Buy / Rent
Started by OTNYC
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 547
Member since: Feb 2009
Discussion about
So just came across this from a week ago - my apologies if it has already been discussed. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/04/20/business/20100420-rent-ratios-table.html?ref=economy According to the table, it made sense to buy in the NY area in 2005, and it makes even more sense now. Not saying this applies to Manhattan specificallly, but the NY area in general (at least according to the rent ratio) had the most favorable ratio in the entire Northeast (18.8 in 2005 and 15.4 in 2009). What are thoughts on this?
It must include the entire state of NY because NYC is around 25 times rent roll today.
Number 1 feature for the NY Times still remains to use it to wipe your azz.
if it would be either number, people would be buying like it's 2007.
plus, if we go with the metro thing, like they're using, NY is at its lowest point since 2004, down for a few months in a row...
Made sense in 2005, makes sense 2010 according to a ratio? How do you explain a ratio to your child looking to have stability at home? What does a ratio have to do with family? And if a home is long term, then how bad between a short 5 year period can this ratio be to give up sensible family values?
being in my seventh year of renting, which meets the average ownership period, i'd say your analysis is crap.
Truth - can you back up that claim? I just saw a listing for a property that is for rent for $3700 and for sale at $819000 (search Halstead for West 110th Street). I think that is around 19X annual rent. Not sure the ratio is as far out of whack as some on this site make out. Not saying this is reason to be bullish or anything, just found it interesting.
And ab - last I checked, the market is reasonably healthy and sales volume is back up (not back to peak levels, obviously).
DaBulls - not sure what you're saying.
AR - thanks for chiming in; can always count on you for valuable input.