Reduced rent for showing landlords apartment?

you should consider that moving in 6 mos, during the summer, will cost you more in terms of rent on your new place. there are always less people looking to move during the winter months.

if you do want to stay, the hassle is significant and i wouldn't consider it unless it would be 33-50% range. he would also have to return all deposits prior to the extension.

You are thinking about this the right way – without a major rent concession, much much better deal for the Landlord.

If the apt is $4,000+ a month the Landlord is going to lose at least 1 of those 6 months trying to rent it, maybe 2. That implies a 35% discount off a reduced, short-term ask (not much demand for short-term unfurnished rentals). Plus, the Landlord is out there advertising a cheap rental -- smells of desperation.

I would ask for 50% off. IF YOU STAY, BUY A SAFE!!! Things get stolen all the time in open houses.

Play this one HARD.

And whatever you negotiate, then ask for weekly maid service to keep your place in good condition FOR THE LANDLORD's BENEFIT for showing the apartment.

Thanks all for confirming I was on the right track here.
We will probably just move out, but might throw the "50% off and you pay for maid" bone at him to see if he bites. And absolutely get my security deposit up front, as who knows what will happen at end of term.

Also curious if anyone knows the conventional meaning of this "management company of building says no open houses advertised to the general public are allowed".

So is this just for clients of the brokerage he is using, or simply means they can't advertise the open house in the newspaper?

To be honest I'm just frustrated with this guy. He was discussing getting the paperwork together to sign renewal all of 6 weeks ago, then he suddenly decides he wants to sell, first showing in a a few weeks.

I like renting from condo owner instead of a rental building as it really seems like better space/quality for the money, but now I'm concerned about dealing with another twit.

It just occurs to me that I actually have a signed rider to the lease stating:

"If __ the owner chooses to rent the above apartment, steve123 will have the option to renew this lease at (current rent amount) for a second year, for the lease period (end of current lease) to (+1 year)."

Not that I want to force a landlord to rent to me who does not wish to do so..
However, this may make it difficult for him to rent to someone other than myself, if I were to decide to try and enforce it (not worth my hassle).

Could be a fun negotiating tactic though? Or are these things not watertight at all?

the "no open house" policy will have the broker list an "open house by appointment." you'll get similar traffic, just not the insanity of 20 people walking into an apartment at the same time.

if i was having someone show a place where i live, it would be at my convenience and with me present and with the security deposit already returned. that could just be me.

On using of that clause, it's a road I don't thing you want to go down. Besides the fact it's on shaky grounds (i.e., the owner is choosing to sell the apartment in some sense), it's not like the LL is necessarily going to rent to someone else. If I were in his shoes, and you weren't staying, I'd simply market (price) more aggressively if selling were my real intention. Having an empty apartment can be somewhat helpful when selling, and finding someone to take the place short-term, unfurnished, and open-housing is not realistic. Even furnished short-term rentals rent at significant discounts.

Here's how I think you play it. First, you explain the hassles you're being asked to deal with (showings, end-of-lease in summer, uncertainty of when you'll need to leave, etc.), explain how you're mainly in your place during weekends, etc., and while you'd like to be helpful, it'd take a big discount for you to stay under those conditions. Say your number is 50%, but you completely understand if it's a number that doesn't make sense for the LL and is not meant to be insulting. It's just a lot of headache to deal with. If things don't work out on the 50% discount, you bring up the clause in a non-threatening way. I.e., you write a letter informing the LL that you would've like to exercise your option to renew the lease for a second full year at existing price, but given that the owner has informed you that he will not be renting the apartment again but instead selling, you cannot exercise your option. That way, if the LL tries to rent, you have a viable legal claim should you feel you've been "screwed" out of something later when you have no day-to-day relationship with the LL.

In reality, it seems like the LL is trying to do the right thing here, the wishy-washiness notwithstanding. The 6 weeks of him not getting his act together is probably a function of a decision between a rock and a hard place, especially if he bought in the past 5 years (sell at a loss vs. continue negative carry). If he was really looking to screw you, he would have let you renew, and then listed either immediately or a few months into the lease: most leases have clauses that state you must allow landlord to show the apartment with reasonable notice. Of course, you could've been an a-hole in return (leave chicken carcasses on the floor whenever someone was coming, etc.). However, the LL didn't take the relationship there, so there's no reason you should be thinking about doing so either.

I've generally seen rent concessions in the area of 35% for such situations.

That's a nice chunk of money. I'd negotiate hard. Anything he can get is much better than nothing.

Brokers: please weigh in with your perspective on this situation!