Loft Market Grows, at Lofty Prices

"However if one searches the Streeteasy database, one can still find rentals in these sizes for the price range mentioned in the article."
....which would mean the net rental yield post common charges is below what it was way back then.

This major disconnect of prices and rental net income is so out of whack that it may have to correct, but maybe the market will just stay irrational like this forever.......

"Thoughts?? "

I think it's wonderfully ironic to choose those two buildings as examples of what you could rent today.

I also think it's sort of funny to talk about 2,000 SF sales and 1,000 SF rentals and comparing prices.

Also, two totally different areas -

The point was that you can still rent apts that are that size, in that price range in that area whereas purchasing those same apts mentioned is now 5x the price plus double the cost of maintenance. I'm only comparing what the article mentioned.

Jimstreeteasy - I agree with you 100%.

In order to afford a $550k apt with $2000 in maint you need to at least make $200-250k. Its not for poor people.

"The point was that you can still rent apts that are that size, in that price range in that area whereas purchasing those same apts mentioned is now 5x the price plus double the cost of maintenance."

Except for one problem: it's NOT the same apartments. It's comparing sales apples to rental oranges. If it's the SAME apartments, tell us how much rentals are these days at 110 Liberty and 205 Pearl (NB my note about irony above). The only way it's "the same" is that you are doing "the same" apples to oranges comparison the NY Times article did in 1996.

I'm comparing the SAME apts to buy that were mentioned in the article to similar apts to rent that were mentioned in the article. I think any 2,100 sq ft apt in a downtown condo is going to be well over $2M whereas renting a 1BR downtown should be around $2800-$3300 and 2BRs in the area at ~$3700 and up.

And you cant buy a classic 8 on Park for $1.2M either.

And how much did those apartments to rent actually rent for which were mentioned in the article?

and why isn't the comparison between those apartments for sale and THE SAME apartments for rent, rather than comparing one set of apartments for sale to a different set of apartments for rent?

"I think any 2,100 sq ft apt in a downtown condo is going to be well over $2M whereas renting a 1BR downtown should be around $2800-$3300 and 2BRs in the area at ~$3700 and up."

Those are two separate and distinct statements but you're acting like they are one. The real question isn't what $2100 Sf lofts are selling for vs what 1 BRs are renting for, it's what 2100 SF lofts are selling for vs what 2100sf lofts in the same buildings are renting for.

I think you could make a valid argument if you used the real numbers, but I'm questioning the particular methodology you are using as a valid form of a "proof".

again I'm not comparing the 2100 sq ft loft to buy vs the 1000 sq ft jr for rent.

what i was comparing is what the 2100 sq ft loft price to buy was then vs the price it is now (which is 4-5x as much)

and what the 1000 sq ft jr 4 or 2 BR whatever, was renting for then vs. what it is renting for now (which is essentially the same).

so it was more of a statement that rents havent gone up that much over the last 12 years whereas purchases have gone up 4-5 fold overall. again not trying to compare those 2 specific apts to each other (obviously they are not the same size and while in the same downtown location, not the same neighborhood).

I'm only 3rd gen, so maybe I miss something that an extra 2 generations would account for. Comparing prime TriBeca (429 Greenwich) to 250 Pearl Street in a shitty Fulton area?

Again, I'm not comparing what location is better or the size of the apts to each other.

What I'm comparing is what it was to rent then vs. what it is to rent now (essentially no change) and what it is to buy then vs what it is to buy now (4-5x). The location is not that relevant - I also said the classic 8 on Park that went for $1.2M would also be about 4x that.

"Again, I'm not comparing what location is better or the size of the apts to each other.

What I'm comparing is what it was to rent then vs. what it is to rent now"

Fine. So why don't you answer my question "And how much did those apartments to rent actually rent for which were mentioned in the article?"

let me just tell you that in most of Europe, especially in large cities like London or Paris, in nice areas, the rent/purchase ratio is 1:25 at best (4%) and 1:40 (2.5%) is not unheard of