Oh my! Deutsche expects another -40% decline in the New York MSA

so you mean 52% drop from peak, not 12%!

52.1%

Cool!

Fantastic news! Whoever feels the itch to buy right now should reconsider his position immediately unless he has plenty of money to waste... Don't let your desire to decorate your place blur your reality! If you make the mistake to buy now, this is gonna cost you! This is gonna cost you big!
Don't come crying when your underwater like we didn't warn you.

Here we go again. It nice to get excited about Wayne, NJ and White Plains, NY (which is what this MSA includes) but really people, this isn't relevant at all to Manhattan. Do the MSA cover co-ops?
This is old news, here is a thread that debunks this entire crappy article.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/11192-another-35-decline

"This is gonna cost you big! Don't come crying when your underwater like we didn't warn you."

Wow sledgehammer, a bit of a sensationalist aren't we? You should get a job at the Post.

Ok Juiceman,

From the original post:

"Before you get all worked up yes I know the NY MSA is not the equivalanet of Manhattan. But Manhattan is part of the NY MSA. Given the employment and income picture, the rising tax rates on income and property, on top of the bubble in prices and new development over build, one could argue that Manahttan will do even worse."

I outlined the bear case: rising unemployment (LEH, MER, BS etc.), lower incomes (no job, cap on bonuses, pay czar, etc), rising taxes on income and on property (thank you David Paterson, Mike Bloomberg and POTUS), the bubble in asset prices (thank you Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke) and the new development overbuild that has inventory at 24 months of supply (thank you Stephen Ross, Gary Barnett et. al.)

Can you outline the counter bull argument? Skip the hysterics. Just the facts please.

Yes, what's the bull case, Juiceman?

"here is a thread that debunks this entire crappy article."

JuiceMan believes that whenever he says something it is true. He has "debunked" an entire article based on his opinion, without posting any relevant sources for those opinions. He declares victory then walks away.

What is to say that Manhattan won't fall MORE than White Plains, meaning that 52% could be 62%?

Nothing that JuiceMan has contributed.

JuiceMan was wrong on real estate before - he predicted a 10% decline tops - and now blames the crash on "Lehman."

The crash happened, regardless of the short-term trigger, as it had to happen. Owners' carrying costs cannot long exceed market rents. But of course JuiceMan has an argument for that one, too, using risk-free rates for opportunity costs, excluding transaction costs, using ARM's, denying that the real-estate run-up had anything to do with Wall Street, adding the principal in twice, denying the correlation between rents and owners' carrying costs, saying that tight credit is a GOOD thing for the housing market, claiming that economic theory doesn't apply to Manhattan but does to Albany, that Manhattan prices are only down 1%, that Miller Samuel was a reliable source for price data despite its recent massive reevaluation of past inventory data, denying that median prices are skewed in very small samples, claiming that there is no premium for condos over co-ops.

And so on and so forth.

If only he'd be consistent, and had a half a foot grounded in reality.

Juiceman?.......Juiceman?........Anybody?......Buehler??..........

crickets.

Well it is true that in LA/OC, prime west LA (Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, Santa Monica) or nicer parts of the valley (Sherman Oaks, Encino) or beach-y areas like Newport and Manhattan Beach fell less than the overal 52% fall from peak for LA/OC as a whole - but they stil fell at least 20%-30%. In the SF area, SF proper has fallen by double-digits, though less than the 9-county bay area as a whole. Etc. So "core" areas might fall by less than "fringe" areas...but they are certainly falling in these other cities, and Manhattan has already fallen...and even within Manhattan, in past downturns some "prime" areas fell by a LOT more than others, especially when they were over-built with new condos (Cough-cough Chelsea, upper East side).

Boyz, boyz, don't get too excited about this! I am not going to agree or disagree with either side, but I thought one of the big lessons we learned from the current financial crisis was that NOBODY, even Nobel Prize-winning economists, can predict anything reliably. ANYTHING.

Sure, I know a lot of us here are hoping for an additional 40% or even 50% price cut, but let us not fall for Confirmation Bias (a tendency to search for and/or selectively focus on information that confirms our own views, while avoiding, discounting, or discrediting information that does not). When you get too "left" or too "right," this type of thinking can be harmful... Let us remain somewhere in the middle.

where's the fun in that?

Jason10006 - I think most would agree with you about core vs. fringe fact and that it even includes areas within the island itself.

However, there is one reason I don't totally buy it for Manhattan: Manhattan IS the core of the destruction that lead to all of this. The job losses are sustained out of the very industry that drove this town to the heights it achieved in the last few years. SF, LA, OC, etc. do not have a majority of their industry based on the financial world that NYC does. Those cities do not have the support industry to gobble up the large amounts of money the financial industries spun off in enormous bonuses.

NYC is similar, but inherently different, than those other cities due to it's heavy reliance on the financial industry; one that is now a shadow of it's former self and likely to get even smaller as regulation crushes profitability and mergers move talent out of the NYC area to companies headquartered elsewhere.

Even as taxes rise, we'll see more and more corporations pull up anchor and flee to places where the cost of doing business is much less.

If finance wasn't the epicenter of this mess, I would agree that Manhattan wouldn't fare so badly. However, since it is, I think this entire MSA as in serious trouble and Manhattan, especially overbuilt areas, are going to come down hard.

Well, it's hardly any reason to be bullish, but here is an article from today's WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124511318124517281.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_pj. I agree with the level-headed assesments above: if Wall Street is so smart, why are we in this mess in the first place? I wonder how much of her own money the analyst would be willing to bet on the predicted 50% drop in prices.

I don't have hard facts to support this, but I have a feeling there will be many support levels preventing us from falling too far too fast. Do we go 40% peak to trough?? Who knows. But it will not be the same for all neighborhoods or property types. I do think new dev condos in fringe Manhattan (this includes far West Side, FiDi, Harlem, etc.) will suffer the most, and many will go rental, and sub-million dollar properties in prime areas will suffer the least. The range for drops will be all over the map, 15-50% depending on the above (and hundreds of other) factors. I do know that we are almost 20 months into this recession and we are slowly but surely clawing our way back out.

"if Wall Street is so smart, why are we in this mess in the first place?"

Oh, so this one analyst = all of wall street's collective wisdom?

FYI, there were many wall street macro-level analysts who predicted this, and many who specifically covered housing and banks too. A minority, sure, but Meridith Whitney, Stephen Roach etc were not figments of my imagination.

Isn't this the equivalent of that analyst at Goldman that reduced his price target on GE from $14 to $7 when GE was already $7. And then increased it to $16 when GE was back up to $14?

Isn't a 50% drop already baked in? Think about it, if the market in Manhattan is thought to be off already 25% are people really not doing deals for 40% off?? Of course they are. In fact those are probably the only deals getting done right now.

So an extra 10% is not a far cry from where we are guys.

"Yes, what's the bull case, Juiceman?"

The "bull" case is very simple, use data that is relevant to what we are discussing (Manhattan). I’m very interested to hear credible analysis (bull or bear) on Manhattan. I've seen countless articles like this with silly predictions and headline grabbing titles based on data that render the conclusions completely useless. This Deutesche article is one of the worst (almost as bad as the Goldman one a few months ago).

"Given the employment and income picture, the rising tax rates on income and property, on top of the bubble in prices and new development over build, one could argue that Manahttan will do even worse."

What? Manhattan co-ops will do worse than condos in Wayne, NJ or the Bronx? You don't need the article to make the argument you are making jake; rising taxes, employment and income pressures, new dev issues will continue to impact Manhattan real estate but that has absolutely nothing to do with a White Plains shit box that was thrown up and sold for half a million in 2007. Jake, linking your argument with this article actually discredits what you are saying.

“If only he'd be consistent, and had a half a foot grounded in reality.”

LMAO! You still running the race without the baton you dropped 50 yards back steve? Better go pick it up!

if that was the "bull case", bulls have to pack it up now.

There wasn't any case in there outside of attacking the bear.

I guess its really over.

> Manhattan IS the core of the destruction that lead to all of this

I know, it is funny how many bulls just completely ignore that part.

Yes, Manhattan is different. Bulls were right about that.

Its worse...

"There wasn't any case in there outside of attacking the bear."

That was deep nyc10022. Did you think of that all by yourself? What specifically did I say to attack or are you just disappointed that I am right again?

Do you really think a "NYC DOWN 40%" study that uses a data set that contains Wayne, NJ is credible? We all know you like to take liberty with data but seriously?

I hate to say this but, the notion that Manhattan is this special insular animal is simply not true. Manhattan(I'm generalizing) is where the well is deepest so it's the last place to get dry and usually the first place to get wet. I'm comfortable in saying that Manhattan is one of the last places to be hit by the RE bubble poping. It's probably going to be one of the first places to recover. All that being said, regional data should be considered when evaluating M anhattan RE. It is related directly and indirectly. Direct is obvious, indirect needs a closer look. Think about how it affects housing choices. A family with 2 kids would be greatly effected in choosing a home by regional price considerations. A 3 bedroom plus private school/car/parking domestic help in Manhattan is a tall financial order. 4-5 bedroom home in the Tri-State area with superior schools today is a more cost effective choice and a greater value. This for sure play against the Manhattan market. That's just one example.

Oh no, falcogold, Manhattan IS special. Just like spunky used to argue.

Maybe somebody did buy a shitbox in White Plains for half a million, but a lot more people can afford half a million for a shitbox in White Plans than $2 million for a 1 bedroom on the Lower East Side.

Lower East Side? Did somebody mention shitbox? Petrzitz...?

Juiceman, now two posts from you since you were asked for a coherent argument, and still nothing else but the attacks.

*Three* people have now asked for a coherent argument from you, and, nada, zilch.

> disappointed that I am right again

ROFTL.

Talk about deflection.

"Can you outline the counter bull argument? Skip the hysterics. Just the facts please."
"Yes, what's the bull case, Juiceman?"
"Juiceman?.......Juiceman?........Anybody?......Buehler??.........."

And I'm not even including Steve's kind words...

Is there not one bull out there who can make a coherent argument?

What the bulls don't get, aside from logic, is relative value. If prices drop in half in westchester, you don't think some people who live in manhattan would move there? All assets are valued on a relative basis. It's funny, I've seen bulls list articles about rising prices in London and Hong Kong implying NY prices should follow, but jersey prices are irrelevant? And the constant reference to Wayne, NJ? I don't think that is the only town in the MSA.

Nothing but empty rhetoric from the bulls

"*Three* people have now asked for a coherent argument from you, and, nada, zilch."

Why isn't it coherent nyc10022? Did I not say very clearly that jake's argument has merit but linking it with this article makes it baseless? Are you having trouble comprehending the simplicity of that statement? It is not difficult nyc10022, even though it may be for you.

“And the constant reference to Wayne, NJ? I don't think that is the only town in the MSA.”

Here is some further information on what makes up this MSD. What a freakin joke.

"New York-White Plains-Wayne, NY-NJ Metropolitan Division (Bergen County, NJ; Hudson County, NJ; Passaic County, NJ; Bronx County, NY; Kings County, NY; New York County, NY; Putnam County, NY; Queens County, NY; Richmond County, NY; Rockland County, NY; and Westchester County, NY)"

http://geography.about.com/od/specificplacesofinterest/a/nymetroarea.htm

or how about this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_metropolitan_area

This would say that Manhattan makes up about 13% of this MSD. So how do you think a decrease in this MSD translates to 13% of the population? Do you think the Bronx and Queens will react the same as Manhattan?

“Nothing but empty rhetoric from the bulls”

Empty? Maybe you should do some research seaddict, you are missing all the fun.

JuiceMan, if she was talking about the entire MSA or not, which includes 23 counties: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/New_York_Metropolitan_Area_Counties_Illustration.PNG

Pike County, the one on the far left, is in Pennsylvania.

I'm not sure why people put all that much stock in one analyst's predictions here. This has all been hashed and rehashed several times before. You either agree with the basic premise or you don't. nyc212's got the right take I think - be wary of confirmation bias.

I love how bears spit the dummy when you challenge their weak conclusions, baseless facts, and worthless data. It's comical that they can base their entire agenda on such a shaky foundation.

Staten Island is part of this MSD! Go Stink Island! What can Stink Island tell me about the UWS? Please bears, give me your wisdom!

Pike County! nyc10022, where is your coherent argument on Pike County and stink island?

"I love how bears spit the dummy when you challenge their weak conclusions, baseless facts, and worthless data."

I suppose that's almost as amusing as reading posts with strong conclusions, no facts, and zero data.

Oh! Just like JuiceMan's!

Because to the best of my knowledge, JuiceMan did not publish any source showing HOW Manhattan data are correlated to other data in the metropolitan region.

"Because to the best of my knowledge, JuiceMan did not publish any source showing HOW Manhattan data are correlated to other data in the metropolitan region."

Let's be fair, steve - neither did you. You postulated that Manhattan could fall more, but the reality is that it's likely impossible to accurately predict a correlation here. Most people on this board are concerned with Manhattan real estate, and while talking about trends (though in this case it's mostly a prediction, far more tenuous) in other areas can be useful to gain some perspective in certain instances, the fact is that it's quite a stretch to apply this analyst's predictions to Manhattan. I believe that's all JuiceMan was saying here - and he's right to call out sensationalist posts like sledgehammer's.

"Because to the best of my knowledge, JuiceMan did not publish any source showing HOW Manhattan data are correlated to other data in the metropolitan region."

Thanks for proving my point steve. There is NO correlation data for these regions which is why the article is baseless when discussing Manhattan real estate. You are so smart steve!

What happened to all the wicked smart people? All y'all asked for data, I provided two threads to support my claims. What happened to "empty rhetoric from the bulls"?

"Why isn't it coherent nyc10022? Did I not say very clearly that jake's argument has merit but linking it with this article makes it baseless?"

A coherent "answer" that does not answer the actual question is not what I would call "coherent".

You going to ever answer???

> Pike County! nyc10022, where is your coherent argument on Pike County and stink island?

I don't even know where the hell that is.

Juiceman, why won't you just answer the question instead of throwing out random sentences?!?!

"You going to ever answer???"

nyc10022, I'll throw the same question at you re: EddieWilson. The clock's been running for months on that one.

"What happened to all the wicked smart people? All y'all asked for data, I provided two threads to support my claims."

And still didn't answer the question!?!?!??

Are you still ducking the question Juice??

Here it is again... in case you "missed it"...

"I outlined the bear case: rising unemployment (LEH, MER, BS etc.), lower incomes (no job, cap on bonuses, pay czar, etc), rising taxes on income and on property (thank you David Paterson, Mike Bloomberg and POTUS), the bubble in asset prices (thank you Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke) and the new development overbuild that has inventory at 24 months of supply (thank you Stephen Ross, Gary Barnett et. al.)

Can you outline the counter bull argument? Skip the hysterics. Just the facts please."

You've posted, what, 10 times since, and even started a new thread talking about this thread...

and yet you still haven't answered the actual question.

What gives?

Juiceman,

Ok. Let's give you your point and all agree that Manhattan has a zero correlation to every other city, town, village and geography in the Metropolitan MSA. But is that really the best (apparently only) argument you can give us for being bullish on Manhattan real estate prices??

Or is the argument that Manhattan real estate prices are strongly negatively correlated with other real estate in close proximity but not exactly in Manahttan??

Ok, one more time nyc10022, for the slow and the reading challenged.

""I outlined the bear case: rising unemployment (LEH, MER, BS etc.), lower incomes (no job, cap on bonuses, pay czar, etc), rising taxes on income and on property (thank you David Paterson, Mike Bloomberg and POTUS), the bubble in asset prices (thank you Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke) and the new development overbuild that has inventory at 24 months of supply (thank you Stephen Ross, Gary Barnett et. al.)"

This argument has merit and all of these things will continue to put pressure Manhattan real estate prices. How much? Who the hell knows?

This argument coupled with the stupid Deutesche study is baseless, because the study has unknown (and in my opinion very little) correlation to the Manhattan market for all of the reasons you have yet to acknowledge (and never will)

That's the third time nyc10022. Can you comprehend or are you too friggan stupid to understand it? Are you unhappy that it is not a “bull” answer? Well it’s my answer and that’s what you asked for so shut up already!

Now you can answer my questions no?

So, if I'm reading this correctly, the only bull counter argument to the bear argument is "well, you're right"????!?

ROTFL.

Thanks, you closed the case and gave me a good laugh. Took you long enough.

"the only bull counter argument to the bear argument"

Yeah, I guess so nyc10022. It is a real stretch to say that bad economic times are going to put pressure on NYC real estate. Whew, glad we got that out of the way. Congratulations on your incredible victory.

"Took you long enough."

You are the one who can't read, if I could have clapped syllables for you I would have.

So how come you have avoided all of my questions nyc10022? Do I have to type everything three times for you to comprehend?

Tell us how Pike county and Stink Island data help you forecast UES real estate trands?
Tell us how Pike county and Stink Island data help you forecast UES real estate trands?
Tell us how Pike county and Stink Island data help you forecast UES real estate trands?

Once again, second sentence from the original post:
"Before you get all worked up yes I know the NY MSA is not the equivalanet of Manhattan."

We seemed to have thrashed out that the Manhattan MSA has no relationship to Manhattan. I'll take that a step further and say that Manhattan real estate price performance will be sharply negative and could well be worse than the surrounding areas for the reasons outlined above.

Is there anyone, (anyone other than Juiceman who I think tried and failed but I am still not sure) anyone who wants to outline a fact based case for Manhattan real estate prices going up in the foreseeable future???

Calling Petrfitz. Isn't this about the time he usually parachutes in to help the sit com show pin the laugh meter??

sorry metropolitan MSA- should read:

Once again, second sentence from the original post:
"Before you get all worked up yes I know the NY MSA is not the equivalanet of Manhattan."

We seemed to have thrashed out that the Metropolitan MSA has no relationship to Manhattan. I'll take that a step further and say that Manhattan real estate price performance will be sharply negative and could well be worse than the surrounding areas for the reasons outlined above.

Is there anyone, (anyone other than Juiceman who I think tried and failed but I am still not sure) anyone who wants to outline a fact based case for Manhattan real estate prices going up in the foreseeable future???

Calling Petrfitz. Isn't this about the time he usually parachutes in to help the sit com show pin the laugh meter??

> "the only bull counter argument to the bear argument"

> Yeah, I guess so nyc10022. It is a real stretch to say that bad economic times are going to put
> pressure on NYC real estate. Whew, glad we got that out of the way. Congratulations on your
> incredible victory.

Well, from you, I think it is. A clear change from the juice of old.

Its a little extra amusing today... someone else popped this post from you from 19 months ago...

"Goodness. Nothing like pissing in a buyers cornflakes eh? MMAfia, suppose you are right and the market corrects more than it already has. What percentage do you believe it would correct? 5-10%? Condos in prime UWS or Gramercy? Not going to happen."

So, can't say I'm surprised at you getting nasty about it. But, yes, I'd consider this a pretty big swing.

> "Took you long enough."
> You are the one who can't read, if I could have clapped syllables for you I would have.

I see, when proven wrong, go nasty. I get it. Not surprised.

> So how come you have avoided all of my questions nyc10022? Do I have to type everything three times
> for you to comprehend?

Actually, you just have to read better. Talk about llusy comprehension.

I answered twice. Thing is, you've now spread this to multiple threads.... to cover up your admitting you were wrong, I guess.

As I said before, deflection, deflection.

> Once again, second sentence from the original post:
> "Before you get all worked up yes I know the NY MSA is not the equivalanet of Manhattan."

Ha, I missed that. The specific part Juiceman gets all worked up about, he was wrong on.

> Is there anyone, (anyone other than Juiceman who I think tried and failed but I am still not sure)
> anyone who wants to outline a fact based case for Manhattan real estate prices going up in the
> foreseeable future???

Given we haven't been able to get one in months... I'm going to venture no.

But it SURE is FUNNY to see folk TRY!

> Calling Petrfitz. Isn't this about the time he usually parachutes in to help the sit com show pin
> the laugh meter??

Ha.

"This argument has merit and all of these things will continue to put pressure Manhattan real estate prices. How much? Who the hell knows?"

Is this an admission that you've been totally wrong for the past year and a half? Or...not? Just wondering.

tee, hee...

juice?

"Do you really think a "NYC DOWN 40%" study that uses a data set that contains Wayne, NJ is credible?"

JM - just accept it. You've been wrong all along and likely will continue to be wrong. NYC down 40% more is a likely outcome over the next couple years. Just accept it already and move on w/ your life.

"Well, from you, I think it is. A clear change from the juice of old."

I guess it makes nyc10022 angry when I make him and his data look silly while he attempts to shill his agenda. He has no idea what my point of view actually has been.

"Goodness. Nothing like pissing in a buyers cornflakes eh? MMAfia, suppose you are right and the market corrects more than it already has. What percentage do you believe it would correct? 5-10%? Condos in prime UWS or Gramercy? Not going to happen."

ah yes, quotes out of context from 19 months ago - nyc10022's favorite. I was right about this by the way if you bothered to read the tread. Yawn.

"I see, when proven wrong, go nasty. I get it. Not surprised"

nasty? wrong? about what? I can't help it that you can't read.

"to cover up your admitting you were wrong, I guess."

wrong about what?

"As I said before, deflection, deflection."

yup, you said it, and define it.

"Is this an admission that you've been totally wrong for the past year and a half? Or...not? Just wondering."

No, this is consistent with everything I have said over the last 18 months. Look it up, it is all right here boys and girls.

"JM - just accept it. You've been wrong all along and likely will continue to be wrong. NYC down 40% more is a likely outcome over the next couple years. Just accept it already and move on w/ your life."

Really BSex? What do you base that prediction on? What was your prediction two years ago?

"I guess it makes nyc10022 angry when I make him and his data look silly while he attempts to shill his agenda."

First off, angry? Dude, I'm laughing my head off.
Seeing your quote today, too funny.

Second, "my" data.

Dude, you are delirious. That isn't my data. I said several times I don't even know where that place is.

And "my agenda".

Juiceman, you need your own show!

"ah yes, quotes out of context from 19 months ago - nyc10022's favorite. I was right about this by the way if you bothered to read the tread. Yawn."

Ah, THIS is the juice we all know. Now he says its "out of context".

Sorry, we've all read 'em, including the context, you were just painfully wrong.

And you talk about deflection!

""Is this an admission that you've been totally wrong for the past year and a half? Or...not? Just wondering."

No, this is consistent with everything I have said over the last 18 months. Look it up, it is all right here boys and girls.

"JM - just accept it. You've been wrong all along and likely will continue to be wrong. NYC down 40% more is a likely outcome over the next couple years. Just accept it already and move on w/ your life.""

Tee, hee.

Too funny.

Well, if he's going to deny it (AGAIN), I figure I'll just share some old favorites...
I love the Lehman one!

JuiceMan
about 14 months ago
ignore this person
report abuse

2005 levels? Your talking about a 15-20%+ correction. Ain't gonna happen.

---

JuiceMan
about 15 months ago
ignore this person
report abuse

Fed cut by a half a point, Lehman's earnings strong, looks like that real eatate slowdown could take a while.....

---

JuiceMan
about 15 months ago
ignore this person
report abuse

I'm glad you are coming around to the fact that Manhattan real estate is unique and the sooner you get in, the better

---

Thread entitled "More proof the dopey renters don't get it

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/2448-more-proof-the-dopey-renters-dont-get-it-

Yes, got it.... streeteasy never had a bunch of bulls going off on folks calling a bubble...

---

JuiceMan
about 13 months ago
ignore this person
report abuse

These units closed in the third quarter during the peak of the credit crisis. What happened to “the sky is falling because no one can get a mortgage”?

---

"Face it, the doomers were wrong. "

---

"I'm still wondering what happened to the Q3 mortgage crisis."

---

"oh yeah. The crisis. The one that you so expertly predicted would crash Manhattan real estate in Q3, and then Q4, and now Q1 of 08. Right."

---

"Assuming average bonus payouts this year (far better than the 30-50% decrease the bears predicted as aifamm pointed out) Wouldn't stock that vests over 1,2, or 5 years be pretty good for the future of Manhattan real estate? Or should we ignore that benefit as well? "

---

"Fringe properties in fringe areas will suffer. Maybe enough to flatten the overall market. As for the good neighborhoods...up...up...up."

---

"Call me a bull but it is impossible for me to calculate a reasonable scenario where all of those indicators will drive south quickly, and put Manhattan in a Miami like situation. It is just not going to happen."

---

"dco, if you are waiting 12-18 months for prices to come down you are in for a surprise. How long do you really think this economic slowdown will last? If this recession is mild, what happens then? Manhattan is always the last to be impacted in a slowdown and the first to recover. Do you think we’ll be in recession for the next 3 years? "

---

"Goodness. Nothing like pissing in a buyers cornflakes eh? MMAfia, suppose you are right and the market corrects more than it already has. What percentage do you believe it would correct? 5-10%? Condos in prime UWS or Gramercy? Not going to happen."

---

Title of thread he started 7 months ago...
"Housing crisis is over "

Last line of first paragraph... "Yes, the housing market is bottoming right now."

Again, just too easy...

"Juiceman, you need your own show!"

That's the only intelligent thing you have said today

If Juiceman is the one defining "intelligent", I'll take that as a complement.

;-)

I stand by it all nyc10022. Where are your predictions from 15 months ago nyc10022? Should I be looking for a different alias? Did you predict the Lehman bankruptcy?

What was your alais back then nyc10022?

> stand by it all nyc10022

Can't say I'm surprised.

LOL

> Where are your predictions from 15 months ago nyc10022?

They're located on the correct side of history.

> Did you predict the Lehman bankruptcy?

Would it correct your mistakes if I had or hadn't?

"Is this an admission that you've been totally wrong for the past year and a half? Or...not? Just wondering."

I guess not.

Of course, the actual words conflict that... what was it Juice was saying about comprehension?

nyc10022, STILL ignoring the question. Come on, buddy, I'm not asking for much here.

forget nyc1002. He's a troll. The only thing he knows how to do is hide behind his keyboard and insult others.

What was your alias back then nyc10022? What do you think of the Deutesche study?

Yes, better I should move to New Jersey and post every few minutes "manhattan is not down 20%". Then I'd be a more valuable member of society.

> What do you think of the Deutesche study?

I think its pretty lousy. I only came on the thread after you got asked for a counter argument to the follow up point and didn't provide one for 15 posts.

"I think its pretty lousy."

Well, we agree on something

"I only came on the thread after you got asked for a counter argument to the follow up point and didn't provide one for 15 posts."

I responded to the question on my first post after reading it, are you instituting a SE time limit?

What was your alias back then?

> I responded to the question on my first post after reading it, are you instituting a SE time limit?

You playing semantics? You "responded", but you didn't answer. You dodged the question.

"The "bull" case is very simple, use data that is relevant to what we are discussing (Manhattan). I’m very interested to hear credible analysis (bull or bear) on Manhattan. I've seen countless articles like this with silly predictions and headline grabbing titles based on data that render the conclusions completely useless. This Deutesche article is one of the worst (almost as bad as the Goldman one a few months ago)."

If you think that was answering the question, then I have a follow up question. Are you Bill Clinton?

As for my predictions, I said before Lehman or any numerical decline, 15-25%

I believe I am already wrong.... I think I undershot greatly.

Was that prediction documented somewhere? Maybe under a different alias?

What, you don't trust me? You think I'm making that up now?

I'm a bitter renter, remember? We were all saying the end of the world was coming...

"I wonder how much of her own money the analyst would be willing to bet on the predicted 50% drop in prices."

If there were some financial instrument which was some sort of warrant, I guess, which said if prices dropped 35% or less I lost all my money, if prices dropped 35% to 45% it was a push, and if prices dropped by more than 45% I doubled my money (we're talking Manhattan prices), I'd drop $100,000 on it tomorrow.

"I only came on the thread after you got asked for a counter argument to the follow up point and didn't provide one for 15 posts."

Hall monitor. Also, answer JuiceMan's question, please. Talk about dodging...

"Isn't this the equivalent of that analyst at Goldman that reduced his price target on GE from $14 to $7 when GE was already $7. And then increased it to $16 when GE was back up to $14?

Isn't a 50% drop already baked in? Think about it, if the market in Manhattan is thought to be off already 25% are people really not doing deals for 40% off?? Of course they are. In fact those are probably the only deals getting done right now."

Very ironic post: aren't you doing the act thing you talk about the Goldman analyst doing? here: "if the market in Manhattan is thought to be off already 25% are people really not doing deals for 40% off?? Of course they are. In fact those are probably the only deals getting done right now.:

If the only deals getting done are 40% off, then the market is down 40%. period. not 25%.

I know no one is going to believe this, but as far back as 2004/2005 I was telling people "I don't know when the market is going to turn down: it could be 6 months from now it could be 6 years from now, but whenever it does I think you are going to see a 50% drop". Each time, everyone looked at me like I had three heads. But I believed that then and I still believe it now.

And to answer the question which you're going to ask, purely a chartist/historical call.

> "I only came on the thread after you got asked for a counter argument to the follow up point and
> didn't provide one for 15 posts."

> Hall monitor.

Jesus, hall monitor, if you're going to use the insult, use it right!

I wasn't asking him because there I was enforcing some rule set I made up - like you do - I asked because I wanted to know! Sorry, its just that simple.

Damn, the hall monitor doesn't even know what hall monitoring is!

"Really BSex? What do you base that prediction on?"

Well, let's see why I think prices will fall another 40% or so:

1. Lack of mortgage financing

2. Dems will remove the interest deduction for 200K crowd (i.e., the "richest Americans")

3. Wall Street has completely imploded

4. Those that feed off Wall St (lawyers, accountants, consultants, etc) are being crushed

5. Most NYC apartments are above the conforming limits

6. Interest rates are rising and will continue to rise when inflation hits

7. Incomes are falling

8. New developments are failing, which will jack up inventory

9. Inventory is already skyrocketing

10. People tend to avoid buying in a falling market (catch a falling knife)

11. Dems are going to regulate incomes for bankers in the future

12. Potentional overseas buyers are in worse shape than us

13. Stock market implosion leaves everyone less wealthy (able to afford downpayment / closing costs)

14. When a bubble pops, prices tend to over-correct to the downside

Did I leave out anything???

"What was your prediction two years ago?"

Well, considering that 2 years ago I thought Manhattan RE prices were obscenely overpriced, my prediction was that they would fall significantly. I wasn't sure when it would happen, but I was positive it would happen. I wasn't posting here 2 years ago, however if you look at my previous posts going back to the middle of last year (I believe), you will see that I've consistently held these views.

REO,
Your projecting 50% off peak ask or peak closed comp?
When would you call the peak date?
When do you think we will be at 50% off?
How long do you think it will last?
I understand this is speculation and nobody really knows but, nothing like an educated guess from the educated. I promise to never hold your feet to the fire over your estimates.

Damn, don't scare Juicman with all the logic!

1) off peak closed, asking prices to me are a fairly meaningless thing since there's always people asking things with no basis in reality whatsoever (like 200% of what it should be)
2) not really sure when peak was yet - I think I may need another quarter or 3 to be absolutely sure, but I'd guess CONTRACTS Q1 2008 (don't ask why I need more time to crystal ball the past)
3) 2 years from now. But it depends on what artificial "brakes" the Fed Gov't throws at trying to stop it from happening: those will determine if it's sooner or later than that.
4) flat to little upside for 2 years (depending on the economy; if there's some big blip upside like big bonuses from WS, it could end the flatness immediately)

NB I didn't really take any time to think about these answers, so I reserve the right to come back later with different numbers without someone pulling this post up 2 years from now and saying "you said ....". these are total 2 minute seat of the pants, knee jerk answers.

Thanks
no feet to the fire...that was the deal.
Very helpful

REO, do you get nervous that the Fed's actions may have already messed up the 50% peak to valley prediction? I was in the 50% camp and feeling very good about that prediction back in March but the world looks very different today - and at least the equity markets are telling you that maybe the worst has passed (albeit real estate lags equity markets and maybe it's just a suckers rally).

I'd also be curious if you believe the couple of reports out there that suggest that real estate prices do not necessarily fall when interest rates rise. Everyone knows higher interest rates are coming but no one's sure how high it will be 5 to 10 years out. I'd be curious how a professional adjusts for that.

I will take apart the following factors:

****1. Lack of mortgage financing****

Mortgages are there for people with decent credit. You can buy with as little as 3.5% down.

***2. Dems will remove the interest deduction for 200K crowd (i.e., the "richest Americans")***

Linking politics to the RE market is just plain silly.

3****. Wall Street has completely imploded****

ok, fine. I will give you that one.

****4. Those that feed off Wall St (lawyers, accountants, consultants, etc) are being crushed****

fine, I will give you that one too.

****5. Most NYC apartments are above the conforming limits****

That is not true. I beleive that only half of them are.

****6. Interest rates are rising and will continue to rise when inflation hits****

Interest rates wre at insane low levels a matter of weeks ago and it was inevitable they rose. With that said, rates are still very good right now. Inflation also has the potential to cause prices to INCREASE so if you think it is coming, you should be buying RE.

****7. Incomes are falling***

I'm not so sure about that. I think incomes are flat. And even though incomes were flat for the last 8 years, prices rose.

****8. New developments are failing, which will jack up inventory****

New devleopments also equal more inventory. I don't get what you mean by "failing."

****9. Inventory is already skyrocketing****

Per Urban Digs, inventory is on the decline.

****10. People tend to avoid buying in a falling market (catch a falling knife)****

True, but the time to buy is when nobody else is buying so there is no competition.

****11. Dems are going to regulate incomes for bankers in the future****

Another one blaming the Democrats. Oh, those evil Socialist Democrats. Seriosuly, please post your RNC/ Rush Limbaugh/ Dick Cheney talking points on a right wing blog, not SE.

****12. Potentional overseas buyers are in worse shape than us****

Which country are you referring to? I recently heard that England is no longer in recession, as in May they GDP grew.

****13. Stock market implosion leaves everyone less wealthy (able to afford downpayment / closing costs)****

If you anticipate buying in the near future, you have no business putting your downpayment money in the stock market.

****14. When a bubble pops, prices tend to over-correct to the downside****

Not always. I'm sure they will over-correct in bubble markets like CA and FL, but NYC is not anywhere as bad.

"REO, do you get nervous that the Fed's actions may have already messed up the 50% peak to valley prediction? I was in the 50% camp and feeling very good about that prediction back in March but the world looks very different today - and at least the equity markets are telling you that maybe the worst has passed"

I don't know about REO, but I'm not nervous. I'm happy. And considering that REO owns RE in Manhattan, I doubt he is "nervous" either. With all the govt. action, I think one can take all of these predictions and throw them out the window.

"REO, do you get nervous that the Fed's actions may have already messed up the 50% peak to valley prediction? I was in the 50% camp and feeling very good about that prediction back in March but the world looks very different today - and at least the equity markets are telling you that maybe the worst has passed (albeit real estate lags equity markets and maybe it's just a suckers rally).

I'd also be curious if you believe the couple of reports out there that suggest that real estate prices do not necessarily fall when interest rates rise. Everyone knows higher interest rates are coming but no one's sure how high it will be 5 to 10 years out. I'd be curious how a professional adjusts for that."

No, I don't think it will change it: delay it, maybe, but my guess is also that the more the delay happens the more my 50% figure may be wrong.... on the low side. If you look at the big picture, the world isn't really any different to those of us who knew the stuff which is coming out as "news" now. Like that all sort of non sub-prime stuff is ready to go to hell in a handbasket. Or that the low mortgage interest rates would not hold, because the banks know that they can't stay low LONG TERM and are basically saying "We don't give shit that the Fed Funds rate is zero TODAY: in the long run, we're all dead (Keynes)". Any what is probably going to happen is when the resets come, interest rates on mortgages will be high enough that those who's resets hits won't be able to be saved by refinancing. And they won't be able to sell because they will be under water.

We are seeing a lot of stuff in NYC so amazingly different than a lot of other places in the country. Take a CLOSE look at places like California WHERE 50% of current sales are foreclosure sales. Or Las Vegas or Miami. It just hasn't hit here YET. And guess what? This is EXACTLY what I saw happening between 1987 and 1992.

Re; interest rates rising not necessarily effecting RE prices: of COURSE that's true. But it's not true IF THOSE ARE THE ONLY 2 VARIABLES, because if everything else remains constant, than it is true. The times that it isn't true is because of myriad other things which effect RE prices. And since you CAN'T guarantee that the ONLY thing which will happen is interest rates rising, how can you say what it is that caused prices to fall or not? people fall out of airplanes and live to tell about it: that's not a reason to forget about parachutes and assume that since in one very odd scenario it wasn't needed. Look at it this way: I am willing to go WAY out on a limb and say that if you look at an awful lot of charts, we were beginning to so a "normal" cycle curve of various RE stuff, but then the money tap was opened to full throttle and "cheap and to easily available money" drive prices wild. Well, IF you believe me that this is what happened, how can you imagine that when you do the reverse, it won't have a similar effect in the opposite direction?

“Once again, second sentence from the original post:
"Before you get all worked up yes I know the NY MSA is not the equivalanet of Manhattan."”

Sorry Jake but, nice try. Why would you post the article if you weren’t implying that it has some sort of relevance / correlation to Manhattan? Otherwise you would have just posted the reasons why you feel Manhattan prices will soften. So why don’t you tell us why you thought this piece of crap article added to your point of view?

“Well, considering that 2 years ago I thought Manhattan RE prices were obscenely overpriced, my prediction was that they would fall significantly. I wasn't sure when it would happen, but I was positive it would happen. I wasn't posting here 2 years ago, however if you look at my previous posts going back to the middle of last year (I believe), you will see that I've consistently held these views.”

Well considering streeteasy only tracks your posts up to 12 weeks ago, I’m curious how your previous posts go back to “the middle of last year”. Unless that is, you changed aliases, which is a favorite hobby of another poster we all know and love. So Bsex, which is it? Did you change aliases or did your fantastic prognostications begin 12 weeks ago?

“As for my predictions, I said before Lehman or any numerical decline, 15-25%

I believe I am already wrong.... I think I undershot greatly.”

I thought I have seen it all with nyc10022, but this wins the streeteasy hypocrisy award of all time. After tracking all of my posts for the last two years and pointing out how “wrong” I was in my predictions pre-Lehman, he decides to post this little jewel about how wrong he was pre-Lehman. You can’t make this stuff up.

So let me get this straight nyc10022, your banging your chest because I predicted flat to small declines pre-Lehman and you predicted a 15% decline pre-Lehman? Did you forget that prices went UP YOY for most of Manhattan pre-Lehman? So you were wrong then and you are wrong now. Best part is, I can’t even prove you were wrong because you changed aliases and have yet to admit that you are EddieWilson. This is so much fun!

"Well considering streeteasy only tracks your posts up to 12 weeks ago, I’m curious how your previous posts go back to “the middle of last year”. Unless that is, you changed aliases, which is a favorite hobby of another poster we all know and love. So Bsex, which is it? Did you change aliases or did your fantastic prognostications begin 12 weeks ago?"

JM - I've only used one screen name. Maybe I was just reading threads but not posting a year ago. Honestly, I don't remember and can't be bothered to check. But the fact is, I could have bought a place 2 or 3 years ago (I had plenty of savings for a downpayment, a well-paying job, good credit, etc.), however I refused to even consider it b/c I thought Manhattan RE to be absurdly overpriced. And I still think it's overpriced.

Alpine - you can try to "take apart" the factors I listed, however it won't change the fact the prices in Manhattan are going to continue to decline. Sorry, bud. BTW, I left out the key factor - price-to-rent ratios are still way out of step with (i.e., much higher than) historical norms - they will inevitably return to normal, which means lower sale prices. I mean, this isn't rocket science, folks. Just look at what happened after 1987 if you want a precedent of what will happen.

I'm sorry so your argument is that the New York MSA has NO relation to NY? That is just stupid.

JM - as far as making predictions, I really don't think you should be calling out other people. Here's what you said 20 months ago, i.e. around September 2007 (basically at the absolute height of the Manhattan RE bubble):

"I'm glad you are coming around to the fact that Manhattan real estate is unique and the sooner you get in, the better."

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/2353-manhattan-housing-boom-continues

If I had taken your advice then, where would I be now? Answer - in deep shit.

wow, i was overly optimistic about the Kalahari situation. Glad i decided not to buy.

...or this prediction from the same thread:

"2005 levels? Your talking about a 15-20%+ correction. Ain't gonna happen."

"Ain't gonna happen" - famous last words, JM. So why should anyone believe your views now? It appears that you really don't know what you are talking about, sorry.

"I'm glad you are coming around to the fact that Manhattan real estate is unique and the sooner you get in, the better."

"2005 levels? Your talking about a 15-20%+ correction. Ain't gonna happen."

I've already said on some other thread that the first quote was a poor choice of words and I f-ed up because I didn't anticipate Lehman. That said, if you read the thread in context and if you were around during those times, you would understand that the amount of misinformation and stupid predictions resulted in some snarky responses. What you are also fail to mention to is that everyone of these quotes was 100% correct until Lehman exploded. That means that all of the market bears were 100% wrong from mid-2007 to mid-2008. That means a market apocalypse was required to slow down the train AND the “50% off” crew still has still not been proven right. nyc10022, steve, and every other crack-bear has admitted they didn’t see Lehman coming, yet they all claim that they were right! So, I stand by what I said and don't apologize for it. Spin it however you choose.

"I've only used one screen name. Maybe I was just reading threads but not posting a year ago. Honestly, I don't remember and can't be bothered to check."

You don't need to check, I did and you have been posting for 12 weeks. You mentioned predictions that you posted last year and I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I guess that answers that question, but congratulations on your world famous predictions from 12 weeks ago or that 3 years ago you thought things were "expensive". You may want to ask yourself if your “12 weeks of wisdom” justifies your criticism of someone who had the actual balls to make a prediction, stand by it, and take the lumps (some deserving) associated with it.

"So why should anyone believe your views now? It appears that you really don't know what you are talking about, sorry."

I don't care if you believe me or not, I'm not here to educate you. That said, I wonder how many folks (you included) would have believed that POS Deutesche report if someone that "didn't know what he was talking about" didn’t spend 30 seconds looking at it. Bears get angry when you poke holes in attention grabbing reports that support their baseless agenda. Don’t you see it?

"I'm sorry so your argument is that the New York MSA has NO relation to NY? That is just stupid."

Is it malthus? Why don't you enlighten us on how median prices of single family homes in Pike County impact a 2 bed co-op in the Village? What’s stupid is that you are still fighting this.

JM, enlighten us on what portion of the NY MSA sales occurred in Pike County? If it were a study comparing NYC to Pike County I would agree with you. Its not. Your argument is crap.

Do you really want to argue that falling prices in Westchester and Bergen County do not have some affect on prices in NYC? Go for it.

"What you are also fail to mention to is that everyone of these quotes was 100% correct until Lehman exploded. That means that all of the market bears were 100% wrong from mid-2007 to mid-2008. That means a market apocalypse was required to slow down the train AND the “50% off” crew still has still not been proven right."

So you were 100% right...until you were 100% wrong. Correct? And the bears were 100% wrong...until they were 100% correct. Correct? In other words, the doomsday crowd was wrong about predicting a market apocalypse...until a market apocalypse occurred. OK, I guess you're right (insert smirk).

"You may want to ask yourself if your “12 weeks of wisdom” justifies your criticism of someone who had the actual balls to make a prediction, stand by it..."

Sorry I didn't post my prediction on your message board of choice in 2007. For the record, I did have balls (more so than you). Why? Because I had the guts to resist the herd mentality to buy (or be priced out forever). How many times during 2004-2007 did people tell me I was missing the boat, that I should buy, etc etc etc. How many times did I see friends and co-workers flip properties for an easy 200K or 400K gain? And how many times did I have to defend my position that NYC RE prices were absurdly overpriced? Trust me, dude, it takes a lot of balls to resist the temptation to buy when everyone is telling you that you are wrong to hold out. Well, I guess I was correct after all.

"Bears get angry when you poke holes in attention grabbing reports that support their baseless agenda. Don’t you see it?"

Look, I don't need a report from Deutsche Bank to tell me where NYC RE prices are headed. I do my own analysis.

"when you poke holes in attention grabbing report"

Poking a hole in something is easy; setting forth a generally cogent case is hard. I've seen the bears do the latter; I've never seen the bulls do anything more than the former.

I will take apart Alpine's taking apart of the following factors

"****1. Lack of mortgage financing****

Mortgages are there for people with decent credit. You can buy with as little as 3.5% down."

Maybe so. I have credit north of 800 and, if what you say is true and I can put as little as 3.5% down, I should be able to scoop up a $2m dollar apartment, right? Maybe back in '06; now they look at that pesky monthly income (not including uncertain bonus awards) and, well, looks like that might make that $2m a bit far off.

The point is, now, they don't give loans away anymore. It is MUCH tougher, even if you're credit worthy, to borrow and they're sticking much more to the normal 32%(or is it 27%?) calculations of net income. This greatly reduces the amount you can pay for a place and, well, as high-paying jobs evaporate from NYC, what do you think will happen?

"***2. Dems will remove the interest deduction for 200K crowd (i.e., the "richest Americans")***

Linking politics to the RE market is just plain silly"

Not really. If China get's pissed we're devaluing our dollar, stops buying our debt, and forces us to move to a dollar-protectionist stance and increase interest rates, you'll quickly see how politics can affect the RE market.

Or, more centrally located, now that Bloomberg is putting back many of the cuts he had planned due to reelection pressure, the money will have to come from somewhere. They're already raising the sales tax 0.5%, next could be property taxes. You don't think that will have an affect on affordability?

3****. Wall Street has completely imploded****

ok, fine. I will give you that one."

And you'll also realize with that goes many of the high paying jobs (and subsequent tax dollars) that helped bring this city to the point where it was in 07, right?

****4. Those that feed off Wall St (lawyers, accountants, consultants, etc) are being crushed****

fine, I will give you that one too."

Again, when they get less money, they afford less, they spend less, they cause a huge ripple effect that most definitely affects real estate.

****5. Most NYC apartments are above the conforming limits****

That is not true. I beleive that only half of them are."

I have no idea on this, so I've got nothing here...

****6. Interest rates are rising and will continue to rise when inflation hits****

Interest rates wre at insane low levels a matter of weeks ago and it was inevitable they rose. With that said, rates are still very good right now. Inflation also has the potential to cause prices to INCREASE so if you think it is coming, you should be buying RE."

There is the chance RE will NOT increase, as salaries will likely not be following hyperinflation quickly enough. Plus, for RE to benefit from it, you still have to loosen mortgage lending standards which will be highly unlikely when banks are just beginning to get scorched by the next wave of resets/recasts.

****7. Incomes are falling***

I'm not so sure about that. I think incomes are flat. And even though incomes were flat for the last 8 years, prices rose."

What do you think allowed for prices to rise when incomes remained (relatively; outside of Wall Street, I'm sure) flat? Giving away mortgages.

Incomes are falling. Even if you don't include the massive layoffs dropping out of the "total city income," then you're not including the "underemployed" folks around. A good friend of mine that does software for the music industry narrowly avoided a layoff and, on top of that, was told that the entire company will be on a furlough from the beginning of Dec to the middle of Jan; of which they will only be paid for half of it.

That was yesterday and that's going to be considered falling income.

****8. New developments are failing, which will jack up inventory****

New devleopments also equal more inventory. I don't get what you mean by "failing."

He means (I am guessing; I can't speak for him) they are not selling, going bankrupt, and getting foreclosed on. When this happens, the units are likely going to be "dumped" onto the market as rentals or cheap sales.

If they're cheap sales, they'll kill surrounding comps. If they're rentals, they'll still kill comps because, now, you can rent a similar place for much cheaper than you could buy it; which will bring prices down as those comps do not sell over time and owners get restless.

****9. Inventory is already skyrocketing****

Per Urban Digs, inventory is on the decline."

No idea on this but, if it's not anything substantial, my guess is it's only the seasonal uptick usually seen around this time of year. There are, of course, still people buying; some because they think this is cheap and some because they absolutely have to.

Still, it doesn't change the fact that there are far too many units coming on line and not enough people buying/renting them up.

****10. People tend to avoid buying in a falling market (catch a falling knife)****

True, but the time to buy is when nobody else is buying so there is no competition."

Exactly. However, we haven't reached that point yet as, obviously, there are quite a few bulls on here that still believe we are going to go shooting back up to pre-bursting levels.

Once they're gone and you can't find a bull among the bears in this place; then I think buying would be prudent.

****11. Dems are going to regulate incomes for bankers in the future****

Another one blaming the Democrats. Oh, those evil Socialist Democrats. Seriosuly, please post your RNC/ Rush Limbaugh/ Dick Cheney talking points on a right wing blog, not SE."

It has nothing to do with being one side or the other. It has to do with what Obama has SAID he is going to do about compensation packages in the financial industry.

Doesn't really matter if he's a Dem or Repub, he's the guy in charge and that's what he said he's gonna do.

This will ensure WS will be crippled, due to cheap salaries or high regulation, for quite some time. As goes WS, so goes NYC/Manhattan.

As an aside, I just got done reading a really interesting book on the history of NYC. It talked about how great a shipping port this used to be and on how this helped grow the city in the past. Then, as the industrial revolution hit, it talks about how the manufacturing of NYC helped it grow even more. Then, as both of these fell into horrible decline, Wall Street came in and brought this city out of the mire of the 60's and 70's.

Well, guess what, that's crippled now, too?, and we don't have manufacturing or shipping to fall back on. What "saves" the city this time?

****12. Potentional overseas buyers are in worse shape than us****

Which country are you referring to? I recently heard that England is no longer in recession, as in May they GDP grew."

England has a much higher debt to GDP ratio than even we do. Like us, I'm sure their massive government stimulus plans were a part of that.

China had 30 million migrant workers leave cities and go back to farming villages to look for jobs: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=anFTCDCm7XQ0 . They have a building boom there that made ours look like child's play. The main reason we don't hear much about them is due to the government's strict control of the media.

****13. Stock market implosion leaves everyone less wealthy (able to afford downpayment / closing costs)****

If you anticipate buying in the near future, you have no business putting your downpayment money in the stock market."

True, but it doesn't mean a majority of people think that way. Read the article on the Trustafarians in Billyburg. Their parents are pulling back because, you guessed it, stock market losses.

Whether you think people are making the right choice by leaving their money in the markets before buying or not is irrelevant. It happened and will have an effect on the RE markets now.

****14. When a bubble pops, prices tend to over-correct to the downside****

Not always. I'm sure they will over-correct in bubble markets like CA and FL, but NYC is not anywhere as bad."

When the largest bubble in history pops, it'll likely over-correct massively. NYC might not be quite as bad as FL, CA, NV, etc., but it sure is hell worse than most other places. The overbuilding going on here is crazy won't be absorbed anytime soon. This will certainly affect prices more.

The last thing is the fact that NYC is always late to the party and always stays longer; partially due to the MUCH longer foreclosure period than ANYWHERE else. NY State is 450 days, the next longest is right around 300, and the states we hear so much about are right around 90-120 days. So, you figure, we are WAY behind them when it comes to getting hit with that.

“In other words, the doomsday crowd was wrong about predicting a market apocalypse...until a market apocalypse occurred.”

No, they were 100% wrong about the reasons for the correction (except maybe a couple like Urbandigs, MMAfia). They all know they missed it but claim victory anyway. Look, if I predict that the Yankees will win tonight because of a home run by Derek Jeter and the Yankees actually win tonight because of a bloop single by Brett Gardner - am I right? What if I then told everyone how smart I was because I called it right? It is both hilarious and nauseating.

“Trust me, dude, it takes a lot of balls to resist the temptation to buy when everyone is telling you that you are wrong to hold out. Well, I guess I was correct after all.”

If that is your situation then I’m happy that you made the right choice but that doesn’t mean that someone in a different situation and with a different set of circumstances didn’t make an equally “right” choice. Additionally, we all debate a lot back and forth about the direction of the market and that is sort of the fun of all this but I can say unequivocally that when someone has asked this group for advice on rent vs. buy and has been willing to share details, bulls and bears have generally aligned to the right recommendation. Market chatter is different than telling someone to buy or not to buy. Said another way, if I think steve’s 2x more expensive to buy than to rent theory is crap, I’m going to tell him. Does that mean that I think someone should buy a place that is 1.5x more expensive to buy than to rent? Probably not.

"Do you really want to argue that falling prices in Westchester and Bergen County do not have some affect on prices in NYC? Go for it."

No, that's not what I'm arguing at all but since you mentioned it, if prices were to fall in Westchester and Bergen County by 20% how would that impact Manhattan?

"Your argument is crap."

That's a real insightful point of view malthus but unless you can enlighten us to how this report correlates to Manhattan, it is a weak one. Maybe you should read the source data again and get back to us or be more clear on your point of view.

“Poking a hole in something is easy; setting forth a generally cogent case is hard. I've seen the bears do the latter; I've never seen the bulls do anything more than the former.”

Said by the guy that pokes holes in everything to a point that he loses his place and pokes holes in his own theories.

"Market chatter is different than telling someone to buy or not to buy. Said another way, if I think steve’s 2x more expensive to buy than to rent theory is crap, I’m going to tell him. Does that mean that I think someone should buy a place that is 1.5x more expensive to buy than to rent? Probably not."

Exactly. Though there are a few extremists who apply their market views in every last scenario. You know who you are.

I agree with basically all of InvestorMan's points - on the conforming point, my perspective is that the apts I would consider buying are above the current limits, so that's what I care about.

JM - I don't really get your point of view. Who cares what caused the meltdown? Fact is, it happened. You said it wouldn't - you were wrong - case closed. So now you are trying to "poke holes" in the arguments of those who are predicted substantial further declines. Again, why should I listen to somebody who has been wrong for the past 1.5 years?

"I can say unequivocally that when someone has asked this group for advice on rent vs. buy and has been willing to share details, bulls and bears have generally aligned to the right recommendation"

Really??? You said 20 months ago that people should buy into the "unique" Manhattan RE market "the sooner, the better". Sounds like you were on the wrong side giving that advice. So what is your advice now - buy or wait? Penny for your thoughts (show everyone how much balls you have by making a prediction - I've already given mine).

"It has nothing to do with being one side or the other. It has to do with what Obama has SAID he is going to do about compensation packages in the financial industry."

Turbo Tax Time Geithner has made it very clear just the other day that the govt. will NOT limit salaries.

*Turbo Tax Tim Geithner*

The_P - if you think Wall St will be returning to the levels of compensation witnessed during the past decade anytime soon, you are nuts.

"So what is your advice now - buy or wait? Penny for your thoughts (show everyone how much balls you have by making a prediction - I've already given mine)."

Bsexposer, read his post above more carefully. Giving a blanket "buy or wait" response is a pretty dumb thing to do - everyone has different circumstances, not to mention that every place for sale has its different characteristics and (more importantly) pricing. Just because 99.9% of the units out there now don't suit you/are too expensive doesn't mean you should NOT be looking. No one is buying the entire market, which is why this kind of advice is ultimately pretty useless. Isn't that the kind of bs you should be exposing?

I don't need to defend the report JM. I'm just looking for a little intellectual honesty on this board and that doesn't seem to be your strong suit. Put simply, you tried to denigrate a study by cherrypicking the farthest part of an MSA that accounts for 0.3% of its population and saying that the study is invalid because this is included. You are not arguing with her study, you are arguing with what you would like her study to be. I think it is you that needs some defending and I don't see anybody jumping to it.