What keeps business/people in the NYC area?

TV boy, please don't tell me about supply and demand. Of course it should stay higher here. Do you understand what I mean when I say "spreads"? The appreciation in NY was exaggerated by cheap credit which inflated financial industry incomes and made large mortgages easier to get. This has gone away. Question is now, what is a more normal premium for Manhattan. That is even before you take some of the factors people have mentioned in this blog about trends making it easier to work away from the metro center.

Calm down, Rhino -- we're actually in agreement here.

Just having fun. My buddy just bought 2000 sqft in a desirable neighborhood in Chicago for $700k... I think we can fall more and still be New York. I actually find Boston pretty desirable and the asset management industry is more stable than investment banking. I dont have a sense of prices there right now.

matt: duck and swerve. so, did Ted Turner make a huge pile of money selling his lousy Atlanta based franchise or not? you clearly are not in TV or haven't been for quite a while. the threat to network TV is not from downloads; the problem is getting advertisers to pay up to cover the huge programming costs as well as the ever growing audience of TIVO/dvr commercial skippers.

"TV boy, please don't tell me about supply and demand. Of course it should stay higher here. Do you understand what I mean when I say "spreads"? The appreciation in NY was exaggerated by cheap credit which inflated financial industry incomes and made large mortgages easier to get. This has gone away. Question is now, what is a more normal premium for Manhattan. That is even before you take some of the factors people have mentioned in this blog about trends making it easier to work away from the metro center."

People seem to miss that a ton. "yes, but its better than XXX city" and "more people want to live here".

All true. But going from 5x as expensive as the rest of the country to 3x is still a HUGE jump down, especially when other places are falling as well.

Yes, NYC deserves a premium. But the premium overshot, and now it looks like it might be correcting.

I wish there was an easy way to look at that premium over time. Intuitively, it overshot. All the investment bankers and hedgies here drive this market like none other.

"the threat to network TV is not from downloads; the problem is getting advertisers to pay up to cover the huge programming costs as well as the ever growing audience of TIVO/dvr commercial skippers."

There is no single "threat" to network television. I merely pointed out one of the major threats, looking ahead 10, 15, 20 years and beyond into the future, which IS, in fact, the internet. Yes, advertisers and TIVO are more immediate problems, but they aren't as singularly important as the next generation of programming delivery systems.

"I wish there was an easy way to look at that premium over time. Intuitively, it overshot. All the investment bankers and hedgies here drive this market like none other."

I think you have at least some of that in the prices to income ratio.

matt: stick with shoeshines. much simpler: brown, black, cordovan.

Kid comes to the big city to become a TV star...Who knew the harshest critics of all would be on Streeteasy.

matt does so many things and knows so much about so much, it makes me dizzy just thinking about it.

What keeps people in NYC vs other cities?

Would you rather drive a Honda or a Bentley?

I would rather drive a Bentley...but I would not pay any price for a Bentley.

and you criticize others for stupid posts?

intended for the boy---rhino was a little too quick for me.

You would not pay any price for a Bentley? Yea....sure.

"What keeps people in NYC vs other cities?"
1) High paying jobs (big "if" going forward)
2) Culture (Broadway, Off Broadway, museums, galleries,etc.) (not likely to change)
3) Quality of life (like being able to get a roll of toilet paper and a pack fo cigarettes delived to your apartment at 3AM any night of the week. Essentially anyone in a 200sf ratty tenement studio has full-time concierge like services. try calling up and getting a bagel with cream cheese and a cup of coffee delivered to you in any other city).
4) Diversity (did you know that Queens is the most culturally diverse place on the whole planet?)

but add some weighting to your four points....70% to #1?

I think people outside finance don't want to believe that finance drove Manhattan real estate. And even if they do, they don't realize 1/6 is out of work in that industry and the other half have seen their incomes cut in half...roughly to 1990s levels!!! Everything points to the 1990s.

CC: "matt does so many things and knows so much about so much, it makes me dizzy just thinking about it."

I'm sure you can achieve "dizzy" without my help.

the last thing anyone needs is help or advice from you, you pompous know it all.

lowery said: "I guess what you're saying is that the economic collapse is going to cause everyone to re-examine, and maybe finally the decentralization away from Manhattan in law, finance, advertising, etc. will finally happen. But I am not convinced. I remember when Silicon Valley seemed to be the place to be and go. Then software companies and dotcoms relocated to Manhattan."

The decentralization has already happened, and from the sound of things, it appears that many New Yorkers don't even realize it. Someone upthread mentioned that a dotcom raising $100MM needs offices in New York. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't think of a single successful dot-com that raised $100MM with a major presence in New York (and I'm not counting major media subs like NYT). I don't know of any major relocations from Silicon Valley to Manhattan. Companies have already stopped using New York "white shoe" law firms for less than complex work. Someone upthread also mentioned that "college towns" don't offer any jobs beyond the coffee shop. Well in the past 25 years, some "college towns" like Austin, Chapel Hill and Palo Alto became places where educated people stayed and prospered, and more will emerge. For all the college grads that come to New York after graduation, there are at least as many New Yorkers who are part of a "brain drain" leaving town for college and never coming back. Some of the comments I'm reading about New York remind me of how Europeans from a past generation thought of themselves in comparison to the United States. Being the financial capital of the world created great prosperity in New York for a nice long run. However, during that time, there were other economic sectors that were emerging largely outside of New York, or existing sectors that became "decentralized" to service clients who no longer feel the need to have a "New York connection" and suffer no loss from it because technology has made the world just so connected without having to "be there." The financial collapse should be time for New York to re-examine and, as some have suggested, use the talent pool and resources to diversify the local economy and spawn new industries. Otherwise New York will become like an old European capital with great art, culture, and big banks that make money available for great things to be created and produced ELSEWHERE.

"but add some weighting to your four points....70% to #1?"

Until very recently, it never was the case. You had plenty of people who were in NY who did not have high paying jobs. In fact, you still do: I think we get a little strange here because we think the only people still living in Manhattan make $200,000 a year, and it's just not the case. If you think high paying jobs is the reason 70% of people live in NY, how do you explain the super-super-majority of people who live here not leaving?

"Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't think of a single successful dot-com that raised $100MM with a major presence in New York"

I don't know, what would you call Google's 311,000 sf at 111 Eighth Avenue?

http://curbed.com/archives/2005/11/15/inside_new_gooooogles_new_chelsea_oooooffice.php

WebMD is supposed to have something like 100,000 sf of space in that same building.

And before they merged (got bought by?) Google, I think Doubleclick also had around 100,000 sf in that building as well.

"I think we get a little strange here because we think the only people still living in Manhattan make $200,000 a year, and it's just not the case."

They do if they buy. That's the issue. Banks won't stretch your purchasing power like they used to...and there is no one to step in an replace a shrunken finance industry.

Google is in NY for Madison Avenue. Which is getting its ass kicked.

But also consider that they have big, branded buildings all over the country and world. I saw one in Israel. They're everywhere.

If this is all we got, thats not good...

reddog - My previous posts were all about demand - let's not forget supply issues. The building process here is asinine. The unions ensure building regulations are different from the standards used throughout the US in an effort to keep national builders out of NYC. This increases building costs by about 20%.

Next our zoning regulations are so obtuse that the government has to hire lawyers to interpret the governments own laws. Over 1,000 pages of the most ridiculous rules. Houston has zero pages - my guess is that somewhere in the middle makes sense.

NYMBs, enough said there.

The approval process in NYC is non-sense and wealthy people with good lawyers can tie up huge projects for years. Pre-development costs here are sometime 1,000% more expensive than in other major US cities.

You get the idea. We have plenty of places to build - don't let the "we've run out of land" crowd fool you - we could add 1,000,000 units easy but the approval process, cost of construction, and for now lack of lending will prevent more supply.

But don't get me wrong, now is not the time to buy -we go lower from here. For now, the supply is much great than the demand from people who can actually get loans.

I was out with family friends the other day. They sold their 3,000 sq ft house w/pool in Houston proper for 280k 3 years ago. They bought a similarly sized place in Dallas for an even trade. There's no city or state income tax there either

Would I rather drive the honda or the Bentley? If I have to work 80hrs a week to drive the Bentley, not see my family, and stay up nights worrying about paying off the Bently bill, I'd rather drive the Honda.

Our taxes are about 50% now, city, state, Fed, as many of you are painfully aware. I think it's a REALLY good question about why companies and people stay in ny. And honestly, I think more and more people are finding it hard to justify.

As for the culture, for the money I'd save living down south, I could fly back to ny 4x a year and take in the ballet here.

"Would I rather drive the honda or the Bentley? If I have to work 80hrs a week to drive the Bentley, not see my family, and stay up nights worrying about paying off the Bently bill, I'd rather drive the Honda."

No, that's if you CHOOSE to work 80 hours a week driving the Bentley. Some of us driving those Bentleys have decided that 30-40 hours per week is quite enough, thank you, and are sleeping just fine.

Great for you Matt, you're the chosen one. Wow, you really put me in my place.

LP1, I was only pointing out that not everyone in New York has bought into the notion of economic slavery, worshipping at the altar of work and career.

You seem to have missed the point Matt. IF the price of your NYC apartment requires so much cash flow that you need to be at the office till 1am to make the $$$, then maybe it's not worth it. I have friends who are at the office literally till 3am in PE, ibank, law. To me, it's not worth it. I'd rather be down in Miami, hanging out on the beach with my kid, with less money in my bank account. To them, they would rather maximize their earnings now. Personal preference. I've just known too many who worked the hours and didn't get paid in the end.

No, I got your point LP1. And MY point was that if the price of your NYC apartment requires you to work like a slave, perhaps you're trying to buy more than you can afford.

So much philosophizing. Fewer people making less money in finance. Prices must fall more than just 30%.

You don't have kids do you Matt? If you've got 2 kids, you're not going to squeeze into a studio. You either have the money to buy a couple bedrooms, or you leverage (providing you can) or you move out. Families have been moving out for years now. And with people making less, and career tracks stalled, I don't see the upside in current Manhattan prices.

LP1, no I don't have kids. But if I did have kids, I wouldn't kill myself to buy an apartment I couldn't afford.

People with kids are forced to move to more affordable locales in cities and states all across America. It's hardly a New York phenomenon.

Families leaving New York City wouldn't be the end of the world. Quite frankly, I could certainly do with fewer strollers in Chelsea and the West Village.

Really...you think a lot of $300-500k income families leaving the city wouldn't be a big deal? Obviously not a numbers guy. This city better get cheap fast, because once families leave they don't turn right around and come back in two years if things get cheaper.

What makes you think they're all making $300K-500K?

And if they WERE all really making $300-500K, they could easily afford family-sized apartments.

Really? People making $300k should buy a $1.5mm classic six (down from $2.1 last year)? Easily? Listen young man, I think you really don't know much about a family budget in this city. Besides, the issue isn't whether or not they can make it work...its whether they will choose to make it work in the new world. Frankly, your stroller comment shows your maturity level. In any event, $300-500k (or more) kind of folk pay a lot of taxes in this city. Whether you realize or not, that amount of income is really a compromise level for a family of four. In any event, the more than move the worse off the city is on many levels. Maybe you'll like it better, who knows...but its a downward spiral as they raise taxes on income and banks cut comp levels.

Oh okay Matt. Trust me, 3-500 doesn't go far in this city with kids. Generally if you're an employee making that you're taking home only half. And the marriage penalty tax will cost you more on top. Add on nannys at 750/wk or daycare at 2k mo, clothes, food, +100 in sitters every time you go out, and that's young ones. Private school will cost you even more.

With respect Matt, you don't seem to know much about earnings, expenses, or demographics in this city.

Well put Rhino

"People making $300k should buy a $1.5mm classic six (down from $2.1 last year)? Easily? Listen young man, I think you really don't know much about a family budget in this city. Besides, the issue isn't whether or not they can make it work...its whether they will choose to make it work in the new world. Frankly, your stroller comment shows your maturity level. In any event, $300-500k (or more) kind of folk pay a lot of taxes in this city. Whether you realize or not, that amount of income is really a compromise level for a family of four. In any event, the more than move the worse off the city is on many levels. Maybe you'll like it better, who knows...but its a downward spiral as they raise taxes on income and banks cut comp levels."

I know a thing or two about demographics and affordability, and I personally know quite a few families in New York City (including Manhattan) who are successfully raising families on less than $100K. And they're not doing it in Classic Sixes, either.

And believe it or not, there really aren't THAT many families in New York City making over $300K -- or at least enough of them leaving the city to make that dramatic of a difference in the tax rolls. Really. The bread and butter of this city is in the sheer numbers of "regular" households making between $35K-150K. Always has been. Always will be. The rest is gravy. We've done with less gravy in the past -- we can certainly do it again.

Trust me...I get a lot of practice with my wife. The other issue here is even if your a finance type making $600-800k...only $150-200k is guaranteed. You budget your family off what...$400-500k? Lets say its only one earner, not two. Do you go out and put $600k down on a $1.6mm apartment or do you look at the very nice suburban house for $1.1mm. Difference doesn't sound huge, but actually with the same downpayment you are looking at half the mortgage. Then factor in 4% back in city taxes (grossed up for the income you'd need to earn to net down to 4%....and its 8% at the margin).

I think this is a big big deal for the city. Finance type who used to make $1mm and budgeted around $600k, might make $500k now and not feel as confident about the $500k as he did about the $1mm. Might not want a $1mm mortgage. Meanwhile, it takes time for sellers of apartments to ratchet down their expections... Will a classic six get to $900k fast enough to keep the families on the edge in the city? Probably not... This poses a big problem for the city as tax rolls are already down huge on the lower incomes and lower employment levels.

And obviously, this is way more interesting stuff than 'what makes NY cool'. Of course its cool, who cares.

Matt, what does your 20-something ass know about the good old NY? Who is we? Honestly, what the fuck are you talking about. Wave the flag all you want. When was the last time NY had less gravy...the 70s?

You don't need that many people making that to drive huge shifts in tax revenue. Apparently the developers weren't working from your figures on so few $500k earners when they built thousands upon thousands of $2mm +/- straight 2 bed apartment units.

"The other issue here is even if your a finance type making $600-800k...only $150-200k is guaranteed. You budget your family off what...$400-500k? Lets say its only one earner, not two. Do you go out and put $600k down on a $1.6mm apartment or do you look at the very nice suburban house for $1.1mm."

Here's an idea: how about doing what tens of THOUSANDS of families in New York do all the time: budget your family on less than $100K.

Matt, why do I care? This is a board about real estate prices. We are talking about buying real estate. Renting requires 50x monthly rent in income. How about you stuff it up your ass and show me a family apartment for $2,000 a month south of 96th Street.

Actually, the standard multiplier is 40x the monthly rent.

And I didn't realize that "New York City" ended at 96th Street.

Ask yourself this Matt... What is the conversation that YOU are having exactly about, and is anyone else having it with you?

Ask yourself Rhino ... what colour is the sky in your world? A world where families "compromise" on half a million dollars a year?

I am talking about NYC, where 40% of the tax rolls come from the finance industry, and a greater percentage of the new condo buyers. Lets start from square one, because I see you are slow. First, this is a real estate website. Most people on this site discuss the purchase market for residential real estate in Manhattan...where it has been, where is may go (primarily the south of 96th market). Do you know what the average apartment costs in Manhattan? Over $1mm off the top of my head. So do you see where this is going? I am on point for this site. You are talking to yourself about the working man, the good old days (you are clearly to young to know shit about any of it). So again, what is your point? Are you here to say $500k is a lot of money? Sure it is. Maybe that's why real estate is too high.

Rhino, forget it. What is Matt's point anyway? He's flip flopping all over the place.

The rest of us know how expensive the city is, especially with a family. We know the income potential has degenerated for a vast amount of working people. And we know taxes have gone up and continue to do so. All this points to NYC being less desirable than it was a few years ago, and other US cities looking better in comparison.

There will still be independantly wealthy people here, family money, flagship offices, and expats living on packages. But if you don't fall into one of those categories you may be inclined to move out.

None of this is why people stay in New York. It's where the sidewalks hum with art, music, innovation, intellect, ideas. There's no place like it. Hong Kong has buzz but it's only about money. London and Paris are sleepy in comparison. It's the creative energy capital of the world.

trinityparent, do you really think affordability does not play into the equation. REALLY?

LPI, I think trinityparent's point is that "affordability" is subjective.

For normal people, families can live on less than $100K in NYC. For elitist over-entitled snobs, they're "compromising" at half a million.

BTW, my experience with nice Boston neighborhoods suggests price-per-square foot less than half of (IMHO) comparables in New York City. And yes, Boston is also a delightful city.

I don't think its over-entitled to say that you'd rather move out of Manhattan than pay $1.5mm for 1,500 sqft below 96th street. If people are looking at $1.5mm on less than $300-500k in income, they should re-consider their analysis. I don't think its over-entitled to want 1,500 sqft of space for four people and decent schooling for your children. I am not sure where families or two or more children rent for $2,500 in Manhattan, or what it really has to do with a blog about home ownership. Matt, maybe its time to get off your fucking soapbox. How old are you?

Boston is quite nice. Maybe Manhattan should be 30% higher than Boston / 35% lower than it is now. Maybe Boston is still falling. Long only asset management business isn't so hot with assets down 30-40% on performance, more with redemptions.

Old enough, m'dear.

Please tell me then, when last did finance incomes NOT drive this cities budget?

I honestly have no idea what NYCMatt is talking about at this point. He's gone in circles for a bunch of posts now, I'm not actually sure what he's trying to prove.

matt is so full of shit its hilarious...two weeks ago he was going on and on about the four jobs he had to have to get his down payment for his make believe apartment.

It's not compromising to live in a place you love. Compromising would be knocking around in a huge lonely space where there's nothing going on. My friend who moved to Boston tells me they have everything New York has: a bagel shop, a theater, a concert hall, an art gallery. One of each. He's looking to come home. People from California complain about the weather in New York. What weather? Who cares about weather? Who goes outside?

Not going outside is a Manhattan selling point? People love San Francisco.

It is compromising to shove four people into a 900 sqft space on the fifth floor of a walkup. Back to point, if there is a way NOT to do that on less than $300k or so...you tell me. In Manhattan. Below 96th street. A huge housing payment to live comfortably plus an extra 4% of tax is a compromise. It either suits you or it doesn't.

of course you're right. matt just makes it up as he goes.

oh shut up and deal with the prices.

it really isn't that expensive.

not you again.

oh...you.

Someone left the parental controls off on the family computer.

Rhino, if you have difficulty affording Manhattan go to Queens.

Wonderboy if you have difficulty participating here beyond 'shut up' go to a porn site and jerk your little hairless.

That was sooo uncalled for, you vulgar man.

back to the original question:
fashion
magazines
photography
internet media
advertising

we own this. the suppliers and talent come from all over the world. try making clothes without the button guy, the fabric guy and the zipper guy right down the street. or do a shoot without producers, equipment, photographers and stylists. please!

i think that NYC produces more advertising dollars than chicago and LA combined.

NYC rules the creative community. it's not going to be surpassed by houston.

many things need to happen in reality, not just the internet. i own a photo and production co and i have kids interning like crazy. they're here, and they are simply waiting for the market to improve. they are not leaving the city.

Wisco, and thus Google, DoubleClick, WebMD and their ilk come and stay. From a strategic perspective, you reach more people here.

"Google is in NY for Madison Avenue. Which is getting its ass kicked.

But also consider that they have big, branded buildings all over the country and world. I saw one in Israel. They're everywhere.

If this is all we got, thats not good..."

So Google's office space at 111 8th Avenue is "for Madison Avenue? Care to explain that?
And there is no evidence of Google's occupancy of 111 8th Ave from the street, so i don't know how they've made it a "branded" building.

I really have no clue what you're trying to say here, it makes no sense.

"They do if they buy. That's the issue. Banks won't stretch your purchasing power like they used to...and there is no one to step in an replace a shrunken finance industry."

And what percentage of the population buys in any year? You've got the tail wagging the dog. I think that you are foregettting the NYC is STILL a city of renters rather than owners.

Right. Here're the numbers: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/nychvs/2005/s1bt14.html

re Paris I disagree - but try buying a family-sized apartment in the heart of Paris........

"Google is in NY for Madison Avenue. Which is getting its ass kicked.

But also consider that they have big, branded buildings all over the country and world. I saw one in Israel. They're everywhere.

If this is all we got, thats not good..."

> So Google's office space at 111 8th Avenue is "for Madison Avenue? Care to explain that?

Madison Avenue means the advertising world (which, if you didn't know, isn't really all on Madison anymore).

Per Google's own words, they put down NYC roots to focus on madison avenue, who controls ad spending for a huuuuuuuuuuge chunk of big spending folks. For a while, the office was simply a sales office for Tim Armstrong, and then they added more mobile stuff, but its still a whole lot of sales.

And Madison Ave. is getting crushed these days.

> And there is no evidence of Google's occupancy of 111 8th Ave from the street, so i don't know how
> they've made it a "branded" building.

I didn't say 8th avenue was a branded building.

I just pointed out that google has large presences in a lot of other cities.

So, tying our city of 8 mil's fortune to Google is a stretch.

> I really have no clue what you're trying to say here, it makes no sense.

Only because you don't understand Google much.

Most New Yorkers rent, and most New York renters are under rent control. That is how many people afford to live here. Only the wealthy renters can afford market rents, and only the wealthy market renters can afford to buy.

30 yrs said: "So Google's office space at 111 8th Avenue is "for Madison Avenue? Care to explain that?
And there is no evidence of Google's occupancy of 111 8th Ave from the street, so i don't know how they've made it a "branded" building...I really have no clue what you're trying to say here, it makes no sense. "

I'll answer this question on behalf of nyc10022 since I do know what he's trying to say and I initiated the discussion. Google moved their advertising group to New York a couple of years ago and they comprise a large part of Google's staff in New York. I don't know if Google ever moved into that 8th Avenue space you linked to as their offices are on Ninth Avenue. Google has high profile satellite offices all over the world. Given that advertising is one of those industries that is being hit hard by the recession, Google's presence in New York (which occurred well after they became a multibillion dollar company and had offices throughout the world) is a pretty weak example of New York being an important player in attracting successful dotcom companies.

Google moved from broadway to the doubleclick building, across from Chelsea Market. Then they took space in Chelsea Market

And, yes, HDLC, that is what basically the gist of what I was saying.

Althought he conclusion probably needs to be said a little stronger... in the end, noting a SATELLITE office as proof of our importance of a locale is a stretch.

"Madison Avenue" hasn't been on Madison since the 80's. I know -- I was there. I think Y&R is the last holdout. All the other big agencies moved to the far west or downtown years ago (where they're suffering the brave new world, god knows) and the newer agencies (last 25 years) have been in Flatiron or downtown. Creative people, however, will always gravitate to New York, because it's where the critical mass is. You might get a great job in Portland or Minneapolis, but if that job goes phht, it's back to New York, where you can meet people and get ideas.

Where is there great weather year round, other than Southern California? The summers in Florida are brutal. Winters can get messy here for a couple months, but Boston, Chicago, Montreal and others get horrible winters. San Francisco gets chilly and foggy during various times of the year. Complaining about NYC weather gets overblown.

Shiller on NYC

It’s a little bit like Rome. I don’t know if you’ve ever read what Roman historians say: People in that city, I’m talking about ancient Rome, there were poets who extolled it, it must have been an amazing place. I wish I could go back in a time machine, it must have been something! The Roman Empire centralized on Rome more than the U.S. does on New York; in fact their whole country was named after Rome … They definitely had great feeling for that city, and it’s still there, and it’s still a neat city. But it went through some bad periods, if you look at history: Really bad periods when it fell into decay! So it’s kind of up and down, and I think that’s the typical history of cities. Rome has not always been expensive.

Rhino, great pull.

> "Madison Avenue" hasn't been on Madison since the 80's. I know -- I was there.

Already noted in the posts above.

> Where is there great weather year round, other than Southern California?

Northern California. (yes, I'm basically agreeing with you)

"Creative people, however, will always gravitate to New York, because it's where the critical mass is."
This may be true for visual artists and hip hop musicians and New York has a rich legacy for it.

However, as far as technological innovation, New York is a second tier city. I'd gladly trade several classes of MBAs for an equivalent number of outdoor loving engineers working on creative new products that have benefit to society.

"Google moved from broadway to the doubleclick building, across from Chelsea Market. Then they took space in Chelsea Market"

Satellite office or not, that place is ginormous and extremely well staffed. I was lucky enough to attend a conference hosted by Google there. Given that ad revenue is how they make their money, they aren't going anywhere.

HDLC, then why stay here? Sounds like Palo Alto is more your thing. I always wonder why people post here their doubts about staying, as though they expect to find a bunch of New York City haters on a New York real estate site. It happens, but I'd say that if you're looking at real estate, you're probably serious about New York in the first place, and it's not like some anonymous poster is going to change your mind about it.

I also think you're defining "technological innovation" rather narrowly. A great deal of technological innovation takes place in the city's infrastructure - unseen, but global social capital in another sense entirely.

Firstly, the "Ninth Avenue" office is 111 8thAve. Try looking at what you're talking about before , well....

You guys are masters of circular reasoning: "Google moved their X to NY because NY is the center of X". You can pick X, it can be anything, but then you go on to say how NY is now a non-player in anything but financials. Well, guess what: in this case X isn't financials, so you've EXACTLY proven your own point to be incorrect.

"Only because you don't understand Google much"

I guarantee I understand Google a hell of a lot better than you do. I spend 6 figures annually on Google advertising, I've been inside their offices because a neighbor works there and i have other friends who work there as well.

But apperently you two thing Google are idiots because they moved their advertising area to NY when NY is no longer relevant to advertising (according to you; now go backpedal and start up that smoke machine).

I'm not so sure creative people will always gravitate to New York. Creative people used to all gravitate to Venice and now the place is an open air museum staffed by retirees.
New York does not have much room for young creatives except for the most desparate or trust-funded.

chasing wamus - of course young creative people come -where the hell else could they go?? all the creative jobs are here. except for film, creative jobs barely exist anywhere else. bushwick is bumping. go to a friday night open gallery night. a couple of weeks ago was the bushwick open studios weekend. packed! i work in the photo industry, and very few are trust funded.

also, talking about google - that's technology and media. not creative. like to hear from people like in fashion or music or art on this board. no one dreams of making it in fashion in boston or cleveland or wherever.

evnyc,
I've had the opportunity to live in Palo Alto and chose not to. Everyone has their own reasons for staying or not staying in New York that are as diverse as the city itself. The point that I made is that there are very prosperous, innovative communities that thrive outside of New York, and in response to the OP, noted that it is less necessary for businesses to be here than in the past. That is not a slam on the city. It's just an objective conclusion. It's a very outdated view to assume that businesses NEED to be in New York, and it's actually detrimental to the city for people to believe that.

Wisco, many of the most creative people do it on their own time and pay for it with a day job. These people form the vanguard of the arts, and these are the people to whom New York is increasingly hostile.
Did you know that New York was once the capital of the film industry? Those creative jobs left for less expensive areas like LA and Vancouver.

30 yrs said: "You guys are masters of circular reasoning."

You seem to be the one having trouble making a linear argument. Let me give you a road map.

1. Jazzman said: "It's much easier to raise $100MM to run a fund, a graphic design business, a dot.com etc if your offices are set up in NYC."

2. I said: "Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't think of a single successful dot-com that raised $100MM with a major presence in New York"

3. You said: "I don't know, what would you call Google's 311,000 sf at 111 Eighth Avenue?"

4. nyc1022 said: ""Google is in NY for Madison Avenue. Which is getting its ass kicked.
But also consider that they have big, branded buildings all over the country and world. I saw one in Israel. They're everywhere. If this is all we got, thats not good..."

5. You got confused and said: "I really have no clue what you're trying to say here, it makes no sense."

6. Upon clarification, you got all hot and bothered and ranted : "But apperently you two thing Google are idiots because they moved their advertising area to NY when NY is no longer relevant to advertising (according to you; now go backpedal and start up that smoke machine)."

Conclusion-- It is really not necessary be in New York for a dotcom to raise $100MM, nor did Google deem it necessary to be in New York until late in the game.

No, I don't think Google are idiots. I've been to Google's offices on several occasions but excuse me if I'm unfamiliar with their building in New York because they don't have senior management in New York and I had to travel to Mountain View, CA every time.

I doubt Larry Page and Serbio spend much time in the NYC office of Google.

I think Wamus is a little off on a couple of points. The NY area was the center of the film industry when film was first being developed by Edison. Filmakers moved out west to make it more difficult for Edison to sue them based on his patents.

Venice was a source of creative types because it was the first trading stop from the Middle East. Venetian artisans had great opportunity to see and copy the unique art and craftmanship from the East. Venice declined once the New World was found, sea routes to India were discovered, and after terrible plagues. These aren't the type of events that are likely to affect NYC in the near future.

HLDC: so why "late in the game", did Google choose to lease 311,000 square feet in NY?

the internet and phones, even video conferencing, don't substitute for actual physical presence (i.e. a meeting), particularly when large sums of money are involved (i.e. making a deal, trusting someone with significant assets). this may change over time, but probably not for a long time. additionally, people that have people working for them want to see that the people working for them are actually working for them--and they want to be able to show, through physical gestures as well as written or spoken instructions, how to do what they want them to do. i have worked for companies in connecticut (also expensive, but less so) where the boss made the decision to have an easier life by moving his hq out there--the company was ultimately less efficient for two reasons--no one from NJ, Long Island, Brooklyn, Queens, and Manhattan wanted to work there. you are drawing from a smaller job pool--and by definition you are not going to get as good of employees. secondly, the EFFICIENCY of having all these talented people concentrated in a small area (manhattan) connected by relatively efficient and cheap mass transportation makes the productivity advantage of VISITS by people from non-NYC based companies too great to spend a lot of time in NJ, LI, CT, etc (no offense to any area, but that's the way it is). Cities exist for a reason, and those reasons are changing slightly, but not completely--and are unlikely to at any time in the future--and NYC is the biggest (and I say best) city in the u.s., despite all the warts. If the internet is changing everything so that cities don't matter, why is there the biggest global trend in urbanization ever seen happening on a global basis right now?