if you have a choice between a coop for 400k with 1000 maintenance, and a condo for 500k with 500 maintenance. for simplicity and this discussion,not factoring in tax benefits and net cost of living, both cost 2000 month out of pocket.

both with the same down payment of 100k, similar locations and layout.

i would presume the condo will be the better option since you dont have to deal with a coop board, easier to re-sell and sublet etc.

The condo won't be $500 maintenance (or half the maintenance of the coop for argument's sake).

There must be an abatement that will fade with time or you are forgetting about the tax bill on the condo and not comparing the coop/condo common charges apples-to-apples.

"if you have a choice between a coop for 400k with 1000 maintenance, and a condo for 500k with 500 maintenance. for simplicity and this discussion,not factoring in tax benefits and net cost of living, both cost 2000 month out of pocket.

both with the same down payment of 100k, similar locations and layout."

****

First of all, condos don't charge "maintenance" -- it's "association fees". And you conveniently left out TAXES, which are charged separately from the "association fees", which together could easily surpass the maintenance (which includes taxes) of a similar condo.

Second, as crescent22 pointed out, you didn't mention whether this condo is in a tax abatement, in which case the financial picture will change drastically when the abatement ends.

"if you have a choice between a coop for 400k with 1000 maintenance, and a condo for 500k with 500 maintenance. for simplicity and this discussion,not factoring in tax benefits and net cost of living, both cost 2000 month out of pocket."

Financially, coop wins, as a the end of the mortgage, you have the lower payment and AOTHBE more valuable asset.

sorry, that should read condo wins...

Condo wins.

First of all, condos don't charge "maintenance" -- it's "association fees".

Wow! I own several condos in Manhattan and they all charge maintenance fees, never heard of association fees. Been doing this for over 30 years.

Here's an idea. Go for the apartment that you like better.

condo is the winner!

After being in condos and coops personally and selling several, hands down condo. You can usually sublet with ease and speed if your job/life situation changes, coop boards and applications (as well as the whole process) are deterrents to potential purchasers and renters, and you actually own your apt. in a condo, where in a coop you are subject to buying shares in a corporation that grants you a proprietary lease to live in the property. If you looking to own, wouldn't you rather actually own. But, I agree with Eric-- go for the apartment you like better after weighing the pros and cons, of course, that caonima stated-- best is to look at offering plan, financials, talk to some other owners and take it from there. Even the best apt. can be outweighed by neighbors-- as my mom used to say-- you can pick your friends, but you can't pick your neighbors.

If you take the financials out of the equation then I would personally go with the co-op. While the condo is much more flexible, I don't plan on moving out of the city in the next 5 years so I would want my neighbors to be owners, not renters. I'm not rich enough to buy in a super exclusive condo building with bigger units that would be more expensive to rent out, so I would expect my neighbors to be post college renters putting up walls and having loud parties - which is what I dealt with for the 6 years I lived here as a renter.

Not to say every 'affordable' condo building is like this, but honestly I wouldn't even want to take the chance.

The only thing that I really dislike about coops is the fact that they can significantly slow down your ability to sell your home if you really need to. A condo board has the right of first refusal, but a coop board has much greater power in this respect. You may or may not need to sublet your apartment, but you will most likely need to sell it at some point.