Current bear argument can be categorized in the following ways: (it changes like the weather so its difficult to capture but this is the crux of the argument) 1. NY drop began long after the rest of the country therefore we will be last to recover. Wrong, our recovery has begun. Watch the 3rd and 4th quarter numbers for confirmation. 2. Price to rent ratios out of whack. So? When have Manhattan... [more]
Current bear argument can be categorized in the following ways: (it changes like the weather so its difficult to capture but this is the crux of the argument)
1. NY drop began long after the rest of the country therefore we will be last to recover.
Wrong, our recovery has begun. Watch the 3rd and 4th quarter numbers for confirmation.
2. Price to rent ratios out of whack.
So? When have Manhattan real estate prices ever seen a perfect sustainable match of this metric? We deal in cycles and occasionally orbits will match but never for a moment believe equilibrium is a sustainable goal.
3. Affordability relative to incomes out of whack.
So? Manhattan is a center of worldwide wealth but predominantly a renters city. The last 15 years has seen boomers wealth explode. Those who purchase are financially secure and able to put down large amounts of cash. Even small players (sub $1M) have demonstrated affordability and inventory has dramatically tightened. Those whose incomes and savings can't support a purchase join the rental ranks.
5. Shadow inventory is lurking.
So? Condo prices were heavily inflated to begin with. A slow leak of inventory (it won't be a giant dump folks so quit waiting for it) will effect a price leveling that has been slow to happen because of existing contracts on new development.
4. A return to historical period pricing is inevitable because of the above reasons. Lets see, they range between mid 90's to mid 00's depending on the which bear needs to hit a particular number.
The fact of the matter is Manhattan IS different and will break any perceived mold these experts attempt to create. The motivation of the bears to drive prices down to the point THEY feel comfortable with is evident. They are paranoid of any discussion which doesn't serve their collective goal. Look at ANY thread where someone attempts a remotely positive discussion.
Watch and wait... heeeeeeree they come!
[less]
> Love is in the air, bjw & nyc are just two peas in a pod.
More like christ and anti-christ.
;-)
Or whatever analogy you like, as long as it correctly alludes to me being right, and bjw getting it wrong.
Well, the overshoot we were talking about originally was on the price to rental costs. Since we don't have the data - would love it if someone found that - I don't know.
In terms of the Shiller price to income chart, I'm not actually sure we'll overshoot on that unless you create a more near term "median". I think that gets overshot, though.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by bjw2103
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 6236
Member since: Jul 2007
"Another lie (and a repeat). Again, not surprised!"
"Well, too bad for you then. If you don't want to hear it, put me on ignore, or STOP COMPLAINING ALREADY. Otherwise, bite me."
You say this, but please point them out. You're the (only) one doing an awful lot of complaining yourself.
"But if you yell go after someone else for being wrong, and be as mistaken as you have been here, sorry, I will respond."
So, you're like the great Streeteasy defender? Color me unimpressed. You're proving my point - you genuinely enjoy trying to police my posts (and yet you accuse others of hall monitoring - hypocrisy, thy name is nyc10022) and getting into these drawn-out, wasteful arguments, that don't actually resolve anything. Solid.
"and he's intelligent about it, and you're not"
This is the post that was so "unintelligent" that set you off:
"LICC, this is pretty off-base. The New York City of the 70s was a horrific place compared to what we have now."
You're right, I should be drawn and quartered for making that statement! You are beyond ridiculous.
"At least your level of accuracy has stayed consistent."
Way to change the subject - you clearly were wrong.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by nyc10022
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 9868
Member since: Aug 2008
> You say this, but please point them out. You're the (only) one doing an awful lot of complaining yourself.
And, here you are... with YET ANOTHER post complaining. The hypocrisy never ends!
Hillarious!
> So, you're like the great Streeteasy defender? Color me unimpressed.
Nah, you're the hall monitor...
> You're proving my point - you genuinely enjoy trying to police my posts (and yet you accuse others
> of hall monitoring - hypocrisy, thy name is nyc10022)
Wow, you are stupid, too! Tell me you aren't THIS dumb.
You can't understand the difference being disproving lousy argument, and a guy who goes around saying what people should and shouldn't be posting about, what is ok to argue about, and who other people should be ignoring.
Dude, I don't even think you know what the word hypcrisy means!
You just complain and complain and complain, and have more inaccurate posts that anyone!
You are the king, miranda.
> and getting into these drawn-out, wasteful arguments, that don't actually resolve anything. Solid.
The guy STILL REPLYING to that argument is complaining.
I love it!
Dude, you are the king of hypocrisy. I wish you knew what that meant.
> You're right, I should be drawn and quartered for making that statement! You are beyond ridiculous.
You, uh, conveniently left off the post you were CALLING WRONG. Yes, if you ignore what was actually said, you look less stupid. I give you that.
But, too bad the rest of the post is right up there for anyone to read.
Sorry, toots, you were PAINFULLY wrong.
(no matter how much you argue and complain)
> "At least your level of accuracy has stayed consistent."
> Way to change the subject - you clearly were wrong
repeat yourself as much as you want, you were PAINFULLY wrong, and always hypocritical.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by nyc10022
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 9868
Member since: Aug 2008
$20 bucks says bjw responds to this one, too... (after hypocritically complaining about all the "arguing").
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by bjw2103
almost 17 years ago
Posts: 6236
Member since: Jul 2007
"More like christ and anti-christ."
Comparing yourself to Christ - pretty much says it all about you right there.
"$20 bucks says bjw responds to this one, too"
Your check's in the mail. I'm not complaining about arguing in general, I just think if you get this worked up about it, a suggestion to put me on ignore wasn't such a bad idea. You complain that I keep replying, but hey, $20 that nyc10022 responds to this one, too...
To answer 30yrs' question about bananas, here's Tom or Dick: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1cfTMdjkYM
> Love is in the air, bjw & nyc are just two peas in a pod.
More like christ and anti-christ.
;-)
Or whatever analogy you like, as long as it correctly alludes to me being right, and bjw getting it wrong.
Well, the overshoot we were talking about originally was on the price to rental costs. Since we don't have the data - would love it if someone found that - I don't know.
In terms of the Shiller price to income chart, I'm not actually sure we'll overshoot on that unless you create a more near term "median". I think that gets overshot, though.
"Another lie (and a repeat). Again, not surprised!"
"Well, too bad for you then. If you don't want to hear it, put me on ignore, or STOP COMPLAINING ALREADY. Otherwise, bite me."
You say this, but please point them out. You're the (only) one doing an awful lot of complaining yourself.
"But if you yell go after someone else for being wrong, and be as mistaken as you have been here, sorry, I will respond."
So, you're like the great Streeteasy defender? Color me unimpressed. You're proving my point - you genuinely enjoy trying to police my posts (and yet you accuse others of hall monitoring - hypocrisy, thy name is nyc10022) and getting into these drawn-out, wasteful arguments, that don't actually resolve anything. Solid.
"and he's intelligent about it, and you're not"
This is the post that was so "unintelligent" that set you off:
"LICC, this is pretty off-base. The New York City of the 70s was a horrific place compared to what we have now."
You're right, I should be drawn and quartered for making that statement! You are beyond ridiculous.
"At least your level of accuracy has stayed consistent."
Way to change the subject - you clearly were wrong.
> You say this, but please point them out. You're the (only) one doing an awful lot of complaining yourself.
And, here you are... with YET ANOTHER post complaining. The hypocrisy never ends!
Hillarious!
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/14180-manhattan-is-different?page=2
second page, search on "argu" and notice how many times you complained.
> So, you're like the great Streeteasy defender? Color me unimpressed.
Nah, you're the hall monitor...
> You're proving my point - you genuinely enjoy trying to police my posts (and yet you accuse others
> of hall monitoring - hypocrisy, thy name is nyc10022)
Wow, you are stupid, too! Tell me you aren't THIS dumb.
You can't understand the difference being disproving lousy argument, and a guy who goes around saying what people should and shouldn't be posting about, what is ok to argue about, and who other people should be ignoring.
Dude, I don't even think you know what the word hypcrisy means!
You just complain and complain and complain, and have more inaccurate posts that anyone!
You are the king, miranda.
> and getting into these drawn-out, wasteful arguments, that don't actually resolve anything. Solid.
The guy STILL REPLYING to that argument is complaining.
I love it!
Dude, you are the king of hypocrisy. I wish you knew what that meant.
> You're right, I should be drawn and quartered for making that statement! You are beyond ridiculous.
You, uh, conveniently left off the post you were CALLING WRONG. Yes, if you ignore what was actually said, you look less stupid. I give you that.
But, too bad the rest of the post is right up there for anyone to read.
Sorry, toots, you were PAINFULLY wrong.
(no matter how much you argue and complain)
> "At least your level of accuracy has stayed consistent."
> Way to change the subject - you clearly were wrong
repeat yourself as much as you want, you were PAINFULLY wrong, and always hypocritical.
$20 bucks says bjw responds to this one, too... (after hypocritically complaining about all the "arguing").
"More like christ and anti-christ."
Comparing yourself to Christ - pretty much says it all about you right there.
"$20 bucks says bjw responds to this one, too"
Your check's in the mail. I'm not complaining about arguing in general, I just think if you get this worked up about it, a suggestion to put me on ignore wasn't such a bad idea. You complain that I keep replying, but hey, $20 that nyc10022 responds to this one, too...
"To answer 30yrs' question about bananas, here's Tom or Dick: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1cfTMdjkYM"
I figured SOMEONE would know it, especially given the context, but I guess not.
30yrs, I actually responded much earlier in the thread (I believe correctly)!