Better to Buy or Rent?!?

Because there are high transaction costs to buying and selling property, it is impossible to get a realistic scenario where it is more profitable to own in the early years. The key is how quickly the graph turns positive. You are doing pretty well if it does in 5-7 years.

Thanks, PMG

Are there apartments for sale at $1.8M that are available for rent at $6,000? With these numbers, I'm surprised it ever makes any sense.

Maly: there are apts currently on sale for 3m+ which are on the market for rent at 6800.

Oh yeah plug in negative 5% on rental for 5 years. Rerun with $2.5mm, addin Ginger, twist of unicorn and shake on the rocks. The answer => ya bettter not lose your job, get pregnant, or a divorce in the next 25 years. After that it's a wash.

That's crazy. Can you give me an example?

Maly, please comment on doggie w67th first before resolving your own curiosities.

Why rent when you can own?

Has this topic been discussed on another thread?

Stop giving your money away to your landlord.

After reading the SE posts for several months, the general consensus seems to be that it's better to rent in today's NYC market than to own. Unless, like me, you want to buy an apartment where you plan to live there for many years. It seems that most of the people who post on SE either have a strong real estate or financial industry background and for them, it's clear that renting is the better option. But in reading the posts, why do quality of life factors such as not having to live in a rental building filled with noisy people in their twenties never enter into the analysis? Why is the analysis purely financial, particularly for people who can ride out the ups and downs of the market since they plan on holding onto the property for many years?

> The purchase will have only made sense after 17 years

if ever...

"But in reading the posts, why do quality of life factors such as not having to live in a rental building filled with noisy people in their twenties never enter into the analysis?"

Same reason having to live in a crappy co-op building with low reserves doesn't factor in...
or apartments bought by daddy for the same kiddies.

"But in reading the posts, why do quality of life factors such as not having to live in a rental building filled with noisy people in their twenties never enter into the analysis?"

I like how "riding it out" is supposedly a good excuse for losing money.

How do you know that you will lose money if you live in the apartment for 15-20 years and then sell? Why can't you make money in the long run? Or is it only people that bought suburban homes in the 1960's and then sold their homes when they retired who make money?

And again why do quslity of life issues play no part in the analysis of buying an apartment? Why is the money the only issue and only money in the short term?

lobster, living in a coop with obnoxious owners who feel a higher sense of entitlement because they own a tiny fraction of the building is no picnic either. Surely you've heard an endless flow of stories?

Alan, true enough, but at least there is a board to go to if there is a problem and a possibility that it will be resolved. In a rental building, there is often nowhere to turn for help.

Oh, so you haven't heard the endless flow of stories!

If you can get a "sick deal", BUY.

Very very funny. Have a good rest of the evening.

"How do you know that you will lose money if you live in the apartment for 15-20 years and then sell?"

How do you know that you will make money?

(the math says you won't)

> Why can't you make money in the long run?

Noone said you can't... just that the math says you probably won't.

> Or is it only people that bought suburban homes in the 1960's and then sold their homes when they
> retired who make money?

Well, buying when home prices were low, and then selling in a bubble usually does one well. Hell, that works for pretty much any asset going into a bubble. Tulips, dotcom stocks, etc.

But does that mean tulips were a good investment after they started to decline?
Does that mean you SHOULD have bought pets.com after it fell 50%?

> And again why do quslity of life issues play no part in the analysis of buying an apartment? Why is the
> money the only issue and only money in the short term?

Lobster, now you are just making things up. Noone said it doesn't matter.

But you made a mistake. You generalized and assumed quality of life in buying is always better. Sorry to burst your bubble (no pun intended), but that isn't at all true.

Especially if you factor in that for the same money you can rent a much nicer place...

Prices in capitalist markets have a strong tendency to revert to the cost of production. If buyers are willing to pay more that that, investors can make super-normal profits by producing more supply. So they find ways to do it. That continues until demand is met and prices drop, or costs go up.

In NYC, it is not hard to convert rentals to owner occupied. So if it is more profitable to sell to owners than to rent, investors will move units to the owner-occupied market. Bloomberg has also revised the zoning laws to make building much easier.

The implication is very simple: in the long run, you should expect condos and coops to sell for the least of the cost of building, the cost of converting/renovating, or the value of a condo to an investor that intends to rent it. Prices will be based on the economics of investors, not owner-occupants.

Ordinarily, you would expect the cost of building and rents to track inflation pretty well, since it is a very large part of measured inflation. They should go up less fast than economic growth in general, since productivity in the building industry can grow quite a bit.

So, long run and post-bubble, you should expect that prices will drop until investors are indifferent between renting and selling (about half current levels) and then should rise with or somewhat slower than inflation. If NYC does extremely well or extremely poorly relative to the rest of the country, rents (and therefore sales prices) could deviate somewhat (but not very much in the long run because its not all that hard to build here or to find substitutes elsewhere).

If you buy now, you should expect to lose large amounts of money, unless you have some persuasive story why (1) ordinary market rules don't apply, or (2) cost of construction and rents are going to go up faster than inflation, or (3) another bubble is going to start because people will buy based on an irrational belief that prices can go up forever without affecting supply or demand.

The NYT widget assumes that investors are willing to accept unusually low returns on real estate investments. It therefore is biased towards purchases. If it is recommending rentals, then the bubble has a great deal deflating left to go.

They're not making any more land.

Somewhereelse, you and I clearly have a disconnect about quslity of life issues. Here is my assumption- that people who own a coop or condo want to live in a quiet, well-regulated building and people who rent apartments often don't care as much about their building. I'm speaking from my own experiences in having rented apartments for the past 17 years. I've had many neighbors who are very noisy and leave garbage in the hallway and other issues. Maybe I will be proven wrong when I buy an apartment, but I hope not. Having a beautiful apartment in a rental building doesn't mean that your quality of life will be good if no one really cares what happens in the building and the building super and the management company aren't interested in qulaity of life issues. But we can agree to disagree about these issues.

it only takes one piggish sort no matter where you live to make life uncomfortable. renting isn't hell and owning isn't heaven. i've lived for 13 years in three different places that i've owned, and 12 years in numerous rentals. the only negative rental experience i've had has involved the landlord, not the tenants, and that was an outlier.

If they're not making any more land, how did they find space to put up all these condos. What you dont understand is people dont NEED to live in Manhattan, especially at these prices.

PS: Buying something for $1.8mm that rents for $6k is absurd. As high as the asks are for coops right now, the rent buy relationship on condos is mindboggling. Its very easy to find $1.8mm asking price condos that cant find a renter at $6k. The best bull case for buying right now is that rents are so depressed, they can snap back 25%-30%. Show me how that can happen, and you can be bullishing on buying.

No money down and low low monthly payments.

Right because borrowing $1.8mm is cheap and maintenance hasnt been going up for ten years while rents have done next to nothing.

Be the king of your castle.

I get it you're goofing.

Your family needs a home, not just a house.

aboutready
about 2 hours ago
ignore this person
report abuse it only takes one piggish sort no matter where you live to make life uncomfortable. renting isn't hell and owning isn't heaven. i've lived for 13 years in three different places that i've owned, and 12 years in numerous rentals. the only negative rental experience i've had has involved the landlord, not the tenants, and that was an outlier.

Was that because of the extra day to wait for the new toilet seat? Or was that the older incident with the plunger?

Lobster, have you ever considered that you can rent in a condo? It's quite easy to do so for years on end. Or if you're willing to put up with coop rules like a 2-year max (not me), that's also a possibility. However, if you want to have a defeatist attitude, you can ignore such facts and equate renting with only a certain type of place.

This is a great discussion, an important topic, and I rather wish people would take it seriously.

A quality rental building is way better than a crummy co-op or condo. I've been to listing appointments at condos that feel exactly like sterotypical rental buildings, complete with surly scruffy staff and dirty utility rooms. (I don't take such listings, by the way.)

You are Queen or King of your home regardless...although I guess alanhart has tongue planted in cheek. The landlord owns the house, but the home is yours. If you take a look at your lease, you'll see this phrase "quiet enjoyment." That's legalese for the concept. Good landlords respect it.

It's not all about finances, of course not. But the financial analysis is certainly worth doing and including in your decision-making process. Many of us appreciate the security and control (even perceived control) of owning. But financially? The numbers don't lie.

As I've said before, I love my co-op so much that I can't imaging buying anything but a co-op in the future for my own enjoyment. When we move up, a co-op it is likely to be. That's a minority position on SE, but it's because I bought into a terrific building--and of course the apartment prices are proving that, even in this economy.

{Manhattan real estate agent.}

It never makes sense to buy. Put your money where it's safe, in equities.

There is such a thing as cash...and bonds. There are big myths built around both owing real estate and owning stocks for that matter. We live at 12 East 86th and love it. I am so glad we didn't go out and spend $1.2mm on a two bed or even worse, $2mm on a classic six.

but Spinanaker you bought and are happier than a pig in s**t - so why did you say that?

Why do we even continue to have this discussion? People who want to buy will, people who want to rent will. We seem to get into a protracted "discussion" when the "true believers" feel some need to prove their position correct...then the fun begins! I think a very small percentage of people make their decision to own or rent based on empirical financial analysis.

Not everyone is a real estate geek (I include myself) obsessing over the buy/rent spread like the few here on streeteasy. In the "real world" people decide to buy or rent for much more organic reasons. I think many Manahattanites choose to rent because they feel they will not be here very long and when it's time to start a family will buy a house in the burbs. Renting an apartment in NYC is a great way to enjoy life here without a making a big financial commitment...especially for those of us who are not swimming in liquidity.

There are great options for renting, from full service high rises, unique lofts, character laden brownstones or a crummy little walk up if you just arrived with more dreams than money. You can also do this in as many wonderfully diverse neighborhoods all connected by a pretty decent transportation system. Either way you do it, in my opinion NYC is a wonderfully diverse place to live. I still remember when I first moved here in 1981 and got the keys to my $200 dollar a month apartment on Norfolk street...magic! And I still love it and won't ever take it for granted!

Buy, rent it's all good, enjoy life.

I understand bulls. I understand bears. I don't understand the people who log in to remind us its not the most important thing in life. Thanks?

I guess I'm banging my head against the wall on this topic. Maybe my rental experiences aren't the norm, but several times I have lived next door to groups of people in their twenties who blasted music all weekend and the management company, despite phone calls and letters from several neigbors, did nothing except send a letter to the tenants. I'm sure that ownership has plenty of downside (other than financial), but I can't imagine that type of noise issue would be tolerated in a condo or coop. I also had a neighbor who couldn't be bothered to throw her garbage down the chute and left her garbage (not in bags) on the floor of the incinerator room and this was tolerated by the building management. Again not likely to happen in a condo or coop. Maybe there are significant quality of life issues in condos or coops of which I'm unaware.

lobster, if your neighbor is an asshole your neighbor is an asshole, wherever you live. certain buildings have more 20somethings, which can be an issue. but believe me, that's not the only issue. and you're granting coops and condos far too much credit. if they didn't tolerate any assholes, they'd have far fewer occupants.

i know a couple of coop stories that could put your annoyances to shame. and they're not about the coop boards, except to the extent that they were not able or willing to remedy the problem, they're about owners.

It would be awesome to pay a big price and then live next to an asshole whose parents bought him or her a coop studio or one bed as a graduation gift.

Aboutready, please share one of these stories.

Lobster: all I have to say is rent or buy, pick your building carefully. We've lucked out in every building we've lived in. The twenty-somethings (including us) were all tired from their 100h+/wk job and collapsed at home every weekend.

Of course you wouldn't Rhino; you only want to see "bulls and bears" and take a position. You will (and have) argued that you are right and they are wrong. My position is that there are circumstances that make both options a viable choice based on individual circumstances. Not hard to understand at all.

Not hard to understand...but kind of like tits on a bull on a real estate site wouldnt you agree?

@Rhino: lol..

a friend of mine lived in a coop. her upstairs neighbor worked and came home every night to work on his own renovations, frequently until the wee hours of the morning. for five years. she had a young son who was awakened two to three times a week. i don't know why, but she couldn't get the coop board to get him to stop.

it really is just luck. someone above you with triplets could drive you mad, depending on your tolerance level. and you just can't stop the upstairs neighbor from having triplets, can you?

Generally, the more chi-chi the co-op is, the less likely you are to have neighbors who renovate their own apts or don't deal with garbage properly. The only catch is whether you can live up to their stringent standards.

Condos are more hit or miss because of the higher proportion of renters. Look for low turnover of rentals.

or afford the apartment in the first place. this was a mid-level coop.

You are also less likely to have annoying neighbors if you are rarely at home yourself.

Yes, I've also heard stories where people do their own renovations in their apartments during late night hours. Blasting music, to me, is much much more bothersome than listening to children running or playing in the apartment above you. Of course, if you're noise sensitive, you can always soundproof an apartment before you move in. I just can't see what is so great about renting in terms of quality of life issues. As KeithB states very well, renting is often a good option for many people, especially for people who plan to leave the city, but IMO, renting is often not bliss.

I cant imagine a coop board so lax that they dont put the hammer down on someone doing renovations on weeknights.

Lobster: can't generalize. There are rental buildings out there/ condos w/o annoying people. Might I suggest that when you are renting, NOT to look for the best possible bargain? Sometimes it's worth paying a couple hundred bucks extra.

That sounds the exception that proves there is no sense overpaying for home ownership. Lets address the fact that the coop structure itself is weird, and that owning a coop will never be the same as owning a house...or even a condo. Its not property, but people here want to get all sentimental over it.

i rented one time in a coop. during the interview they asked if i owned a typewriter because the neighbor hated the sound. i didn't but i should have run, not walked, from that place. we had to quit listening to music entirely because even if we had it at level two the neighbor called the board president who confessed that the neighbor was bat-shit crazy but he had no alternative to ask us to turn off the music or his life would be hell.

i had totally forgotten that experience. i've had two negative experiences, one a rental landlord, one a coop.

nyc10023, when you say to look for low turnover of rentals, do you mean to look for buidings which only permit long term rentals or buildings where there are very few apartments to rent or a combination of both or something else?

I'm ecstatic I bought ph41. Money is just a tool that allows me to live the way I want to live now. Those who are waiting for the clouds to part and the risk analysis to lead them safely to the promised land, suggest to me they are not happy or satisfied with their current situation. Otherwise, why would they care? In my case, I acknowledged my dissatisfaction and formulated a plan. I didn't pressure myself, I was methodical in my research and honest about my needs. There was no point exploring "what if" scenarios, I had made my decision to move forward and did. My daughter is now locked into a great little school, I can send her and my dog outside to play while my wife and I enjoy a glass of Lonesome Duck in front of the fire. WAIT??? Are you kidding me??!!!

But cash and bonds are awful tempting ; )

Its great that you're happy...but that happiness should have nothing to do with owning. My bonds pay my rent at 12 East 86th, and we are locked into PS 6. We love the staff, and we're on top of the Park. The emotional attachement to owning is on close inspection, kind of unnatural. I mean what is owning coop shares of a corporation when you might have a maniac next to you who doesnt like the sound of a typewriter. We looked at a coop where the treasurer decided to put all the cash (substantial - the proceeds of a loan) into adjustable rate securities. The exposure is a joke.

i currently rent two apts and both are stone quiet and my neighbors are great--

lived in coop once nextdoor to a complete ahole--we shared the back elevator landing and he was a filthy non-recycling slob who stored his dirty mops etc otu there--im kinda live and let live so i just dealt with it; until one night i returned after a hell flight from a ski trip at 3 am and left my ski bag in the hall until 630 am when i brought it to the basement --this db intitiated a fing letter writing camopaign based on this--found out from my friend the board pres that the guy was a constant pain in the ass--invited nmy friend down to look and the back elevator landing and he was appalled-- he wrote the guy a lets live and let live a litte letter who then threatened to litigate

neighbors can be great or awful--doesnt correlate with coop or rental

Rhino - I'm glad you're happy (and rich, too.) But I wouldn't be caught dead in that building.

And to think I am the one accused of taking pot shots at people. Back at ya, enjoy your overpriced apartment. Only the math challenged would buy now, particularly with rents so weak. Home sweet 'shares in a coop corporation entitling you to the use of a space.'

I hate people.

i only hate the people i know.

lobster, have you lived in those few particular buildings that cater to recent college grads? Dormandie Court is the classic, but I gather there are others in the Gramurray Bay area, and probably FiDi.

I love the people I hate.

spin, how canadian of you.

KeithB: 'Why do we even continue to have this discussion? People who want to buy will, people who want to rent will. We seem to get into a protracted "discussion" when the "true believers" feel some need to prove their position correct...then the fun begins! I think a very small percentage of people make their decision to own or rent based on empirical financial analysis."

I am one of the 'small percentage' who will make a decision on empirical financial anlysis. During 2002-06 I was going through the process of getting my green card and did not want to place my money into anything could take time to sell. By 2007 it became obvious the real estate mkt was due for a crash. As a result, I did not buy and rented instead and ended up accumulating a respectable liquid position, some in financial mkts, some in CDs.

I intend to keep potion of my money (above and beyond the $$ in retirement accounts) in the market. But I am now asking myself whether buying in the next 12 months will be a good idea. I have not arrived at an answer yet. In theory I am open to everything: coop, condo, manhattan, other broughs, suburbs -- you name it. My lease expires in September, so I will start going to open houses in January.

As a resultI find these discussions very helpful.

hehehe

ukrguy - all the smart money is renting at 12 E 86th. Although they may not get your British humour over there -that's right, HUMOUR with a U spellchecker.

Alan, I've only lived in the UES east of Lexington. Meantime, is anyone here a Mets Fan? Do they really have a shot to get Roy Halladay?

What is "Mets"?

"Correct"

"Plural big city abbreviations for 400, Alex"

You guys are kidding me? You only live and breathe real estate?

ukrguy: I was right there with you (as a broker here in NYC) I stopped selling and started a company focused on renting with a discounted fee (now mostly no fee). I have just recently started working with buyers and sellers again offering a menu of services to both; from commission rebates for buyers to a variety of options for sellers; all based on he specific needs of each.

I guess "why do we even have this discussion" is a bit to general. I am all for discussion, guess its just the direction some of these rent v. buy threads take that I find unproductive.

"Not hard to understand...but kind of like tits on a bull on a real estate site wouldnt you agree?"

Two things - 1) just because this is a real estate site doesn't mean rational, level-headed opinion should be ushered out the door, and 2) in reference to the bull appendages, some people take what they can get.

Lobster: I lived in a co op where the president of the board made life so unpleasant, I had to move. Others reluctantly tolerated his behavior because the were scared and didn't want to move because they had kids in school. One neighbor (an esteemed businessman) who did move told me that he had dreamt constantly of killing the co op president and that one drunken night he almost launched a rocket onto the prez's terrace to burn his apt. down. His wife could only talk him out of it by pointing out that their apt would burn down also. Needless to say, their lives improved once they moved and he slept soundly without murderous dreams.

And, the building across the garden which was occupied by a movie star's unruly teen children (with no adult supervision) blasted rock music all night long. The co op prez (a lawyer) sent threatening letters. The vengeful teen's started blasting hare krishna chants and claimed religious rights. So, you never know what can happen. But moving when you rent is a lot easier than moving when you own.

keith, it's seemed positively light recently on the rent/buy issue. not long ago it seemed as though you could be discussing anything from where to shop for groceries to the cleanup of the gowanus and it would (d)evolve into a rent/buy argument. i enjoy a good rent/buy argument, not so much from the financial side although i get that, but from the social/psychological side.

i also live and breathe swine and wine.

Not to distract the lot of you humourists, but where is that mythical $1,8M for rent at $6,000?

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/396361-condo-635-west-42nd-street-clinton-new-york

2000 (allegedly) sf apartment for $7000. three 2000 sf apartments on the market for $2.4mm-4mm.

score one for AR. nice use of "u" in humourist.

apt23, which movie star?

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/595333-rental-151-east-85th-street-upper-east-side-new-york

F line, $9850. 8F on the market for $2,835,000.

this is fun. and too easy.

There are very few rent stabilized apartments in Manhattan,so you have no idea what your rent will be after your lease is up, and you can usually only stay in condo or co op rental for 2 years. With buying you have the security of knowing your monthly payment and you won't be uprooted.There is something to be said for that peace of mind.

There are a lot of rent-stabilized apartments in Manhattan.

You have no way of predicting maintenance and common charge increases, and you are legally obligated to pay them until you sell your apartment.

No peace of mind.

tomato

Ha! The places you found are throwbacks to a frothier time. I especially love 8f at the Lucida. Closed at the end of August 2009 (for $2.23?, did I read that right?) and listed on September 2nd for $500,000 more. Since the apartment failed to sell in the first few weeks, the price is then increased. Good luck with that. The listing on the rental seems to indicate those sponsor rentals are different, lower floors maybe? There's another one, same size, for almost $12,000. Maybe the "cheap" one you mention is on the second floor?
In any case, those 2 buildings are complete jokes in terms of pricing.

Peace of mind is being able to confidently take risks and embrace change in your career/life without having to ever concern yourself as to whether it affects your ability to make your mortgage payments.

I've found people with large mortgages to be unusually risk averse and nervous about change.

Lobster -- Your willingness to return here to get beat up by anonymous bloggers who are positive that they are right about the direction and severity of future market movements only made it natural that you would be a Mets fan willing to return year after year to a team that continually causes you to bang your head against the wall. I feel your pain. The Mets have plenty of money, particularly with Putz and Delgado contracts expiring, and a stadium any pitcher would love. If they pay up, Halladay will come. Getting a left fielder that can hit, however, looks bleak, as will a 2010 line up that will be lucky to hit 100 home runs as a team.

How about this one...in order for the $8k rent to cover carrying costs (not even factoring in the annual RE Tax increases) he would have to put down over $1 million on the $2.285mm purchase price. That assumes a generous interest rate on a JUMBO and doesn't even factor in closing costs. ROE is non-existent. If he's a cash buyer, even worse...

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/484387-condo-101-warren-street-tribeca-new-york

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/416002-condo-101-warren-street-tribeca-new-york

I've rented in the immediate neighborhood for 8 years (121 Reade St., 22 River Terrace and now 50 Murray) and watched this building go up while tracking on Streeteasy. There have been dozens of listings just like this where the carrying costs on 20%-30% down nearly double the achievable rents. I know there are lots of mostly cash buyers in this building (I imagine there a plenty who thought they'd get 90% financing too), but from an investment perspective, any positive ROE in the near future looks unthinkable.

My wife and I are of the lobster mindset. We want to own because we're sick of renting, and want a place of our own. We're willing to pay a premium for that, but talk about deflating. We've been looking for several months now and to come close to what we currently get renting at 50 Murray, monthly cost would be more than double. Lobster, I am on your side here, but I am a prime example of the positive rental scenario that you are saying is the downside of renting. We pay less than $3,500 for a high floor 1,050 sq.ft. loft/2ba with open city views, 11 ft. ceilings in a luxury doorman building. I roll out of bed and I'm in the Equinox without having to go outside. We're friends with all of our neighbors, a mix of late 20's/early 30's like us with no kids as well as several young families.

I want to get past the basic economics, but the Housing P/E ratio right now is SO out of whack. With more and more product coming online and so many condo owners trying to rent, I just don't see rents climbing that much in the near future.

Any one have any historical data on the Manhattan Housing P/E Ratio?

Maly, here's a good rent vs. buy comp:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/448811-condo-200-riverside-boulevard-lincoln-square-new-york
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/229217-condo-200-riverside-boulevard-lincoln-square-new-york

They're the same exact line, separated by 4 floors (31C for the rental, 27C for the purchase), and they both actually transacted at around the same time (contracts within 2 months, with sale recorded a month ago). The sale went for $1.375M, and the rental's last asking rent was $4650 (perhaps there were negotiations in addition, but let's ignore that). The building was built in 1999, well before any craziness. That gets you to the same ratio as $6K / $1.8M, and these are both actually-transacted prices.

Good enough for you?

I'll post my rental story after a nap (try the lunch boxes at Ennju, yummy).

Inonada, that's a great one, actually. I wish we could that buyer to explain what is so special and wonderful about this nice, if inconveniently located apartment, that he was willing to spend 50% more to buy. It's not like it's unique or perfect or rare.

No clue, Maly, other than either an illogically-strong preference for ownwership and/or a belief that prices will go up despite rent fundamentals, making it a good investment. I usually find that the two go hand-in-hand.

BTW, I was trying to be as "fair" as possible with that example. It seems that 30C (one floor below the 31C rental) went into contract for sale at $1.6M (last ask at $1.85M) within days of 31C's going into contract for rent at $4650:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/404934-condo-200-riverside-boulevard-lincoln-square-new-york

However, I consider the $1.6M price for 30C pretty crappy compared to the $1.375M price for 27C a couple months later, so thought that 27C made a more fair comparison. FWIW, 30C was also on the market for rent at $5250 before it got pulled, and it looks like the buyers were perhaps willing to pay a premium since they own 30D (i.e., were looking to combine).

Peak price for the line was 22C in May 2008 at $1.85M:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/166486-condo-200-riverside-boulevard-lincoln-square-new-york

So perhaps the buyers of 27C were thinking they were getting a great price at 25% off what 22C went for just a year prior.

Difficult to find fault with anyone desirous of the Trump pedigree. Normally it's hard to find a nice mirrored wall in this price range.

LOL

Come to think of it, do the owners in Trump buildings erase the name once they get control of the board? Pull down those big brass letters? Or do they figure it's still a draw for speculative condo buyers in Asia and New Jersey?

maly, you didn't give any restrictions with your little challenge. i could do this all day.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/596027-rental-252-seventh-avenue-chelsea-new-york
12T on the market for $1.6mm, this, 7T, is for rent at $6200.

here's another gem. last on the rental market 05/09 at $8995, 7D. 6D is on the market for $2,675,000, monthly cost around $17000.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/500857-condo-260-park-avenue-south-flatiron-new-york

i don't care if it last sold in a bubble time. i care what it would cost me today to rent vs. buy. i'm a condo person, so this is where i'm looking.