Manhattan: Buy while you can

under starry skies above (don't fence me in)

gonna be alot of crushed hopes whne the money doesnt show and its just like last year

http://trinitypastor.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/broken_record.jpg

Yes. Since foreclosures in Manhattan are on the rise and predicted to rise next year -including coops--and Deutsche Bank predicts that underwater mortgages will reach 77% in NY metro area in 2011, clearly sales will rise. Obviously a wonderful time to be an owner in Manhattan. Jump right in. Buy Buy Buy. Yes there is no more land. Buy Buy Buy. All the sales are an indication that this is the time to buy. All these buyers could not be wrong. Corcoran will tell you so. Rising sales are the surest indication that you should buy.

http://174.129.176.119/newyork/articles/second-wave-of-foreclosures-hits-middle-class-and-upper-end-nyc-neighborhoods--2

Funny, there was no land in 1990, either.

And I suppose 1890, as well.

those empty lots must be a figment of my imagination. and so must be their already prepped condition, many complete with foundations. and the vacant corner buildings.

yes sure, no more land in Manhattan since it's going underwater

There is more "land". It's in the sky, and called air rights. Man. is so overbuilt that people have to stand in line just to get a seat in a diner.

I saw the title of the thread and figured SteveF must be back. The 'New Math' of thread authorship must be stevejhx + sarcasm = SteveF.

SLS, glad you love me. :)

I don't think they're making any more land in Kansas, either.... though not sure if thats gonna hit 10k psf either.

"Deutsche Bank predicts that the number of underwater loans in the New York metro area will jump from its current 11 percent to 77 percent by 2011."

I'll take the under.

"In addition, between October 2008 and October 2009, the city lost 110,000 jobs, according to the state Department of Labor. And if job losses continue at the current monthly rate of 3 percent, another 45,000 people will lose their jobs during the next six months."

Well, let's make this a parlay.

I don't disagree with the idea, but the numbers are way off and there are no facts supporting these extreme statements.

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/section/resources&template=NYC_Layoffs#

This site is based on WARN numbers from http://www.labor.ny.gov/app/warn/default.asp?warnYr=2009

Already, according to Liebman, "There are lots of bidding wars. But the bidders don't go wildly over the listing price like they used to."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I would like to know how many bidding wars exactly, we only know that there are "lots" and how much over the price of similar apts in the last year, we only know that "bidders don't go wildly over the listing price.."
a lot of good information in that phrase...

No way to know, except when the sale price is more than last-asking. Whenever I pull up the latest 200 sales, there're always a few like that that presumably resulted from multiple bids.

There could be others with multiple bids, with the highest still less than asking, but that's not recorded anywhere. (Unless the brokerage houses do it.)

Wasn't steve labeled as a SE troll a few days ago? How in the world could someone make that mistake?

"and Deutsche Bank predicts that underwater mortgages will reach 77% in NY metro area in 2011"

apt23, you better do a SE search on Deutsche Bank reports and see how much credibility they have around here.

Buy now or be priced out FOREVER!!!!

Not named a "troll," JuiceMan - got an apology from streeteasy:

"Steve, That should be fixed now. Your "Manhattan: Buy while you can" thread is currently on the front page. Sorry for the inconvenience! Thanks! Matt"

One more in the Loss Column for JuiceMan.

And JuiceMan - where's your promised answer to the similarity of the 1990 broker spin to today's? Still waiting on that one.

"see how much credibility they have around here."

In JuiceMan's mind, he and LICC alone constitute "around here." In everyone else's mind, reasoned arguments like Deutsche Bank's is worthy of consideration.

BUY NOW OR BE PRICED OUT FOREVER!

steve, I don't think you deserved the troll treatment but it was priceless. I'm still chuckling about it.

"And JuiceMan - where's your promised answer to the similarity of the 1990 broker spin to today's? Still waiting on that one."

Haven't read it yet. Busy.

at least juiceman can have one bright spot in his day... taking a break from all the money-losing.

Careful, JM, you might be next!

JM: I am aware of the credibility of DBank on this site. However when refuting a CNN Money report that is almost illiterate, it seems any source will do. And, conceivably, DB paid someone with a business education to compile that report. So there must be a fact or two in there somewhere as opposed to CNN/Money. I might grow more positive when I return to NY next week, but sitting here in Miami, 77% underwater mortgages sounds rather run of the mill.

"taking a break from all the money-losing"

EddieWilson, you try really hard sometimes but you just can't pull off witty, clever, or funny. You should really stick to what you good at, such as posting three day old news links.

I don't know why Deutshce would have a bad reputation around here. The woman who wrote that report was calling for investors to bet against the mortage market in 2005.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29827248/page/7/

That was about 4 years before some of the bulls here acknowledged that the market was dropping. So let's put the discredit Deutsche Bank canard to bed.

thanks for that post malthus

Been wondering where to post this thought/question:

- i wonder how many buildings have yet to have a closed sale that was contracted after prices declined; some buildings seem not to have; for example, a friend in one nice building doesn't feel the decline is real (25% down would put him underwater, but he doesn't feel underwater) because it hasn't happened manifest in his building.; as time goes on, and more sales at the new level closes, it sinks into more minds, and i wonder what impact that has, if any....

- perhaps so much time has passed that there have been recent closings in most places, esp after the volume pick up recently, but in that case it means plenty of owners just recently saw it in their face what has happened to their asset.

Jim: On a related note, here is what I have been wondering. In my rental search, I have come across a few apts that were owned by foreigners who bought as investment/rental properties. As they are no longer getting even close to the rents they used to get and in addition, the apts are sitting on the market for months. So, they are very aware of downturn. Would this mkt encourage these very same foreign investors to buy more apts as prices go down? Or would they balk as they are not currently covering the costs of buying in these new developments and they want to throw in the towel?

"The woman who wrote that report was calling for investors to bet against the mortage market in 2005."

So calling a downturn 2+ years before it actually happens is a credible projection? Okay...so if I call for RE in NYC to go up and it goes up at all 2+ years from now I am right? That's kind of weak as far as accuracy.

Maybe it's just the people I know, but most owners don't know the market in their own buildings, and don't pay much attention to the market in general. You'd think everybody's always googling their buildings, finding SE, looking up everyone they know in ACRIS, etc., but that's just us.

Then there're all the buildings with just one or a few recent sales. Those are treated as outliers if down, and markers if flat or up.

How is John Paulson's record on mortgages? He started betting against them a few months later. Do you think his team considered her report before betting the ranch?

Early? Maybe. Weak? No. Not credible? Bullshit.

yet another reason why it takes what appears to be a long time for real estate to stabilize downwards. much more fun to think about real estate when its going through the roof.

" 'Deutsche Bank predicts that the number of underwater loans in the New York metro area will jump from its current 11 percent to 77 percent by 2011.'

I'll take the under."

As much of a bear as I am, I have to agree that this number seems AWFULLY high.

lets remember the metro area part. from what i can gather, the suburbs are getting killed.

"Early? Maybe. Weak? No. Not credible? Bullshit."

This is all smoke and mirrors. If you are going to project something timing is HUGELY important. And if your timing is way off (and I think 2+ years early is way off) than you aren;t very credible. How accurate/effective/credible would you be if you recommended waiting to sell Citigroup stock 2+ years AFTER it starting going into the toilet? Call me crazy but I would say most sane/intelligent people would say you failed miserably with that call.

Agreed, timing is important. Most important is calling it BEFORE, not after. ;-)

That being said, bubbles are bubbles. Look at the name. You don't know exactly when they're going to pop, you just do. I sold out of dot com stocks 6 months early. Did I miss some upside, of course. Did I make out better than most of the world, yes. Was I right? Of course.

That the world didn't realize it was wrong for a little longer doesn't mean I wasn't right...

i don't know waverly. wouldn't it have been nice if the fed could have taken a look at a few pertinent statistics and said, hell on wheels, we've got a future bubble situation on our hands? that would have been a good call, no? instead, those few who said we have a future bubble situation on our hands just had to wait until it all imploded. they were early but they were right.

That hedge fund guy that made bazillions shorting the mortgage mkts did so a couple of years before the collapse.

Ehh...yes and no, because the accuracy of the downturn call is being cited as proof of her credibility about saying the number of underwater loans in the New York metro area will jump from its current 11 percent to 77 percent by 2011. I agree with you that early is better than later, but you have to be somewhat close to get the points for accuracy.

So if the number of underwater loans goes to 25% (which seems to be a more reasonable guestimation) she can't say that she was right in predicting an increase. She said 77% and that is NOWHERE near 25%. Predicting a downtrun 2+ years before it occurs is leaving quite a bit on the table. So much, in fact, that I wouldn't exactly be bragging about it or using it as example of steely accuracy.

I am not disagreeing with the idea that the numbers will increase, because I think they will. I am disagreeing with the extreme statement, the lack of evidence supporting it and the foolishness of just accepting this wild idea as a rock-solid fact.

Gotta run...have a good night all.