Based on the rising inventory numbers each day, this is the simplest description of the present reality. New York Magazine April 26, 2009 The First-Time Homebuyer’s Guide to 2009 The motivated seller is the way in. Right now, practical-minded sellers are pricing their properties around 2005–06 levels. So look up comparable sales in your target area from that time period—easy enough to do through... [more]
Based on the rising inventory numbers each day, this is the simplest description of the present reality.
New York Magazine April 26, 2009
The First-Time Homebuyer’s Guide to 2009
The motivated seller is the way in.
Right now, practical-minded sellers are pricing their properties around 2005–06 levels. So look up comparable sales in your target area from that time period—easy enough to do through websites like Streeteasy .com or MillerSamuel.com—and if an apartment falls below that price point, and it has no additional liabilities, like water damage or doorstep drug dealers, you may have found an eager seller. (Neighborhoods with deep price cuts include Central Park South, Tribeca, and East Harlem.) One notable example: At 301 East 63rd Street, a one-bedroom’s down to $199,000 from $379,000. “That shows motivation,” says broker Rick Wohlfarth. “If I were a buyer, I wouldn’t waste my time on people who are unrealistic.” People who think they’re going to sell for a 2007 price are going to be thinking that for a long time.
Just make a bid.
[less]
Funny to open a link called no spin and find ... spin. If you are pricing your apartment at 05-06 levels you are not practical. You are chasing the market down. There are 34 units for sale in that building, including the unsold rent controlled places as a unit.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by crescent22
over 17 years ago
Posts: 953
Member since: Apr 2008
301 E 63rd is the worst example imaginable. A land lease having excessive impact on asset prices.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by alpine292
over 17 years ago
Posts: 2771
Member since: Jun 2008
Hold on there people. Hold your horses. 301 East 63rd Street is a LAND LEASE building that is in TERRIBLE shape. A few months ago, 301 East 63rd Street was used as an example by Urban Digs as what can go wrong in land lease buildings.
But hey, anyone who takes financial advice from a magazine with SEX ADS in the back deserves to get screwed (no pun intended)
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by stevejhx
over 17 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008
No. 2 Fifth Avenue was a land-lease building that successfully bought the land. There is a law against "unconscionable increases" in rent, but I don't know if it applies to land leases.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by 30yrs_RE_20_in_REO
over 17 years ago
Posts: 9913
Member since: Mar 2009
I'm surprised Urban Digs left out on of the big minuses of land lease buildings: low tax deductibility of the maintenance: since the building pays rent instead of RE taxes, only the interest in the underlying mortgage is tax deductible because the RE Taxes are payed by the land owner, not the Coop. I was sort of surprised when the Rudins did 2 Fifth as a landlease deal to begin with - perhaps there was something that i didn't know about which forced them to do it that way.
but a bunch of Village Coops were originally land lease buildings which eventually bought the land I think 1 5th, 29-35-45 East 9th,
310 East 63rd as an example of market movement? As an example of anything other than the additional liabilities mentioned in the previous sentence? Just how bad is the fact-checking over at New York mag?
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/6691-whats-the-story-with-301-east-63rd-street
No. Just wait for 2002-2003 prices.
Down another 50% to equal rents.
Funny to open a link called no spin and find ... spin. If you are pricing your apartment at 05-06 levels you are not practical. You are chasing the market down. There are 34 units for sale in that building, including the unsold rent controlled places as a unit.
301 E 63rd is the worst example imaginable. A land lease having excessive impact on asset prices.
Hold on there people. Hold your horses. 301 East 63rd Street is a LAND LEASE building that is in TERRIBLE shape. A few months ago, 301 East 63rd Street was used as an example by Urban Digs as what can go wrong in land lease buildings.
The clowns at NY Mag need to do their homework:
http://www.urbandigs.com/2008/12/landleases_when_worse_than_the.html
But hey, anyone who takes financial advice from a magazine with SEX ADS in the back deserves to get screwed (no pun intended)
No. 2 Fifth Avenue was a land-lease building that successfully bought the land. There is a law against "unconscionable increases" in rent, but I don't know if it applies to land leases.
I'm surprised Urban Digs left out on of the big minuses of land lease buildings: low tax deductibility of the maintenance: since the building pays rent instead of RE taxes, only the interest in the underlying mortgage is tax deductible because the RE Taxes are payed by the land owner, not the Coop. I was sort of surprised when the Rudins did 2 Fifth as a landlease deal to begin with - perhaps there was something that i didn't know about which forced them to do it that way.
but a bunch of Village Coops were originally land lease buildings which eventually bought the land I think 1 5th, 29-35-45 East 9th,