Elliman's 1st quarter report (which I think is actually Jonathan Miller's report) says in Manhattan there were 414 co-op sales during the quarter and 4,807 on the market at the end of the quarter. 414/3 = 138 per month = 35 months worth of inventory? 3 years??? Sales were down -58% from last quarter and median sales prices were down -21.7% from last quarter. Listing inventory up 33%. Stick a fork... [more]
Elliman's 1st quarter report (which I think is actually Jonathan Miller's report) says in Manhattan there were 414 co-op sales during the quarter and 4,807 on the market at the end of the quarter. 414/3 = 138 per month = 35 months worth of inventory? 3 years???
Sales were down -58% from last quarter and median sales prices were down -21.7% from last quarter. Listing inventory up 33%.
Stick a fork in Manahattan real estate because it is DONE. -21.7% - ha! with sales volumes and inventory numbers like these....
you ain't seen nothin' yet!
Manhattan is right on track for the -50% decline from peak that other cities have experienced in this down turn. And given our unique circumstance of financial industry unemployment, income declines for those still fortunate enough to have a job and the tax increases from Albany how could anyone argue that prices won't fall more than other areas?
[less]
Response by sidelinesitter
over 17 years ago
Posts: 1596
Member since: Mar 2009
You must be missing something in your interpretation of the numbers. The market is actually raging and the smart (actually "savvy" - doesn't that sound so much more sophisticated?) money is buying. If you don't believe me, ask Rosemarie Deane.
http://www.urbandigs.com/2009/04/countertrend.html Isn't it amazing that brokers can't even come up with a new script that is adapted to con people in the current, instead of former, market? They only have about three sentences in their arsenal anyway - how hard could it be to make up three new ones? Up, down or sideways, savvy buyers are always buying. OK. Whatever.
jake, right with you brother. My screen name tells you where I sit.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by columbiacounty
over 17 years ago
Posts: 12708
Member since: Jan 2009
revolting.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by crescent22
over 17 years ago
Posts: 953
Member since: Apr 2008
> "The market would quickly get better if all realtors demanded checking account statements of 20% price of each home's price from any buyer that’s wants to view a property.... With these demands, the buyer demand will indirectly have a quick rise."
This is hilarious.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by aboutready
over 17 years ago
Posts: 16354
Member since: Oct 2007
wtf is Stevens trying to say? then again, he covers the Harlem market, so he can't be having a great time these days. too many oxycontin perhaps?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by columbiacounty
over 17 years ago
Posts: 12708
Member since: Jan 2009
worthy of SNL---total gibberish. would be fun to hear him expound on his theory at greater length.
You must be missing something in your interpretation of the numbers. The market is actually raging and the smart (actually "savvy" - doesn't that sound so much more sophisticated?) money is buying. If you don't believe me, ask Rosemarie Deane.
http://www.urbandigs.com/2009/04/countertrend.html
Isn't it amazing that brokers can't even come up with a new script that is adapted to con people in the current, instead of former, market? They only have about three sentences in their arsenal anyway - how hard could it be to make up three new ones? Up, down or sideways, savvy buyers are always buying. OK. Whatever.
jake, right with you brother. My screen name tells you where I sit.
revolting.
> "The market would quickly get better if all realtors demanded checking account statements of 20% price of each home's price from any buyer that’s wants to view a property.... With these demands, the buyer demand will indirectly have a quick rise."
This is hilarious.
wtf is Stevens trying to say? then again, he covers the Harlem market, so he can't be having a great time these days. too many oxycontin perhaps?
worthy of SNL---total gibberish. would be fun to hear him expound on his theory at greater length.