Bad News For Renters..........

"The number of new leases increased 10 percent to 7,942 as competition made tenants quicker to sign deals."

As far as I can tell, this doesn't make any sense.

it is RE brokerage data and we all know the accuracy of the National Association of Realtors data.. So I an sure this is completely accurate.

Just looked at Equity Residential's website for the west side, and asking rents are definitely raised.
It's good to be a land lord.

If being a LL is so good, why don't you buy more nyc re, go ballz deep Riversider/nyre. I dare ya. I double dare ya. I triple dare ya. Ha.

Keep paying that rent, I've heard real estate prices are tanking, crashing, melting down, etc., will be down to $500 psft in no time flat. LOL!

Wow, a 10% increase? Tough being a renter these days.

"As far as I can tell, this doesn't make any sense."

Think a bit longer on it, it will. Hint: what might the vacancy rate been at quarter end versus quarter beginning and a year earlier?

The numbers that actually matter are really these: average nominal price per square foot up 6.2% YOY, average price per square foot NET OF CONCESSIONS (Inonada) up 9.1% YOY.

Once again, its upper Manhattan that had the biggest YOY gains. I attribute this more to there simply being far more brand-new doorman rental buildings and condos-turned-rental over the last few years versus surging demand for uptown. With so many rent-controlled and HUD units, the remaining market-rate inventory has shifted dramatically from icky walk-ups and tenaments to high-rise doorman bldgs.

In general, there are a LOT more white East-village-from-the 90s type hipsters and even fratty-frat types at my local bodega and on the subway platform than there were when I first moved to Harlem in 2007, so the stigma is certainly wearing off.

...Upper manhattan up 24.5% YOY PSF, is what I mean. New units up 39.8% - and I bet all of that brand-new stuff.

http://assets.prudentialelliman.com/NYCPhotos/retail_reports/Rental_Q4_2011.pdf

jason where in harlem.. fratboys, mmmmmm

Keep paying that rent, I've heard real estate prices are tanking, crashing, melting down, etc., will be down to $500 psft in no time flat. LO

Did you understand the story? More people are renting because IT MAKES NO SENSE TO BUY WHEN PRICES ARE FALLING! no one wants to marry.. they just want to date or put it another way. DON'T CATCH THE FALLING KNIFE!!! (DATE!) yes here comes $500 psf!!!!

Price Chopping inventory coming to Market - hurry and sell for the spring season! This will be on the market for 2 years come April..
$700 PSF headed to $500!!

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/603118-coop-50-sutton-pl-south-sutton-place-new-york

$1,250,000.
04/26/2011
Listed by Prudential Elliman at $1,085,000.
07/05/2011
Brown Harris Stevens Listing is no longer available. Last priced at $1,095,000.
08/01/2011
Listing is no longer available.
09/13/2011
Re-listed by Prudential Elliman.
09/13/2011
Price decreased by 5% to $1,035,000.
11/11/2011
Delisted.
01/11/2012
Re-listed by Prudential Elliman.
01/11/2012
Price decreased by 4% to $995,000.

"Think a bit longer on it, it will. Hint: what might the vacancy rate been at quarter end versus quarter beginning and a year earlier?"

Still thinking about it, particularly the part about how quickly people sign deals. If there's constant demand for apartments and the only thing that changes is how quickly people sign deals, I fail to see how it has any effect on vacancy rates.

"Did you understand the story? More people are renting because IT MAKES NO SENSE TO BUY WHEN PRICES ARE FALLING! no one wants to marry.. they just want to date or put it another way. DON'T CATCH THE FALLING KNIFE!!! (DATE!) yes here comes $500 psf!!!!"

The combination of falling prices to buy and rising rents is totally sensible as the bubble wears off. The cost of buying has been pretty out of whack relative to renting for a long time. Eventually they will settle in somewhere more sensible.

On the other hand, rental prices can't keep going up without more income to drive them. Right now we may be seeing the effects of sideline sitters renting instead and increasing demand as a result, but rents are historically driven almost exclusively by incomes.

"More people are renting because IT MAKES NO SENSE TO BUY WHEN PRICES ARE FALLING!"

No.

More people are renting because they can't scrape together enough of a down payment to BUY.

That and they are concerned with job mobility..

On the other hand, rental prices can't keep going up without more income to drive them.

B - I -N -G -0

BINGO!

Sales prices peaked 4 years ago and are down 20% give or take. When factoring in inflation and the high cost of renting; those who can qualify will gravitate back to the sales market.

I believe we have seen a bottom in the price of Manhattan real estate with a slow but gradual increase over the next couple of years. Since I don't have a crystal ball like others on this board who can see out to 2020(no pun intended) I won't predict beyond the next couple of years.

or Manhattan RE prices.

"More people are renting because they can't scrape together enough of a down payment to BUY"

totally false. people are not buying because it is a bad investment!!

"totally false. people are not buying because it is a bad investment!!"

You keep telling yourself that, renter with no down payment, if it makes you feel better.

Hey know it all NYCMatt, did you even read the story?

People with enough of an income to qualify for $3200/month rent surly have enough for a down payment.

This guy had enough saved for a years rent upfront.. No one wants to catch a falling knife!
Sounds like this guy had enough saved.

He’d considered third-floor walk-ups, was willing to pay as much as $2,300 and didn’t insist on a particular neighborhood. He had money in the bank to pay a full year’s rent and a guarantor backing him up.
After two rejections and a search of almost two months, he found a renovated 400-square-foot (37-square-meter) studio on 95th Street between Park and Lexington avenues. He agreed to the $2,100 rent, which included a $100-a-month surcharge for his dog, a 6-year-old French mastiff named Sonoma Wesson Porterhouse.

Since when was $27,600 enough for a down payment, plus breathing space post closing?

"This guy had enough saved for a years rent upfront."

Big deal, he's 37 years old and has 30K in the bank. Not enough to convince a co-op or even a condo board to let him in on a studio purchase. Even on a 200K studio you need 40k for a down payment.

"People with enough of an income to qualify for $3200/month rent surly have enough for a down payment."

Not true at all.

There are quite a few people in this city who can "afford" $5K, $6K, even $9K/month in rent, yet at the end of the month are BROKE.

"This guy had enough saved for a years rent upfront.. No one wants to catch a falling knife!
Sounds like this guy had enough saved. He’d considered third-floor walk-ups, was willing to pay as much as $2,300 and didn’t insist on a particular neighborhood. He had money in the bank to pay a full year’s rent and a guarantor backing him up. "

So he had $27K saved up -- "a year's worth of rent".

That's a nice down payment on a really nice car.

Multiply it by five and now he's in a position to BUY something.

"Big deal, he's 37 years old and has 30K in the bank. Not enough to convince a co-op or even a condo board to let him in on a studio purchase. Even on a 200K studio you need 40k for a down payment."

Friendly reminder:

CONDO "boards" have no authority to "let" someone buy, other than the right of first refusal to buy the apartment themselves.

So another argument that Prices are too high. affordability.. incomes down(and this is true too ref 2010) census.. too expensive..

good one..

And even for a $200K studio, while the down payment would need to be $40K, he'd also need to show at least $15K of post-closing liquidity for most co-op boards.

Oh yeah, and he'll need another $5K to pay for the move.

Thanks again Matt you keep proving my point. i am starting to think you... are ... a genius.

Remind me of your point?

ok maybe not.. you are so easily confused..

So no point then?

Yes, the buildings I've been looking at in Brooklyn have had price cuts this past week as the units sit there (many of them empty).

They aren't as expensive as Manhattan and some buildings will take a 10% deposit.
The brokers have told me the reason is that people can't scrape up the deposit $.

I'm renting and watching the prices drop.

So Matt is correct( not just in my opinion.)

"People with enough of an income to qualify for $3200/month rent surly have enough for a down payment. "

That was your original point! Now that it has been disproven what's your next point??

"People with enough of an income to qualify for $3200/month rent surly have enough for a down payment.

This guy had enough saved for a years rent upfront.. No one wants to catch a falling knife!
Sounds like this guy had enough saved."

His point is very simple. Until this guy is allowed to buy, prices are too high. Can't blame him, everyone has his/her measuring stick. Just don't tell other people to think like you. That will be fine.

My point is that I have cash to pay and money left over in the bank and investments.
I can afford the movers.

But I'm taking my time and renting because the prices are dropping and new inventory is coming on the market at more realistic pricing.

My landlord owns many small rental buildings in Brooklyn. He checked my financials like a co-op board would. He's strict about financials and yet he has no problem renting out apts. He has takers.

For the know it all and the simpleton(you know who you are)

This was my original statement. Can you derive my point from the below statement(again rhetorical)....

totally false. people are not buying because it is a bad investment!!

In addition, I sold my Manhattan condo to a buyer who was tired of being a renter.
They think it's a good investment to own in N.Y.C.

Different strokes for different owners/renters.

Why is it that a certain someone who doesn't own in NYC and says he has no intention of ever owning in NYC (let me guess why) is so fixated on the NYC real estate market?? They know who they are!

I am amazed that an article showing rents rising 9.5% can be spun to be a bearish sign for NYC real estate. My analysis would say that rising rents would help to support current valuations or help to cushion the sales market from future declines in pricing. Too obvious?

"For the know it all and the simpleton(you know who you are)

This was my original statement. Can you derive my point from the below statement(again rhetorical)....

totally false. people are not buying because it is a bad investment!!"

To be fair, the $3200 / month thing just gives people justifications to question your motive. something like,"does this guy have the grapes are sour issue?" and that really hurt your credibility in any discussion.

Let's go back to the original point, the "bad investment" point.

What is a good investment? That could be very different for different people. Many people agree that when you can get more money (overall) when you sell than the money you put down. The bigger the difference, the better the investment, right? How about risk factor? and so many other things...

When buying a property, the risk factor is moderated by the fact that you can either live there or rent it out in bad times. During such bad times, calculate what kind of return that you can get from that property. Remember, positive return for a rental property doesn't necessarily mean positive cash flow. It could be in the form of equity building if you have a mortgage. If you live in your property, return can be in the form of reduced monthly housing expenses when factoring in equity building and tax deductions. Each person has to calculate that for his own financial situations (income level, tax bracket, kids, etc...)

Vic,
I hope you did not think I was referring to you.

Bottom line with prices still coming down. It makes no sense to buy in manhattan now unless you plan on being here for 20 years.

Huh? If being a LL is great at $1,500psf. Blue ballz as a LL @ $500psf. And ask me if I care what the other nycers paid for their apts.....

On the other hand, rental prices can't keep going up without more income to drive them.

--------------------
A roof over the head and food to eat is a necessity.
When incomes are strained, it's the other items that take a hit, not basic necessities.

"His point is very simple. Until this guy is allowed to buy, prices are too high."

No, "prices" aren't "too high".

He just doesn't have enough money.

If I can't afford a Bentley, does that mean the price of Bentleys is "too high"?

Brooks2,

In investing, no one aims at buying at the bottom all the time. If that is the case, no one will need hedging any more. It is just impossible. People look at ways to protect their down side. Ask yourself, is such protection reasonable? Sure the rising rental value would provide more, rather than less protection against property investment.

NYCMatt,

Reread my sentence. The price are "too high" was in the mind of the person who was denied the buying opputunity. Pay attention to the word "until"

Vic, reread MY sentence.

One individual's financial situation does not a comment on the market make.

"Prices" aren't "too high".

Prices are what they are. HE just doesn't have enough money to buy in this market. That doesn't make them "high", that makes him unqualified to purchase, and therefore a RENTER.

"A roof over the head and food to eat is a necessity.
When incomes are strained, it's the other items that take a hit, not basic necessities."

Rents are driven by supply and demand and are much more fluid than home prices (as we are seeing here). The demand side of the equation has to be supported by income. Besides, the fact that landlords enforce maximum rents as a fraction of income don't make my statement a trend--it's a rule.

NYCMatt,

Actually everyone's perception has something to do with the market price.
If this individual doesn't think the market is too high, then he will participate in the bidding war. The price could be pushed even higher. Even if he cannot participate in the Manhattan marketdue to his financial limitation, he could sequeeze other potential buyer out of the fringe market and consider the Manhattan market. Anyone that occupies a living quater in our region has some influence on the market. No one is completely isolated.

Your mentality was quite like those playing the CDO market few years ago. Those who believed that they can keep pushing up prices without consideration of the health of its consumer base got burnt.

Prices were too high 5 years, ago, but people bought anyway.

Right now, people aren't buying because they have to use their own money which they either are afraid to or can't, they want to maintain mobility in case of job change, and the capital gains expectation is gone. I can't tell you how many people buy for no other reason than they think they can sell higher in a year or two.

Mattnyc- I don't live in a studio. I thought you did. And, you have no idea what kind of bank I have. But, you think you do because you think you know it all. "Prices" or "Price levels are too high" because we are still coming out of a bubble. I choose to rent because IMO from the fundamentals I follow buying at these "price levels" does not make sense.

"The demand side of the equation has to be supported by income"

This i true. And Incomes are down, but rents(according to this article are up), and people are choosing to rent not buy(sales are down).

So get off the power trip you are on.

Yes, RS. those are other valid reasons too. Matt can't absorb that because he is too thick headed and thinks he knows it all.

>I am amazed that an article showing rents rising 9.5% can be spun to be a bearish sign for NYC real estate. My analysis would say that rising rents would help to support current valuations or help to cushion the sales market from future declines in pricing. Too obvious?

Except current rent rates (@$50 per sq ft) supports an $850 per sq ft average sales market.Formula of 200 times monthly rent or 16.66 times rent. If you want to go 18 times rent (@$925 per sq ft)because of the abnormal interest rate scenario we have it's still pretty shy. Rent has at least an additional 10% to climb before positively affecting sales.

To keep it simple, if you consider 2 (of many) fundamental factors effecting prices, Income and employment , I'd say a more likely scenario is prices will continue to fall and rents will stabilize. incomes are going down and WS layoffs are increasing.

ie the the bubble will continue to deflate..

>Friendly reminder:

>CONDO "boards" have no authority to "let" someone buy, other than the right of first refusal to buy the apartment themselves.

Useless reminder as post Lehman, banks putting up the 50 to 80% are far more strict than any coop board.

Rents definitely up... but they were down considerably, too. In real terms, rents in my building for new rentals (I'm paying less) are still lower than 5 years ago.

Not to mention all the money I "saved" from not losing by buying... to me, still way worth it.

And, in the end, the rise is coming from folks not buying... I'll take that.

A little data behind it...
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Miller100yearsNYre.jpg

Saying "see, rents went up" shows to be a lot less meaningful when seeing it is in similar places to the 90s... with prices almost doubled...

If you are pushing that data, than I guess you agree that sales are $1,070 per sqft. Not $550 like some are touting on this board.

"hol4 jason where in harlem.. fratboys, mmmmmm"

East Harlem below 106th has a higher concentration than Central, though there are some there. Not like say Murray Hill, but a surprising number lately given that there were about zero when I moved there.

When I purchased my midtown east condo in 1998 for 259k I was told by people who bought in the early 1990's:
"You missed the boat. We are going to make out like bandits, you will never see a market like we had...".

2012: I made just a few $ south of 1/2 million profit on the sale of that condo.

I don't call displaying factual information touting. I don't display offers and say that is the market. I show were stuff has sold. If you call that touting, maybe you should change the definition of touting on Wikipedia

wow truth you must be very insecure. Tout was RENY phrase. I guess you must be a simpleton just like her

What is the PSF on this?

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/569033-coop-440-east-62nd-street-lenox-hill-new-york

$625 PSF sound about right? That was the selling price in July.. 14 around the same $PSF.

o'yea, and price have dropped since this went into contract in the Spring?

jason, i almost knew prior to asking.. i remember slight new devs above e96th but haven't been to the hood lately..

plus dormandy court is frat central with york/1st aves his lil bro, bro

Exactly. Walking a few blocks to Domandy-ville or taken the m15 1-3 stops is so diesel to the swoll brahs, spesh when they're wasted.

I'm glad I don't rent today. I felt the same way when rents escalated in the late 90s for several years. The early 90s were a different story, and I regretted owning in those years. But my motivation for buying was never motivated strictly by housing valuation or a rent vs. buy analysis. It was to have control over my home over the long term. I realized that prices would rise in manhattan in the long run, and I never wanted to be at risk of being evicted, like many HIV exposed people were in the 80s. When you are concerned that your landlord could turn against you, for whatever reason, you are motivated to pay up for a sense of control.

But then you can just rent somewhere else no?

PMG, since you've been here for so long, why haven't you tried to get a rent stab?

I'm glad I don't rent. I am sitting on a fuckton of capital gains (lottery money) and live for about 1/2 of market rent. And my mortgage is paid off, b/c my apt. was piss cheap when I bought it. I might even be living for 1/3 of market rent, in fact. Renting is for poor people with no net worth.

hol4/jason,
Actually the big reason men live in NYC is to get laid by fresh young pussy. So, Dormandy court is exactly where they'd love to be. You act like young is a bad thing. LOL.

notadmin, I don't think I fit the profile for a rent stab situation. I feel that in the luxury decontrol era, landlords want people who make 40 times the market rent (which I don't) or, alternatively, its workforce housing. I just have improved my small market rate condo to suit my needs and interests. Might it continue to lose value. Yes. but I'm sitting on a large gain. And the transaction costs of trading housing are absurd in NYC. It's not an asset worth trading unless you have a lifestyle imperative to move.

When did I say young was a bad thing?

> was piss cheap when I bought it. I might even be living for 1/3 of market rent, in fact. Renting is for poor people with no net worth.

your logic is falling you. it's stupid not to buy for piss cheap prices, it's stupid to buy for inflated prices (like we have now). it's just about timing.

> And the transaction costs of trading housing are absurd in NYC.

no doubt. most of us really are getting paid to wait in no small part thanks to transaction costs. one should just buy the definite house imho or plan to leave it to the kids.

> notadmin, I don't think I fit the profile for a rent stab situation.

you mean you don't have steady income? or that your income is above $250k/year?

> When did I say young was a bad thing?

Uhh, in your last post!

Truthskr,
"Except current rent rates (@$50 per sq ft) supports an $850 per sq ft average sales market.Formula of 200 times monthly rent or 16.66 times rent. If you want to go 18 times rent (@$925 per sq ft)because of the abnormal interest rate scenario we have it's still pretty shy. Rent has at least an additional 10% to climb before positively affecting sales."
How do you get $850 to breakeven at $50. Are you using a 30 year fixed rate and counting full mortgage payments towards expense? If you are using 30y mortgage, how do you factor in partial protection from rent inflation?

> 30 year fixed rate mortgage

This is an issue I see being discussed by the young (GenX and GenY). Why did the length of the mortgage that's most widely used didn't adjust to the fact that the current labor mkt doesn't provide job security at all anymore? Shouldn't the GSEs guarantee shorter mortgages now? Say 15 or 20 year ones but not 30? I also saw tons of people in their 50s getting a 30 year long mtg.

Why on earth is the taxpayer on the hook guaranteeing a mtg payment when the buyer is in his/her 80s!? Isn't this totally nuts?

"And the transaction costs of trading housing are absurd in NYC. It's not an asset worth trading unless you have a lifestyle imperative to move."

Another great reason to rent in a declining housing market.

Re: 30 year Amortization

I do find it curious that most real estate buyers are in love with the 30 year. In its defense though...the average duration of a 30 year mortgage is only 7 years. There is very little risk of loss to a lender or the government towards the end of a 30 year mortgage since so much equity would have been built up over time.

"Another great reason to rent in a declining housing market."

Like it's so easy to move from one rental to a better rental in Manhattan? I guess you also forgot about the move out and move in costs, not to mention the hassle.

Most people who move out of their rentals usually move out of Manhattan, or downgrade due to financial problems or buy something in Manhattan. Very few move to better rental apartments.

Most people who move out of their rentals usually move out of Manhattan, or downgrade due to financial problems or buy something in Manhattan. HOW ABOUT UPGRADE due to financial success (debbie downer)!

In this Economy, another great reason to rent.

Again, if you plan on being in your apartment for at least 15 years. maybe, maybe think about buying. otherwise renting is a better idea.

Some people move out of there rentals because they are tired of having roommates and want a place of their own. or if they happen to meet someone to live with (ie a GF/Bf or husband/wife) they want to get a place together. The if they have a child they may want a bigger place .. if they have another child they may want to move to the burbs or another bigger place in Manhattan.
On average people tent to move every 5 years.
so transaction costs are a big reason not to buy.

there are move in move out costs when you buy too!

"there are move in move out costs when you buy too!"

There are also tax advantages, appreciation (based on history), low mortgage rates, and most people remain in purchases longer than they do in rentals. They also have more control over their living space.

appreciation (based on history)-- you mean depreciation (based on history

Let me see-- if you bot an apartment 7 years ago in 2005' and tried to sell now.. you would not have seen any appreciation.. It will have depreciated.. Plus you would have to pay alllll that transaction cost!!! you would be loosing money..

low mortgage rate

so your tax advantages are a lot lower with lower rates.. right?

"so your tax advantages are a lot lower with lower rates.. right?"

That is a pretty stupid argument

-- JH I am glad you said it... Yes again RENY looses credibility.

And--She states-
"and most people remain in purchases longer than they do in rentals"
I wonder why this is?( Rhetorical)-- does it have anything to do with transaction cost?(As PMG originally stated)

Maybe because people buy when they are ready to settle down, and rent when they feel ok being more transitory.

"so your tax advantages are a lot lower with lower rates.. right?"

That is a pretty stupid argument.

Brooksie I think that was your quote! Forgot what you said? It's right there in print, just look up. LOL!

What a sad sack!

maybe-- but, my guess it would be a small percentage of buyers .. Again.. IMO(as I stated) it's only worth it if you plan on staying put for at least 15 years... (btw, when people get married they make a live long commitment. We all now what the success rate is there)

no.. I was asking you? I think your argument that there are tax advantages are not that great.
RealEstateNY
44 minutes ago
ignore this person
report abuse

There are also tax advantages, appreciation (based on history), low mortgage rates, and most people remain in purchases longer than they do in rentals. They also have more control over their living space.

Just to be clear. I was calling Brooks stupid.

again- I think the tax advantages are very small(especially with the low mortgage rates) compared much a higher transaction costs

There is nothing more irritating than when a RE broker says. "you know interest rates are low, you should hurry up and buy" -- wait another one I heard-- "you know you can borrow against your 401k".... oh wait 2 others-- "RE is going up - you should get in before the WS guys, Wall Street bonus's are going to be big this year" and the most recent on I heard from RealEstateNY, "real estate can't go down-- there will be a depression"

Sound familiar RealestateNY?

great lines..

ok,jhochle please tell me how great of a tax advantage you can get on a 1mm dollar apt.. compare that to what you will loose on transaction cost and depreciation.. how much is it?

>How do you get $850 to breakeven at $50. Are you using a 30 year fixed rate and counting full mortgage payments towards expense? If you are using 30y mortgage, how do you factor in partial protection from rent inflation?

300mercer, I didnt neccesarily say it was a breakeven point. Manhattan real estate from 1997 through 2007 appeared to sell at a simple formula rate of 200 times monthly rent. Every time I periodically checked individual units or multi unit apartment buildings, it fell pretty close to this range. In fact everytime I did the hard calculations, it deterred me from buying in manhattan as I was making money investing outside city limits for RE that had immediate positive cash flow (12/14x rent roll). I imagine the more creative finance ARM options made the 200 times monthly rent(or 16.66 X rent roll) palatable to enough people to force this formula as the hard deck, particularly in bubblicious manhattan.

The post lehman rental market "crash" (maybe the term is severe for lack of a better one) skewed this ratio way more which shellshocked the RE community. Manhattan has had considerable staying power, aided by a combined resolve of manhattanites weathering the storm using equity and savings and the banks giving manhattan what seems like a stay of execution for the last 2 years hoping the market returns somewhat before putting their hammer down.

The $850 per sq ft brings the sales market to the status quo ratio of the previous 10/15 years. We are not even there yet to decide if that is still good enough or the market has to decline further to be "breakeven." If this stagnant state we are in continues, gravity has to make rent continue further up or sales down to the very least near this ratio.

condos have no authority to say who can and cant buy? Then why does my condo have an expensive managing agent application process to let someone buy my apartment, which also includes financial disclosures, etc, etc - very coop-ian.

Can I tell them to f-off wrt this 1000$ application process? and simply ask them for their ROFR answer?

BTW, RENTS are not going UP.
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/806424-condo-1965-broadway-lincoln-square-new-york

2 months, $1,500 price chop....

Flmaozzzzz.....

"But then you can just rent somewhere else no?"

Not everyone wants to live like a gypsy, moving from rental to rental.

I don't think it is true that NY renters move more frequently than NY owners.

Nationally, renters are more mobile, largely because nationally the rental market is sufficiently broken that only people with limited options rent.

But in NY, the reverse has historically been true. While vacancy decontrol has seriously hurt the upper echelons of the NYC rental market, the ill-effects of the bubble have increased "owner"-speculator mobility, so renters remain more stable in NYC.