Looking to rent? Good Luck!

Bsex - I wouldn't go about bragging that your landlord wants to get rid of you. Understandable, but not braggable.

And - in the very same thread! - another Juicy non-sequitur! I said, in that thread you post, "I've said on multiple occasions that it's always better to buy a home - when it's cheaper than it is to rent one," and I stand by it.

And then bjw, yet again a lack of mental rigour: the Times reporting on someone's else report is not a "Times shill article." It is a report on someone else's shill article.

I don't particularly believe the JMiller reports, either, especially how their numbers magically and inexplicably change from one quarter to the next. But that's not what we were discussing.

Really, you three....

"huntersburg: Why would I want to meet you?"

You love to post insulting comments about me. I would like very much to meet you in person so we can discuss them. Perhaps you are too afraid to do so, since the internet offers you anonymity. But I think we should meet at my offices so you can see what I do and stop making shit up about me.

"Bsex - I wouldn't go about bragging that your landlord wants to get rid of you. Understandable, but not braggable"

Stating a fact that is relevant to the question at issue (i.e., whether rents are rising) is bragging? The reason they offered me a buyout is b/c I live in a rent stabilized apt. It has nothing to do with me. Relax, buddy.

...and, yes, rents are rising (despite your fervent and repeated denials).

"And then bjw, yet again a lack of mental rigour: the Times reporting on someone's else report is not a "Times shill article." It is a report on someone else's shill article.
I don't particularly believe the JMiller reports, either, especially how their numbers magically and inexplicably change from one quarter to the next. But that's not what we were discussing."

So back to JuiceMan's point - you'll cite the NYT when it suits you and completely dismiss it when it doesn't. Convenient!

"a lack of mental rigour"

PS - this further reinforces the general rule that you shouldn't trust anyone who purposely uses British spellings in a vain attempt to appear knowledgeable, well-read, and/or smart.

"you shouldn't trust anyone who purposely uses British spellings in a vain attempt to appear knowledgeable, well-read, and/or smart"

...or somebody who doesn't know how to spell.

Actually - for the ignorant - "rigour" is also spelled that way in America. Like "theatre," goes both ways. Ditto "Glamour."

And alas, bjw still doesn't get the difference between an original report and a report of a report, but we should not be surprised there. He probably doesn't know the difference between Page 1 of the Post and Page 6 - since he has a penchant for quoting it.

""rigour" is also spelled that way in America"

Only by people not playing with a full deck - the rest of us spell it "rigor"

What BSexposer said. As for the Page 6 "penchant for quoting it," I have no idea what you're talking about. Odd.

stevejhx
11 minutes ago
stop ignoring this person
report abuse Actually - for the ignorant - "rigour" is also spelled that way in America. Like "theatre," goes both ways. Ditto "Glamour."

And alas, bjw still doesn't get the difference between an original report and a report of a report, but we should not be surprised there. He probably doesn't know the difference between Page 1 of the Post and Page 6 - since he has a penchant for quoting it.

No. Only Anglophiles with horrible pretentsions spell those words that way. I guess you qualify Steve. On top of being horribly ill-informed about the rental market.

>jason10006
"huntersburg: Why would I want to meet you?"
You love to post insulting comments about me. I would like very much to meet you in person so we can discuss them. Perhaps you are too afraid to do so, since the internet offers you anonymity. But I think we should meet at my offices so you can see what I do and stop making shit up about me.

Sounds like a good use of an afternoon.

Will I get to meet your colleagues? - you can introduce me as the formerly anonymous person who "makes shit up about you" but whose opinion you cared enough about to bring to your office for a tour.

>PS - this further reinforces the general rule that you shouldn't trust anyone who purposely uses British spellings in a vain attempt to appear knowledgeable, well-read, and/or smart.

What about the use of the word "tube" instead of the word "subway"?

"Sounds like a good use of an afternoon.

Will I get to meet your colleagues? - you can introduce me as the formerly anonymous person who "makes shit up about you" but whose opinion you cared enough about to bring to your office for a tour"

So when?

_____________

On a side note, I think Steve is on a quixotic quest here. EVERY data point - not just the brokerage reports, but CPI rent #s and CPI owner's equivalent rent - show that NET rents, inclusive of concessions, are UP YOY in NYC and Manhattan.

The article had a ridiculous example. And rents are still below 2007 peaks. But YOY they have been up for some time. Including in Steve's own bldg, as we can clearly see on NYBits and SE.

Stop confusing steve with facts, he has no use for them

Steve, didn't you say that your renewal offer was up, yet below what outsiders are now being offered leases for apartments smaller than yours? I thought you said your renewal offered was 9.5% but apartments not as desirable costs more, about $4,100? That sounds to me like rents in your building going up. At least there's something new about this thread - no one has thrown around the term "seasonal" yet, nor has anyone postulated that the offending news article contains a typographical error, that $5,000 should be $4,000.

Rents are not rising, on the whole. They will decline if we go into a double-dip recession.

I work in multifamily housing investment and travel to a lot of different states. Just attended a conference today in New Hampshire, and the big focus is that 60% of the youth in the state LEAVE after graduating from college, and it's a major problem for the housing market. Where do they go? Cooler cities where they can find jobs and a life. e.g. New York and San Francisco. That is a BIG part of the reason why the rental market has rebounded. While rents have not skyrocketed by any means, when you combine all the would-be buyers who are scared and sitting on the sideline with the pool of youth and internationals that still want to be in NYC, you get a market that defies all logic.

It frustrates the hell out of everyone who tries to make sense of it, myself included, but bottom line,as long as millions of people want to live and/or have a place in NYC, and there is a f__k-ton of money, both locals and internationals will continue to prop up the buyers market and the rental vacancies will stay at .5%.

Can't argue with supply and demand...and that's all it really is.

Like anything, lowery, it depends on where you take the start and stop from. There are some ups and downs, but the rent that they offered me, and the rents they are asking for for other units, are at 2006 levels.

>It frustrates the hell out of everyone who tries to make sense of it, myself included, but bottom line,as long as millions of people want to live and/or have a place in NYC, and there is a f__k-ton of money, both locals and internationals will continue to prop up the buyers market and the rental vacancies will stay at .5%.

columbiacounty, how does this fit with your view that people need their bonuses to pay the rent?

Steve, I think you need to conduct a more "rigourous" analysis before declaring 2006 rents.

I did, bjw: I checked nybits for archived rental advertisements, and looked at what I was paying in 2006 vs. what is currently being asked. Same rents.

There was a spike in rents from 2003 through 2006, after a huge drop from 2003 through 2006. Rents spiked again - like everything else - in the pre-Lehmann runup of 2008. Starting in 2008 they have fallen back down to 2006 levels. Given the state of the economy, and inevitable march toward Double-Dip, they will likely start falling again, perhaps to 2003 levels.

"after a huge drop from 2003 through 2006" should be "from 2000 to 2003."

Sorry!

So there up YOY

"Can't argue with supply and demand...and that's all it really is"

Stevejhx can...and does.

No, steve, you rented your apartment, if I recall your move-in posts, at a little over $3,600 and smaller units two years later are $4,100. Even $4,100 were the price for your line today, that's more than what you say you rented yours at originally. And your renewal offer was not lower than what you moved in at, nor was it the same. You received an offer to renew for two years at 9.5% higher rent, according to what you say. That does not depend.

The official government CPI stats for NYC say that rents are up YOY:

http://www.bls.gov/ro2/cpinynj.htm

Owners' equivalent rent of residence up 1.7% YOY
Rent of primary residence up 2.0% YOY

The govt stats are NET of concessions.

This is for the whole metro area. So there is a 0.0% chance that rents are UP in the burbs and boroughs but NOT in Manhattan.

Now here is the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's Sept, 2011 minutes:

"...The residential purchase market has been stable, while the rental market has continued to strengthen...

...there has been further improvement in the rental market...

...New York City's rental market has shown continued strength: the inventory of available units is down moderately, and rents on new leases continue to climb and are up 5 to 8 percent over the past year...."

As Sam Jackson might say: Case CLOSED, mutha fucka.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/fomc/beigebook/2011/20110907/2.htm

they're up, jason - there may be some deals here and there

>As Sam Jackson might say: Case CLOSED, mutha fucka.

And what is your relationship with Sam Jackson?

Today's RE section has a correction to the Helena story. The Graney guy's rent was going up to $3,590, not $5,000.

Ignore what landlords are asking and ignore what renters are saying just listen to Stevejhx. Yes, rents are trending down. Finally, according to Strevejhx we are in a renters market again and you still can get 2 months of free rent in prime locations and building throughout Manhattan. Just make sure you take the same medication that stevejhx takes before renewing your lease, otherwise you may believe your rent actually went up this year.

>Ignore what landlords are asking and ignore what renters are saying just listen to Stevejhx.

Sell gold 2 years ago?

"Today's RE section has a correction to the Helena story. The Graney guy's rent was going up to $3,590, not $5,000."

Typical NYT screw-up.

But the rents in Manhattan are supposed to be going down. Why are they asking for more than they were the year prior? I don't understand.

Oh hey renterjoey. Welcome to streeteasy. Welcome!

it's easy to show that rents are trending down - all you have to do is move out of one apartment and move into a less expensive one in a different neighborhood

Rental prices in LIC are up since 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.
On a per square foot basis, it's at record highs across the board.

Can you say that about Manhattan?

That is actually true. The rents in LIC have gone up more than they have in Manhattan.

But that is ONLY because there has been so much development. Back in 2007, maybe a third of the inventory was brand new doorman buildings. Now about 80% is.

You can say the exact same thing about Harlem on FDB or Dumbo or the area west of 8th avenue from 23rd to 42nd.

HOWEVER, on a like for like basis, rents in LIC are off of there 2007 peak. For those few Rockrose/Archstone etc buildings that were there BOTH in 2007 and now.

Please, this is a REAL ESTATE board. Don't try and bullshit us.

hahahah

but stevejhx says rents are going down. He's states it's a renters market right now. He's getting one or two free months of rent every time he renews and also a free IPad2. How can one dispute that?