This is my idea:

Buy a 1bd condo in Battery Park for 360K
(Example: 2 South End Avenue #8E 632 ft²)

CC/Maint: $1,000
Monthly Taxes: $800 monthly fees

15 years mortgage. 25% down (90K)
Mortgage Payment $2,038.

Rent it out for 2,750 month

Does it make any sense?
Am I missing something?
Is it a good investment?

That is my question...

did you forget about the cc/maint when doing your calcs?

I made some corrections...

Buy a 1bd condo in Battery Park for 360K
(Example: 2 South End Avenue #8E 632 ft²)

CC/Maint: $1,000
Monthly Taxes: $800 monthly fees

30 years mortgage. 25% down (90K)
Mortgage Payment $1,200.

Rent it out for 3,000 month

Does it make any sense now...?

Only if you expect rents to outpace the increase in CC and maintenance and/or property prices to rise.

Your income:
Rent $2750

Your expenses:
Interest expense (less tax deduction) $650
CC $1000
Tax $800

You're barely making $300 a year, and that's assuming you get the tax deduction, which, since this is not your primary living property, is iffy. Add in a broken A/C unit or refrigerator here and there and whatever profits you expect to pull out are gone.

That's $300 a month.

Using your example, price is $360K, CC+taxes are $1900:

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/605055-condo-2-south-end-avenue-battery-park-city-new-york

Let's call rent $2750. Take out $1900 in monthlies, allocate $150 to vacancies, amortize $300 to transaction costs ($36K over 10 years), leaves you with $400.

So before you account for the cost of your time, repairs, upkeep, renovation, etc., you're looking at a $4.8K annual return on $360K cash. That gives you a 1.3% yield on cash, and that yield increases with inflation -- as in becoming 1.33% in a year -- as all rents & costs will roughly increase with inflation. Account for that other stuff, you get closer to a 0% yield on cash.

No bubble here, carry on.

In 30 years I will own a highly desirable property (no debts) putting down only 90K...
On the other hand, I don't think is crazy to expect making more than $300/month very soon... by outpacing the increase in CC and taxes.
What you guys think?

i guess you're missing the point that YOU WILL NOT MAKE $300 a month. you will be losing $300 a month and that's not even counting on vacancies/upgrades/maintenance.

now you have $90K sitting in an illiquid asset for 30 yrs. how about putting that money into a S&P ETF?

i don't see how you'll get a tax deduction on an investment property.....

"In 30 years I will own a highly desirable property (no debts) putting down only 90K..

Heh. Except that in 30 years, BPC land leases will probably be mean that the city takes your "highly desirable property. " There's a reason that 1 bedroom is 360k. I seriously considered 2 South End Ave also before saying no. It's beautiful to live in. Just don't expect to get much back for investment.

Check out this listing at 2 South End Ave:

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/652564-condo-2-south-end-avenue-battery-park-city-new-york

Sold for $600,000
1,429 sq ft.

Why so cheap, you ask?

$3900 in maintenance per month!!!!

Agreed 1,000% with JWL. Highly desirable propert in 30 years? Even if NYC does not take the property (no guarantee on a land lease, and a land lease on city property no less), you can expect those monthlies to rise significantly. I can't see the rental market outpacing your building monthlies in BPC.

If you would like to throw money away, I am happy to provide you with my account number and routing #.

What you say?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qItugh-fFgg

also, note how you keep on adjusting the #s to make the calculation work. BUBBLE

@hjf200074

Just walk away from this. You can't even do simple math to see how it isn't even close to break even. Then you go and make up numbers so it just barely breaks even? wow...

Can not believe that this board has become so civilized!!

that is true though if you look at the obesity statistics by race.

http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparebar.jsp?ind=91&cat=2

i really meant surprised at being so civil to the op.

It may appear so according to that chart.
Is it unPC to talk about anything genetic/race related that is not only positive to minorities?

I think that was a quadruple negative.

I think that was a quadruple negative.

That's actually an excellent question.

My unprofesional uneducated opinion would be Alaskan natives may be skewing the alaskan natives/american indian figure(no pun intended). Centuries of polar bear like eating conditions may have genetically affected Alaskan natives to hold more fat, n'est pas?
Of course, the environment eventually makes it genetic, so chicken or egg...yes?

I think an in depth study of Arkansas may shed some some light on why "african americans" are higher than "whites" as the split in that state is the most stark with 82% vs 66%.

This discussion has headed on quite a tangent.