible given that women are better educated than men and must 'marry down' - if they marry at all.
Who gives a shit about the '50 most powerful women in business'? ... or anywhere? or the '50 most powerful men in business for that matter?" Any exemplars of heroes or heroines here? We don't think so.
p.s. i am - as are my friends, happily married ..... (had a starter marriage of a few years back in the sixties) with children (my youngest is 18) and have not been able to 'have it all' as I first thought and fought for by any stretch of the imagination. ....Safety nets? Security? there is no such thing in nature .... you are all, clearly, suffering from some kind of 'no nest' syndrome. and you betcha' 'nesting hormones' really kick in after 50 or 60 when the kids are 'out of the nest' and one can build one's own - to one's own passions and desires....without it being a 'starter apartment' 'commune or collective' 'starter apartment for starter family' ....... as IF these were valid monikers. UGH. and if you think that we worked our f------ butts off to have the male genome put us here in this economic sewer think again - 40% of U.S. jobs are in 'financial services' ...... this house of cards!?
Children such as yourselves would be best getting a life, getting over yourselves, ask the question "who am I and how can I serve?' and then open your mouths. Ask questions rather than spewing forth blather. Zip your lips. Take the cotton out of your ears and put it in your mouths. Seek out the best in yourselves and others. Get some f------ dignity and self-respect.
and I didn't 'burn my bra' '...militant ..... unattractive...' I happen to be drop-dead gorgeous (as are my friends) radiant good health - and must laugh at the current phrasing of older women/younger men salivations (on the part of the younger men) "cougars" .... or MILFs
Read for crissake - watch good movies; begin with 9-5 - come round to Wall Street , Wall Street II, and just today - Inside Job. Get out of the States. Put a f------ pack on your back and travel - on a shoestring.
....and be very very careful what you wish for.
Princess: you sound like a bitter old woman yet your name makes us think you are younger than 7 years old. Which one is it?
Is somebody called "PRINCESS" the best advocate for the newly independent, strong, intelligent and self-sufficient women? I am a woman, but people like Princess make me laugh and lose respect for my gender. "I happen to be drop-dead gorgeous (as are my friends) radiant good health": just more confirmation of PRINCESS being delusional.
"....and be very very careful what you wish for." only people with no brain have a taste for fear tactics, not my case :-)
Princesscbbop: Along with intelligent people everywhere, I salute you -- and PLEASE don't feed the trolls on this board.
as a 'middle-aged' crone who is (a) a first wave feminist (b) bought/sold/rented since I was in my late twenties (the first time women were allowed into B schools, law schools, med schools - I was one of them) before you all were born - know this:
'40's' is NOT middle age - it is youth....
My guesstimate is you are in your 70s, is that right? there's nothing wrong with being in your 70s... Just that instead of Princess, you should call yourself the "Queen Mother" if you sustain the delusion of belonging to some kind of royalty.
But see, the thread was about wondering how middle age women (40s, and 50s if you like) were feeling about buying real estate at this point in the cycle, just a few years after the crash... Not about women in their 70s that think they know how to live life. Let's face it, if you knew anything about that you wouldn't be calling yourself "Princess".
ff, your op is beyond stupid.
here's a good tip on how not to be an asshole. say what you want to say in your head. then substitute whatever group your are talknig about with "black people". if it feels wrong to say it then, how about you just don't fucking say it?
princess, you're only as old as you feel and all that, but 40 is most certainly middle age. unless you plan to live well into your 100s and why is that a bad thing? see, the error is yours for believing that only "youth" is worth living.
This thread is immensely entertaining. although it, and many of its posters, appear to belong
on a black couch rambling before an uninterested shrink enmeshed in his/her own fantasises: the
larger yacht he or she can now afford.
While a great deal of what has been said is highly debatable, Pincess made one point I and my
female friends would all agree with: any woman who marries me would definitely be marryng down.
"While a great deal of what has been said is highly debatable, Pincess made one point I and my
female friends would all agree with: any woman who marries me would definitely be marryng down."
Women marry down because they lack confidence in themselves. If women had integrity, they would marry men their equal or better. The fact that you celebrate that women marry 'dowm' is an insult to women not a compliment.
> Women marry down because they lack confidence in themselves.
you are reducing people to wages and social status or buying into the fairy tail that our 70 year old Princess has yet to wake up from. who's down, who's up... who cares? Miss Lucille, you sound like an asshole for not reading the thread topic and go bullying instead of giving your point of view. Just tell me Lucille ass*ole, how many women are in finance? how rational are they when they buy houses?
What I wrote about "marrying down" was self-effecing humor. Any woman who marred me would be
marrying well above her station in life.
that was my point of view. your op is stupid. lucille's asshole can't respond to your query about women in finance as i am not sure it is privy to such statistics.
I think this thread is going crazy with all the sexism and attractiveness talk and so forth. Why couldn't it be that women may just tend to like buying a home more than having a lot of money in the bank and rent forever? I think the answer is as simple as that. Perhaps women find more satisfaction in a home than in numbers on a bank statement. And yes, it is marketing.
A few guesses:
Finance_Fan is male.
Dwayne_Pipe or Finance_Fan = Captive
A few facts:
There are not that many female Fortune 500 CEOs but the majority of them are/were married, are mothers, and have supportive spouses that put their careers on the back burner so their partner could advance (pretty similar to male CEOs). 11 of the 12 current female Fortune 500 CEOs have children.
An anecdote/circling back to the OP:
Most of the poorly timed purchases from 2005-2007 I know of were couple in their 20s/30s with either no children or recently had one kid. Most of the best sales were empty nester sales to those same people or speculators. Single people (male or female) I know of didn't tend to purchase as often and made purchases that were a smaller % or their net worth.
It would be difficult to see what % of NYC purchases 2005-2007 were single females older than 40 and how that differs from historical norms, but it would be more valid than speculations and stories from bitter old men.
About me: I am a woman who has bought and sold houses since I was 29. I have made money on every deal and done some of them without brokers. I love to buy real estate. Looking at properties excites me. I have the money to buy and would just as soon own property that I can enjoy than stocks. ( although I have a portfolio of equities and bonds too) Men my age I agree like younger women, but they also seem very intimidated and put off by a woman who does not need them financially. It makes them feel "less than". I'm 49 and have a great figure and a pretty face. Younger guys flirt with me like crazy. I don't care about settling down anymore. I'm long divorced and my second( and last) child is going off to college. I'm free to do what I want and it feels great. I have tons of friends and plenty of love in my life. Dwane-pipe you come off like a real ass whose knowledge of the birds and the bees comes from sit-coms and not actual experience.
you are an idiot.
Right back at ya, realestated: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare
I met someone recently, and so I ACRISed that person to see what they owned, what their mortgage was, and then looked at streeteasy to determine that person's gain or loss.
Dwayne Pipe sounds like a troll. No genuine person could be as much of a troglodyte as he
makes himself out to be. Also, "pipe" is street slang for something which troglodytic male
chauvinists claim all women secretly want, so his handle is also somthing of a private joke.
"DP - you sound like a real loser who can't get a woman"
This is called shaming language. For some reason, women who can't otherwise win an argument resort to it ("you can't get laid/you're gay/you have a small penis/you live in your mom's basement/a real man would just do XYZ/a real man would just give a woman the house and the kids and the car and the 401K in the divorce" etc etc). It is so overplayed that most men just laugh when they see it and take it as an acknowledgement that the little dearie has run out of arguments. Girls never were very good at math or logic, and effective debate is based on logic. Not emotion. So women usually underperform men at it. Such is life.
yet you took the bait, again a real loser
Ladies, don't feed the trolls. "Ignore" button is there for a reason. ;-)
ff, well done. now that you've explained that all women are irrational and manipulative, i bet dwayne totally sees how much better you are than all those dumb bitches. i have no doubt dwayne now respects you as his mathematical, cognitive, and phallic equal. you guys will be palling around the internet in no time. just keep buzzing at him how dumb and useless all other women are, i mean you did have that one girlfriend in college, so you would know. you'll see, once he understands that there is only you, he will love you. because that's what love is, you know. wearing them down by relentlessly insulting other women and explaining over and over how much better you are. it's really hard work, this love thing. but i think it will happen for you, you're such a catch! you know math!
how was that? any good? i tried, but you are, like, too sad to mock.
> ff, well done. now that you've explained that all women are irrational and manipulative, i bet dwayne totally sees how much better you are than all those dumb bitches. i have no doubt dwayne now respects you as his mathematical, cognitive, and phallic equal. you guys will be palling around the internet in no time.
sure! while you and Princess keep on playing with your Barbies.
joking aside, i tell it like it is according to my experience. Glad to see you have been able to find a bunch of women that are reasonable, rational not manipulative nor bitches. My friends are like that, but life experience tells me I should consider them a precious scarcity.
> you'll see, once he understands that there is only you, he will love you.
i'm not in a petty competition for males. you and Princess can fight for Ken, I opt-out from that one :-) You could tell it right away as I don't see myself as a juicy piece of meat to be caught by a lucky guy. hence, there's no need for my looks to play any role, I just share opinions and points of views. what's next after selling yourself as meat? complaining that guys don't respect you as a person??
are you paul letterman and the others? if so, i commend you, you have nearly perfected your craft!
considering princess is older than my parents, doubt we would be competing for the same kens
and don't silly, you don't have female friends.
"You could tell it right away as I don't see myself as a juicy piece of meat to be caught by a lucky guy"
the fact that this is the way you describe relationships only proves how sad you are
"You could tell it right away as I don't see myself as a juicy piece of meat to be caught by a lucky guy"
the fact that this is the way you describe relationships only proves how sad you are
not sad, you simply didn't understand it's not a description of relationships but the way i understand Princess & Co see themselves "i'm attractive, my body bla bla bla, my face bla bla bla". who cares?
this thread unfortunately was taken away from women's possible eagerness to buy RE at this point... so i'm opting out from it too :-)
princess is an old hippie and the mention of her looks was a tiny part of her general point, that you should get a life.
and this thread was never about real estate, but a pathetic and transparent act of self assurance on your part. yes, you are smarter than these stupid women. you are really really smart and not at all like other women. you are unique. and really really smart. also, you know math! but mostly, you are just much smarter and better than other women.
beg your pardon, streeteasybots, but is innocent talk of g's and ho's really more offensive than some of the truly vile crap you allow to remain? for example, dwayne here has just informed us of his plans to sexually assault someone. don't you think this is the sort of thing that should disturb your delicate sensibilities more than a stupid 90's pop culture reference?
of course in dwayne's defense, he did fly recently. and having his junk manhandled by a 400lb tsa agent named gene probably did leave him with a distinct need to go out and prove his alleged heterosexuality. sorry dwayne, but guys like you usually hate women this much only because they have yet to find one who can make them stop wanting a man.
I'm really disappointed that you've tried to convince gullible women here that we men are so
shallow that "a woman's value is based nearly entirely on her looks".
I think I speak for most men when I say that while looks are important, we also seek women who
are submissive, supportive when we need them, have sex upon command. make sure our laundry is
always fresh, obsess over preparing our food just as we like it, and gracefully - and silently -
accept the fact that we frequently need to ignore them, particularly when we're spending the
night with their girlfriends (or mothers, if we're into a little kink).
look, of course dwayne is a troll who is just having a little fun riling up the gals here. BUT this kind of humor would not be tolerated were it targeted at any other group. even your post, how about you change the subject from women to black people, as was suggested earlier, and change the wording to explain what other qualities black people should have to be appealing to you. all in good fun, of course. how does it sound? still clever and cute? want me to do it? my kids are sick it's going to be a long night.
The thing that I found surprising when I read the original comment was that anyone could not understand why a man or a woman in their 40s who was having financial difficulties would not be searching for any means towards financial security - whether buying a house, making investments or looking for a well-paying job. Too many things can go wrong in life - a sick child or spouse, job loss, etc. Many middle aged people who have done all the right things can end up in a bad financial way. Obviously, banks will not lend to anyone who is underemployed or unemployed so they will not be able to buy a home even if they want to.
You must excuse Dwayne Pipe. He is bitter after his hot wife got tired of his nonsense, cheated on him and then divorced him and took all of his money, leaving an old broken down shell of a man. He still hasn't learned.
> searching for any means towards financial security
in other countries the answer would be saving like there's no tomorrow, not getting into the real estate game while a 2nd leg down seems imminent. by way to have security (minimize insecurity might be more accurate) is saving, so might be biased. and also i might be the only one thinking the 2nd leg down in prices is here.
"and then divorced him and took all of his money".....really pathetic that women need to take men's money. The women's movement had to puts some limits on equality.
Good comment, Julia!
RB: Your comment about women needing to be submissive was spot on!
Lucille: Your fascist comment "this kind of humor would not be tolerated were it targeted at any other group" is EXACTLY the problem: You're looking to silence, police-state style, views you don't agree with. The fact is, I should get to say whatever i want, about whatever race, sex, or religious group, and so should you. May the best ideas win. Why are you so afraid of that?
so...you choose to neither confirm nor deny getting aroused during your search?
Why are you so afraid of that?
there are 2 things lucille fears in this world, and a free exchange of ideas is not one of them. i think you're fun. and i think all of se citizenry would be shocked to discover you perfectly tame and polite legit se handle.
By all means, Dwayne_Pipe, please speak freely about Abes, ABCs, ABCDs, Abos, Albinos, Alligator baits, Anglo-pilferers, Miss Anns, Apples, Argies, Asian niggers, Aunt Jemimas, Bananas, Blue Gums, Beaners, Boches, Boers, Bog Irish, ....., Yellows, Yids, Zog Lovers and Zips. It just shows how right, how special you are. Because nothing says special like putting others down.
wait, has dwyane actually used all of these words here in print? holy crap
lobster, i completely agree with you that the struggle of middle aged workers during this recession, the "too old to hire, too young to retire" demographic, would make a very intersting topic for discussion.
Wall Street Journal reported recently that the 55+ segment of the work force is the only
segment whose employment ##s have risen in the past two or three years: by about 1.7 million.
> the struggle of middle aged workers during this recession, the "too old to hire, too young to retire" demographic, would make a very intersting topic for discussion.
> the 55+ segment of the work force is the only segment whose employment ##s have risen in the past two or three years: by about 1.7 million.
as far as i see the problem for this demographic (old baby boomers) is for the most part not on the employment status but on their bad saving habits. many wasted about half of their prime saving period over-spending during the last decade instead of saving as much as possible to be ready for retirement. those that bought the kool aid of housing as a vehicle to build retirement savings fared even worse as are now over-indebted, possibly under water.
read a survey of old baby boomers about what they consider a need vs a want during their retirement years. most consider vacations a non-discretionary to my surprise. vacation from retirement? they should have been saving at 20%-25% incomes in order to support that preferences, not at a barely positive rate. crazy stuff. unfortunately this is not the only demographic with this problem: high expectations and very low savings rate to fulfill them.
i feel the "always had it too good" effect plays a big role depressing precautionary savings. deep recessions are great at teaching people how bad it can get, hence the need to save (and not get into debt) just in case it happens again. i don't see any of this in the old baby boomer's mentality imho but it's going to show up in gen y if the unemployment picture of the young gets worse.
Humorously exploring the question of how we got to this point, Stein suggested a number of possible causes for a low average retirement savings. First, he suggested, baby boomers have “always had it too good.”
Never having lived through economic hard times, they lack the discipline to save. He also proposed
a Freudian explanation: the false sense that mommy and daddy—or the government—will always
bail them out if they get in trouble. A third possibility drew on the theories of behavioral psychologist
B.F. Skinner: saving offers no immediate gratification, while spending provides immediate positive reinforcement such as a flat-panel plasma TV set or a new car. The final theory suggested that baby boomers felt compelled “to obey the media consumer spending machine.”
Whatever the cause, Stein concluded, many baby boomers in retirement will have to cut their
standard of living drastically, while others will simply run out of money.
based on title i thought thsi thread would be about aoutready and apt23
not ph41, though.
It is funny how people see the same issue a little differently. I saw the OP as speaking about women who had very low paying jobs (or no jobs) and living in NYC, and as a result could not afford to save much money because of the high cost of living here. I agree that many people now in their 40's and 50's have or had wildly overspent on luxury items, but it did not sound to me as though the OP was describing those types of spenders but I could be wrong.
It reminded me of when I was in my 20's and wanted to put $2,000 in an IRA, but did not have the money because I had a low paying job. I borrowed $2,000 from my father to open an IRA and paid the money back over the course of the year. I know people in their 40's who have difficulties saving for an IRA each year because of the combination of a low paying job and high NYC living expenses.
Man, who knew brokers were so gender biased. As a single woman nearing 40, I'll be sure if I buy to go to a female broker and use a female Atty. What do you brokers call "successful? Studies show the salary that makes people happiest is $75,000/yr.. Sounds good to me. p.s.-make a man pay for it. that's what they are there for!
> Studies show the salary that makes people happiest is $75,000/yr..
which equals what in manhattan? $150k?
> It reminded me of when I was in my 20's and wanted to put $2,000 in an IRA, but did not have the money because I had a low paying job. I borrowed $2,000 from my father to open an IRA and paid the money back over the course of the year. I know people in their 40's who have difficulties saving for an IRA each year because of the combination of a low paying job and high NYC living expenses.
exactly! the past asset bubble inflated living costs for everybody. i wouldn't mind at all to go back to the cheap years in nyc... when was that? sure it was cheap to live in nyc in hte 70s, no idea whether during the 80s too... meanwhile Bernanke keeps on printing $ to re-inflate asset prices and only cares about keeping wages as low as possible... that's the only source of inflation that annoys him, what a SOB!
Too bad this thread has been debased (as usual). There is definitely a nation-wide & perhaps in the Western world, of single women buying their apts/houses in greater numbers than their male cohorts. I think the "forced savings" and nesting aspects appeal to many women. In our relationship, I have always been the one behind a move (either renting or buying).
Don't discount the parental help factor. Many families, in lieu of paying for a big fat wedding, would rather help their daughters by giving a dp.
> Don't discount the parental help factor. Many families, in lieu of paying for a big fat wedding, would rather help their daughters by giving a dp.
sure, but then again, that daughter could opt for saving (for retirement) that money instead of buying in a market with inflated prices, right?
You're forgetting that parental help comes with strings attached. Having seen the market appreciate so much in their lifetimes, boomer parents are much more likely to give $ for a dp and not anything else. As in, take this for a dp but you won't be getting this in cash for your savings. There are also potentially issues with sons-in-law down the road and maybe the apt is a more tangible way of not commingling assets.
The "bricks and mortar" psychology is hard to dismiss. I'm giving you 100k or whatever now for a dp, you don't have to save for dp, you'd be paying rent anyway, now you're just "paying yourself". If you were given a dp and not the cash to do with as you pleased, would you really turn down the dp because the mkt is overpriced?
For notadmin - NYC teachers and police officers usually earn about $75,000. I could make it in NYC on $75K. It's not like I would be able to take a cab all the time, but it's definitely a decent salary. $75K could afford a $250-300K coop after saving up for 5 years or so.
In fact, $75K is supposed to be the starting salary for a NYC teacher who has a Master's degree.
Obviously, a lot of loser bankers are working the banker's hours and making $150K. I could be happy with that salary on a 9-5 job, but where's the humanity in it?
I wonder if the person who started this thread has resentment issues with his Mother because she didn't make very much money and/or couldn't afford property? Hm.
jane, the research you mentioned is based on country wide income earners. you need to adjust the result ($75k) to comparable purchase-parity wise with nyc
it's simple stats... you can do it!
> I wonder if the person who started this thread has resentment issues with his Mother because she didn't make very much money and/or couldn't afford property? Hm.
jane you make me wonder, what does cheap psychology add to a good argument? this sounds like "they are just jealous", it's 99% of the time not true.
janejoey, I don't believe the starting salary of a NYC teacher with a Master's degree is $75K... after 5+ years maybe.
> $75K could afford a $250-300K coop after saving up for 5 years or so.
but you shouldn't pay more than 3 times income, that's $225k... where can you find a coop for that much? maybe an HFDC?
I believe I saw a renovated coop on the UES for $250K. In another thread someone posted it in comparison to a basement apt unrenovated 1 bdrm on UWS listed for almost $600K.
I checked NYC DOE. Teacher w/ Masters no exp $51K, after 8 yrs. $75K.
The thread says "Middle aged women in Real Estate". I know lots of women who own. I know lots who pay rent. It just depends who you meet I guess. It wasn't meant to be cheap, but point taken.
Anyway, PH at Apthorp went for $228K. I am sure it is possible:
NYC is definitely expensive, but it can also be cheap.
Strange gender thread...
I have bought and sold real estate in nyc twice -- making extraordinary gains both times. I am a women -- and I think it is very interesting to hear the commentary.
When I first bought in 97 -- i feared that it was "top of the market" -- and was taunted by my fellow banker friends for being such a "chick" -- nesting and all -- they invested in the internet....
Two years later -- they licked their wounds and praised my "genius" investment choice.
I upgraded again and made another mint.
I do not think this is about gender -- i know plenty of "brilliant" men who stupidly bought at the top --
As a seller - I was was thankful for it.
> I checked NYC DOE. Teacher w/ Masters no exp $51K, after 8 yrs. $75K.
wow, not htat high. that would be somebody at least 33 years old, right? there were entire threads not so long ago about what is the income range required to be considered middle income in manhattan... that range was all over the place. there was an article that calculated the range, but seemed that almost everybody had a different perception of what it means to be middle class.
the PH at Apthorp went for $228K... think that was UrbanDigs that explained why those PH are an anomaly and probably went to relatives or friends of the developer.
> When I first bought in 97 -- i feared that it was "top of the market" -- and was taunted by my fellow banker friends for being such a "chick" -- nesting and all -- they invested in the internet....
lol i can perfectly imagine the situation, the internet kool aid had little to envy to the housing kool aid. congrats Fox!
Sometimes I see studios for approx $139K on UES
Once I found one a half block from the park (in the high 80s, i think) with a balcony for approx $139K.
It's the Maint/CC that make it expensive, and the one space might get depressing to me.
Nonetheless, I guess middle class can be relative in NYC.
This is another crazy thread. There is a comfort factor in owning your own home. Of course there is a comfort factor in being able to ditch your home if circumstances warrant. But ask divorce attorneys, not the attorneys for the ultra rich but for the regular Jane, and what women want first from a divorce is the home.
janejoey, that $139K studio is in a land-lease co-op. All you're buying is the right to pay that maintenance until the lease ends. If it looks too good to be true, it is.
This trend changed during the recession?