Skip Navigation

Financial Giants Are Moving Jobs Off Wall Street

Started by jason10006
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 5257
Member since: Jan 2009
Discussion about
"Financial Giants Are Moving Jobs Off Wall Street... ...New York’s biggest investment houses are shifting jobs out of the area and expanding in cheaper locales in the United States, threatening the vast middle tier of positions that form the backbone of employment on Wall Street...." BULLISH!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who needs people who make less than $1MM a year, anyway!!!! GOOD RIDDANCE!!!!!!!!!!! http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/02/business/finance-jobs-leave-wall-street-as-firms-cut-costs.html?pagewanted=all
Response by alanhart
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by Brooks2
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 2970
Member since: Aug 2011

"The potential shift has profound implications for New York’s tax base and economy because of Wall Street’s outsize financial profile. Last year, the industry contributed 14 percent of New York State’s tax revenue"

Bullish

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by JButton
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 447
Member since: Sep 2011

14% would be direct tax payments, i wander what is the secondary effect?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by huntersburg
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 11329
Member since: Nov 2010

Maybe Jason will now leave back to California.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by AvUWS
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 839
Member since: Mar 2008

Let's see how this plays out. This trend has been touted many times before and never played itself out. At some point you have to wait to hear about this actually affecting the statistics. Meantime demand for apartments and rentals have not dropped like one would expect if WS was really pulling back.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by caonima
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 815
Member since: Apr 2010

then why manhattan RE price is at all-time high?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 13573
Member since: Apr 2009

When has Wall Street not not shifted back office jobs away from Wall Street. This is not a new phenomenon but a decades long trend. The back office guys only entered the real estate market if they made it to mid level manager level and then frequently in Brooklyn, New Jersey , Staten Island etc. Wit each succeeding generation back office translated less and less to front office and less and less as a path to prosperity.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by Brooks2
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 2970
Member since: Aug 2011

Yea but now they are moving them out of the city to other states. Less taxe revenue for the city

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by Brooks2
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 2970
Member since: Aug 2011

And as the article states, they are moving because wall street is having difficulties with the bottom line. Bottom line!

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by huntersburg
almost 14 years ago
Posts: 11329
Member since: Nov 2010
Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
over 13 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009

"then why manhattan RE price is at all-time high?"

uh, because it 'aint. We are 15-20% below all time highs...

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by LICComment
over 13 years ago
Posts: 3610
Member since: Dec 2007

There goes sme's alternative universe math again. In sme's world, 100 is 15-20% below 100 . . .

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by JButton
over 13 years ago
Posts: 447
Member since: Sep 2011

he is talking real money not nominal correct?

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
over 13 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009

LICC is, as usual, incorrect on both fronts.

In nominal terms, Manhattan median (per miller samuel) is 19% below peak prices. In real terms, it is 23-24%.

I know that LICC thinks every number is 100 because he really really wants it to be... but the actual numbers are $830k now... and over $1 mil at peak in 2008.

whoops...

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by jason10006
over 13 years ago
Posts: 5257
Member since: Jan 2009

"then why manhattan RE price is at all-time high?"

In real terms they are not.

http://www.millersamuel.com/charts/manhattan-hoa-monthly-cost-per-sq-ft-1q-08-1q-12

http://www.millersamuel.com/files/2007/01/average-cpi.jpg

The peak in constant dollars with 4Q2008.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by jason10006
over 13 years ago
Posts: 5257
Member since: Jan 2009

2008-ish in general.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by LICComment
over 13 years ago
Posts: 3610
Member since: Dec 2007

According to those charts, sme is flat out wrong. Prices are the same or higher in nominal terms and down 5% in real terms.

Seldom right and wrong again sme, but you should cherry pick your numbers again to make them look better.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by Eric_14
over 13 years ago
Posts: 93
Member since: Sep 2011

The first of "those charts" is maintenance. Okay, maintenance is about at an all-time high. That's probably one of the reasons why the second chart shows that prices are down.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
over 13 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009

ROTL.

sorry, LICC. The numbers are from Miller Samuel... manhattan medians.

You can keep pretending they aren't down... but you'd be wrong as usual.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
over 13 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009

the miller samuel data...
Manhattan Median Price (coops+condos) Q2 2012 - 830,000
Manhattan Median Price (coops+condos) Q2 2008 - 1,025,000

come on, LICC, please come up with some more of your hillarious "cherry picking" claims.

The claim was we are at an all time high... except we are 20% below the all time high. And this is nominal. Add, what, another 5% decline in real terms.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
over 13 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009

"The first of "those charts" is maintenance. Okay, maintenance is about at an all-time high."

pretty fing hillarious that some people mistook rising maintenance for rising prices...

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by yikes
over 13 years ago
Posts: 1016
Member since: Mar 2012

ha!

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by LICComment
over 13 years ago
Posts: 3610
Member since: Dec 2007

According to Miller Samuel, the median peak year for Manhattan was 2009 at $955k. For 2011 it was $850k. Less than 10 percent down. Hardly the crash swe thinks happened. Keep picking those cherries.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by str33teasier
over 13 years ago
Posts: 374
Member since: Feb 2010

> According to Miller Samuel, the median peak year for Manhattan was 2009 at $955k. For 2011 it was $850k. Less than 10 percent down. Hardly the crash swe thinks happened. Keep picking those cherries.

First it's 10%, then it's another 5% and another 10% and another 10% and before u know it, it's REAL money ...

Ignored comment. Unhide

Add Your Comment