Rising inventory

nope, not on my widget..we are right around the highest level now.

By the way, HELP!

Does anyone know a reputable and reasonable programmer they can recommend? I'd like to update charts on my site, but my programmer is busy for another 3 months.

I wonder who is buying all of those units if no one is buying anything?

No doubt some do, Spunkster.

So we need to determine which widget to believe, steve's or digs? Does anyone else have another widget? spunky, do you have a widget?

well Ill tell you mine is very close to J Miller's Manhattan data.

JuiceMan, I don't have a "widget": I went on this site to advanced search, all Manhattan, exclude listings already in contract, and that's what comes up. Nothing fancy from my end. That's the way I always do it; nothing is 100% accurate, but at least it gives me a consistent dataset.

Who said no one is buying anything? However, you don't know anything about those sales so it would be wrong to extrapolate. When were the contracts signed, etc. I looked at one of those buildings, 133 W. 22nd, and there's a thread about it. It only shows 1 sale and 1 commercial sale, no listing data. So who knows if it's true.

relax steve, I wasn't taking a shot at you. Let's just say inventory is between 6500 and 7100, I think that will do.

My widget says about 4309. I too went on numerous sites, went to the library and even knocked on doors of people selling, spoke to RE agents and developers and I came up with an available inventory of 4309. This number is as believable as Stevejhx's so I guess one should use the median to get the correct inventory number.

I didn't think you were taking a shot at me, MightJuice. I just try to be consistent. I think streeteasy is pretty accurate, however, given that it correlates pretty well with Miller Samuel. If you take out the 300 or so houses you get a figure of 6800, which given the recent run-up in inventory would correlate more or less to what MS had at 31 March.

Oh, Spunky, you're such a clown!

and i meant MightyJuice, since you like that so much.

stevejhx when was the last time you had your inventory widget calibrated?

I think trying to be consistent is a good thing steve. The hardest part is admitting you have a problem, but rest assured you have friends here that are willing to help.

JuiceMan, I'm always consistent, and show my sources. If only those of you on the other side would oblige, as well.

spunky leave steve's widget alone

Hi urban. I know I asked you this a couple of months ago but just want your updated opinion of the bond yield curve and what you think it might be indicating.

ehh, who cares about curves that aren't in regards to a woman

Re: 133 W 22nd St. Maybe these really are selling well, but with no closed sales here, are we just taking the developer's word for it? 1 of them, Magnum, is totally unscrupulous, and being sued left and right by buyers in their recent project, the A Building. See the 133 W 22nd St. thread for details.

Digs, smoking, drinking, womanizing...This is a new side of you.

For me, two out of three ain't bad. ;0

digs is bored. No buyers and no credit crisis to talk about. I would smoke, drink, and chase women if I were him, ride it out until the good times roll in.

ha! Juice hit it! I just got 2 signed deals in last 2 weeks, so Juice is partially right. Only got a few more buyers now that are rip, rearing to go instead of 4.

and of course credit crisis is over. BUY BUY BUY!

urban but didn't you tell them now was a silly time to buy. I mean all they have to do is read your blogs to realize you have to be a dope to buy real estate now. Why didn't you set these morons straight.

digs, now that the credit crisis is over will you come up with another apocalypse that will ultimately tank Manhattan real estate?

And at the same time sell real estate.

these were savvy buyers that bought a great product and have 7-10+ yr timelines to own. They approached me to avoid buying an overpriced property, and believe it or not, I shot down a few of the places they originally liked only to hear them say, 'yea, that was our concern. we just werent sure..'

Juice - well, credit crisis may be over in sense systemic risk was eliminated. Until the next debacle comes up. My real concern, the 45 trillion in notional value of credit default swaps positions held. YAYYY, credit default swaps!

still if the the economy is heading for a depression why would you allow someone to buy today. Why didn't you stressed to them to wait a year or two for they could get a better deal. Why didn't you tell them to read your blog and just wait it out. How could you do this?

Alright, I know you're needling Digs, and forgive me for being cloyingly sincere, but I know for a fact that Digs has advised someone to wait at his expense (no, not me). If someone insists on buying and wants a broker to watch his back, he's a good choice.

Tenemental is probably referring to me. Digs is GREAT, he will tell you the truth about a property and will do the best he can to help a client who is hell bent on buying get a worthwhile product. Indeed, he advised us to wait but has been open to looking at properties that we are interested in (and telling us if we're crazy or not!).

Digs, do you do much work on UWS?

Yet he continues to write on his blog site the deterioration of the economy as well as the erosion of Manhattan real estates prices. Then he boasts how he closed two contracts by representing buyers. In other words he's out there selling real estate and simultaneously trashing it on his blog site. I don't get it. Even Stevejhx has to chuckle at this yin and yang approach of doing business. I do enjoy reading urbans blog site but wonder sometimes why anyone who is attracted to his blog site would purchase real estate in today's environment even with long term objectives. It doesn't make any sense.

Spunky: there are people who HAVE to buy and some, like me, who want to buy for the very long haul and want to move into a place more suitable for their needs. There are good buys out there (albeit rare) and he simply tries to get the best bang for the buck. I agree what Digs is doing seems contradictory but he IS very helpful for many of us. I think Digs is trying to tell everyone that it isn't time to buy and flip or sell in the short term.

Finally, no one can predict the real estate market (or interest rates, or the stock market) so no one should base their decision to buy simply on the ideas of a few bloggers.

spunky - stop talking. your making yourself look like an idiot. So, your bashing me for having foresight and accurately and unbiasedly discussing macro and how it will likely affect Manhattan, and at same time you assume that no deals are taking place in Manhattan, and especially none that I should be a part of because of my blog. If anything, at least I tell it like it is and will openly tell a buyer if they are buying too early, or cant afford what they think they can afford. Every situation is unique.

If you were a buyer, would you rather work with a cheerleader who has no understanding of the macro economy and/or the state of the current marketplace who advises you to bid full ask on any and all properties they take you to? Or, would you rather have someone who understands the state of the market, understands macro environment, and is out there to advise in a capacity of caution and make sure the product has the features needed for resale retainability and will advise on what market value SHOULD be for that place given current environment?

This is where you just dont get it! There is a reason I have so many buyers waiting to use my services on buy side. Yet, you just dont get it because Im writing about REALITY rather than cheerlead like 85% of brokers do to get a deal done.

spunky - stop talking. your making yourself look like an idiot. So, your bashing me for having foresight and accurately and unbiasedly discussing macro and how it will likely affect Manhattan, and at same time you assume that no deals are taking place in Manhattan, and especially none that I should be a part of.

If you were a buyer, would you rather work with a cheerleader who has no understanding of the macro economy and/or the state of the current marketplace who advises you to bid full ask on any and all properties they take you to? Or, would you rather have someone who understands the state of the market, understands macro environment, and is out there to advise in a capacity of caution and make sure the product has the features needed for resale retainability and will advise on what market value SHOULD be for that place given current environment?

This is where you just dont get it! There is a reason I have so many buyers waiting to use my services on buy side. Yet, you just dont get it because Im writing about REALITY rather than cheerlead like 85% of brokers do to get a deal done.

spunky - stop talking. your making yourself look like an idiot. So, your bashing me for having foresight and accurately and unbiasedly discussing macro and how it will likely affect Manhattan, and at same time you assume that no deals are taking place in Manhattan, and especially none that I should be a part of.

If you were a buyer, would you rather work with a cheerleader who has no understanding of the macro economy and/or the state of the current marketplace who advises you to bid full ask on any and all properties they take you to? Or, would you rather have someone who understands the state of the market, understands macro environment, and is out there to advise in a capacity of caution and make sure the product has the features needed for resale retainability and will advise on what market value SHOULD be for that place given current environment?

This is where you just dont get it! There is a reason I have so many buyers waiting to use my services on buy side. Yet, you just dont get it because Im writing about REALITY rather than cheerlead like 85% of brokers do to get a deal done.

khd -good point. Just thought that maybe Urban should consider focusing his business on the rental market so his views will match his business model.

drg - sure! email me if you would like my assistance on anything. nrosenblatt@halstead.com

drg - sure! email me if you would like my assistance on anything. nrosenblatt@halstead.com

Breaking News! According to the Spunky Widget, there are now only....

...39 apartments listed for sale in Manhattan!

even though streeteasy lists 7,169.

why did my things post 2 and 3 times?

"stop talking. your making yourself look like an idiot" Urbandigs

Urban I do appreciate your level of professionalism. Although you have a tendency to resort to personnel attacks when someone you disagrees with you are certainly open minded in your thought process. I am quite confident that any potential client which you may disagree with won't be met with the same level of business maturity.

Personnel attacks?

Spunky, keep your staff to yourself. ;)

spunky - because your remarks say you dont get it, when to me, its crazy to not 'get it'! You are contradicting yourself.

Honesty/Reality = bad broker who shouldn't be worked with is basically what you are saying

What kind of math is that?

Urban you indicated you had a long list of buyers. So if you listed an apt with a seller who would one of your long list of buyers be. Would it be the likes of MMAfia or eric_cartman? Not sure what you consider a long list of buyers. Are these buyers really serious and qualified? I would think your buyers or fans would want to buy an apt for 1/10th for what the seller wants. Who wouldn't. Maybe you can put me on your list as well.Even stevjhx can be put on your long list of buyers as well.

see right there, that is an expected response from you. How would I do two deals in two weeks if my buyers are bidding 1/10th of asking price?

I expected nothing less from you spunky. I guess the GE warning and GS recommendation of selling short WaMu is getting you down this morning!

digs - it pains me to see you even waste your time on this troll...what differrence does it make if he gets it or not, there's plenty of ways to figure out who has what stance on RE related issues from multiple posts they make on these boards, some are more reasonable and substantiated, some are less (no names now), spunky however is in a league of his own...btw looks like your charts have been stale for a few days, still comes up with 4/8 as the latest data point.

Oberon - yea, there is a bug in charts. trying to fix and upgrade the entire system. Thanks for pointing out. Frustrating when these tools dont work like they should.

Oh I forget to add Oberon to you list of potential qualified buyers. So your top three qualified buyers are Oberon, MMafia and eric_cartman.

Hi, ccDevi, Spunky:

(FINALLY found this thread where I had posted the original comment - apologies for posting this on one other thread - just wanted to ensure spunky and ccdevi get the response to the q they asked)

I had made a statement that I chose not to buy a place last year because I had found that house prices would have to appreciate at 7% for buying to break even with renting. i.e., this was the growth that was "built into" the price, and if it grew less than that, I would lose money.

I was challenged to back it up - sorry it took me so long (had a pretty busy week at work).

CALCULATION ENGINE USED:

My calculations are based on www.housemath.us has, what I believe, among the most sophisticated calculation for comparing rent vs buy options. I have reviewed the math posted on the wiki. I would encourage you to do the same before using it as basis of what is likely to be the biggest investment in your life.

SITUATION
In 2006, I renting a 1 bedroom mid town (door man bldg, hells kitchen) paying ~$2600 rent (perhaps I had a good deal). Some of the new condos coming up there were asking close to 1 mill for a similar sized place, with common charges close to $1K.

APPROACH:

Much of the output of this (and other buy/rent comparison sites) is driven by what your property appreciation assumption is. Since so much of the answer dependeds on this hard to guess number, rather than put in a number based either on average for the last few years, or just plain guesswork, I asked myself "what would the growth have to be, to justify this price?". In other words, "what is the growth in asset price built into this pricing? " The answer of whether I would buy or not, I figured, would depend on whether this number was resonable or not. So, keeping rent and buying prices as fixed, I just played with the assumed growth rate of property price by trial and error.

ASSUMPTIONS USED:

- Price: $ 1M
- cc: $1K per month
- term: 30 yrs
- interest: 6.5% ( 0 points, loan origination fees)
- downpayment: 20%
- Opportunity cost: long term portfolio return: 9% per year (US S&P500 index grows at about 8% in long term, I believe it is possible to do at least 9% with significant exposure to emerging markets)
- inflation: 4% per year
- Others - left at default (I believe that is resonable)

CONCLUSION:

The growth built into apartment price was determined to be 6 - 7% (depending on the ownership duration assumption from 10 - 30 yrs). I found this number to be unresonable (long term average is ~4%, so this is 50 - 80% above long term average). Hence, I chose not to buy last year.

Please do try this out with your specifics to determine what is the growth that is built into the price of the property you are purchasing.

Spunky, ccdevi, eah, and others - I am open to your critique of this approach. Do let me know your thoughts.

--
PS: ccDevi, you are right, the site seemed to be down a few days ago - its back up now.

If you can rent 2600 per month on an apt that is valued at 1 Million than I thinks your better off renting. I don't know any 1 mil apts that rent for that little at least in downtown. However their are probably more apts valued at 650-800K 1 Bedrooms that are renting for 3200-3500 per month.
Put that in your formula and see what you come with. Also keep in mind that many people can not stomach the volaitle nature of investing in emerging funds and get nervous when the value of their stock portfolio drops 25 to 50% in a relatively short period of time and freak out by selling it only for it to shoot back up again.

eric_cartman: Thanks for mentioning that site. I didn't know about it before and it is very comprehensive. Your methodology is very interesting. Almost like calculating the implied volatility of options prices except you are calculating the implied growth rates in home prices - pretty smart.

I would caution against using a higher-than-average rate of return for stocks - probably better to be conservative than aggressive. The value I find in tools like these (I have been using the NY Times buy/rent tool up 'til now) is to stress-test extreme scenarios - what if inflation averaged 10% instead of 4%? What if home appreciation was 1% instead of 4.5%? What if my time horizon were only 5 years instead of 10-30 years? One of the principles of risk-management (which were clearly ignored by Wall Street over the last few years) is the concept of Value at Risk (VaR) using a 95% confidence level. Essentially, this means that your assumptions may be correct 95% of the time by using historical averages, but you have to be able to survive the 5% of the time when things go to extremes. This is what Long-Term-Capital and Bear Stearns (both of which had some very smart people) failed to take into account.

Thanks again for learning me about that site.

iMom IS hot.

dmag2020: Yes I am.

FYI - www.housemath.us doesn't take into account transfer taxes if you are buying a new development, although you can probably negotiate the sponsor to cover these costs anyway. In case you didn't know:

NYC transfer tax = (Sales price times 1.425%) plus $25
NYS transfer tax = (Sales price times 0.4%)
You would have to add these costs to your total closing costs amount for an accurate number.

Looks like www.housemath.us was designed for resales, not new developments. But again, if you can get the seller to pay your transfer taxes anyway, it would make a difference.

sorry....the last line should read "it WOULDN'T make a difference."

Of course, you could simply change "Mansion Tax" from 1% to 2.83%. This way, the website would calculate transfer taxes as part of the mansion tax number.

Im paying 3000 for a 900 sft 1BR in UES doorman bldg...This apt would easily sell for 850K or so if on the open market as a condo, and that would be a good deal probably.

In that case, if I put 20% down, more than the requirement, at an interest rate of 6.5% and monthlies of 1350, or $1.50/sft lets assume, my monthly nut to own would be:

$4300 $1350 = $5,650 a month before my tax deductions

It would cost me $170,000 for the 20% down payment about $32,000 in buy side transaction costs for this purchase price. The buy side closing costs alone, almost cover 1 year rent for the same property. Clearly, renting for someone like me who can't grow into a 900 sft 1BR if I buy is the savvier decision.

$850k for a 1-br urbandigs? Normally they're asking $1,200 psf, making $1.1 mill a closer price, no?

I'm glad that people are finally coming around to my p-o-v, however.

Except spunky, malraux, juiceman.

I realize this discussion is about prime Manhattan, but:

"The Arbor in Riverdale has sold 20 percent of its 127 homes"

I don't know how long it's been selling, but that is not good. It's not Manhattan, but it is a prime area in the bigger picture, just as Forest Hills, Queens is.

I'm not understanding why a broker is being criticized for counseling his clients to be too optimistic or spend too much. A good businessman will want to be sure the customer is satisfied and not shocked down the road that all is not perfect. The moment I decided Manhattan real estate is too hard to decipher was when I read last summer about a new condo I had been watching be built on lower Third Avenue -- that it sold something like 90% of its units in six weeks without running a single ad. It was not a small building. It may be that lots of Rich Irish Tulip Bulb Speculators snapped them up foolishly, but for my purposes it was irrelevant. It was proof positive the door had long ago slammed in my face. However........... all markets in NYC metro are linked, and Prime Manhattan Condo will slide. I want to work in the future with brokers like the one who's being called two-faced for alerting people to the fundamentals being scarey, while at the same time selling the assets. It's honest. Does a good surgeon refuse to perform surgeries that have no risks? Does he only talk of the great benefits? Of course not.

What do people hear/think about that shiny glass tower at Mt Morris (or Marcus Garvey) Park and Fifth? If I had the $$$ and could get a high-floor view, I wouldn't be too scared, but I do think that bldg may be a case of just a little bit too nice too late.

yes Steve, you are right. I wanted to be UBER conservative in the example to show the others how different renting costs are to buying. In all likelihood, at 850K for a condo in my imm area, I wont get anything more than 800 sft. For 900 sft, prob looking closer to 950-999K or so, pushing up the monthlies to own to closer to 6,100/mth, and down payment and closing costs higher too.

But to avoid all the questioning, I went uber conservative to make the point that for me, for my situation where I would need a 2-3BR to grow into for a 5-7+ yr timeline to own, I simply cant afford asking prices today. So, its a renting decision until either my salary jumps or prices fall; or combo of two.

Urbandigs, nice to see a real-estate agent being so honest: when I'm ready to buy, your him!

I pay $4,500 for a 2-br 2-ba 1,000 ft2 apartment in Chelsea. I look at the poor sods across the street who bought a virtually equivalent apartment - albeit one with nicer tiles but with lesser views (at least I can see the ESB if I stretch) - for $1.5 million, or twice+ what I pay to rent.

This situation is anomalous, even in Manhattan. If incomes rise at about 3% per year - which they do - it will take 20+ years for incomes to rise enough for rents to rise (using the 40x ratio) to match property prices. Which is why property prices must fall, far, hard, and fast.

lowery: Very good points. The only one questioning urbandigs is spunky, so don't read too much into the criticism from just one person. I get the sense that most other people think 'digs knows what he's talking about. I think he's been pretty spot on in his analysis so far.

About the development in Harlem, if you are talking about "5th on the Park" here's the scoop. The developer had to purchase the land from a church that was there prior to construction. As part of the purchase agreement for the land, the developer had to 1) give 47 units to the church and 2) devote part of the ground-level space to a new church built into the development. One of the reasons this development is priced so high is that the cost of these 47 units given to the church are being spread across the other 113 units sold to the public (160 units total). So by buying there, you will be paying for not just your apartment, but also for part of the cost of one of the units being given away. 47/113=0.416, so you'll get 1 apartment, but will be paying for 1.416 apartments. They boast on their website that they're the fastest selling condo development in Harlem and that they've already sold 90 of their 160 units. What they don't tell you is that of these 90 units "sold", 47 were simply given to the church at the start of construction. So really, they've only sold 43 units to paying customers. Sneaky!

stevejhx - Remember that I am also in the camp that prices need to come down. However, the correction in NYC RE may not happen as quickly as you might think. In a liquid market like stocks, forex or commodities, market inefficiencies do not last very long, especially when market participants have good access to information, transactions are quick and transaction costs are low. In a relatively illiquid market like NYC RE, where market transparency is still rather limited (definitely improving but still not perfectly transparent), transaction times can be weeks or even months and transaction costs are high, inefficiencies can exist for some time before the market adjusts. That's why I think prices will be "sticky" and gradually come down over the next year or two. No sudden crash, just a slow and steady decline as sanity gradually returns to the market.

Comments/feedback welcomed.

Urbandigs, nice to see a real-estate agent being so honest: when I'm ready to buy, your him!---Stevejhx

So Urban I forgot to add stevejhx to your long list of serious qualified buyers. It's really starting to sahp up and grow quite nicely. You have MMafia who needs to sells his gold stash thatt he has tucked away in empty coffe cans, then eric-cartman who believes the real estate market is on big ponzi conspiracy, Oberon and faustus both of whom would love to curse at the sellers and now you have the 50 percent reduction man Stevjhx. With potential future buyers like these you'll be able to buy that 3 bedroom apt over looking central park

iMom, you're right about the timing - all we can do is "await incoming data." Nonetheless, the difference this time from last is the vast number of new units under construction, the sudden demise of Wall Street (aka jobs AND bonuses), and the near evaporation of leverage not only in the sense of high interest rates on jumbo loans, but on the terms of qualification. Temporary jumbo conforming limits do not apply to co-op loans, which will hold the prices of condominiums down, as well, since they're in direct competition. And developers can't keep their units unsold for long, lest they go bankrupt. If they don't sell, watch them be converted to rental buildings.

But you're right - there is no way to tell with precision the exact date, place, time, and amount of the bottom of this market, or any.

spunkster, you're right: urbandigs might get a lot more business out of you, as you're forced to liquidate your holdings at bargain-basement prices. ;0

yep your right stevejhx urbandigs would be the first one I would call.

iMom - that is very interesting about the condo Fifth on the Park. Yes, we are thinking of the same one. I had heard it was built "over a church," but can see no evidence of a church building on the lot. I see that "over a church" is still very much what it is. I think their prices are too high, but who am I to say. BTW, how is the Kalahari doing? I was very impressed with them, but they seemed to be doling out the "availabilities" gradually to avoid having too many on the market, though they were also making sure any increase in prices would not be scooped up by early flippers. Has anyone heard whether they sold out completely? iMom, is that another case of the "affordable" units that people had to win a lottery for being paid for by the prices being paid for by "nonaffordable" unit buyers? Or is there a different form of subsidy, financing, swap of rights going on? If the lottery apartments are actually being subsidized by some outside source of $$$, then that may serve to keep the building stable if the market hits an ugly spot.

Lowery: I'm not an expert on Harlem. I just have 2 friends who live up there. They're the ones who told me about 5th on the Park. I have no knowledge of the Kalahari other than the fact that I find the exterior repulsive. But hey, I guess I'm not the target buyer they are looking to appeal to.

My understanding is (and I might very well be wrong) that buildings with lotteries for income-restricted tenants received subsidies during construction - low-cost financing, tax-incentives, zoning allowances, etc. - from local municipalities. For example, let's say the city owned some vacant lots up in Harlem and a developer came along and wanted to buy the land to build a new condo development. The city might sell the land at a below-market-rate with the stipulation that a portion of the units have income restrictions. The discount from the land purchase would then go towards funding the low-income units.

That is different than the deal that the 5th on the Park had with the church. My guess is that the church negotiated the sale of their land and part of the sale agreement was that 1) the developer had to rebuild the church and incorporate it as part of the development and 2) 47 units would be given to the church. So even before construction began, the sales team could already claim that 47 units had been sold. But since this is a private arrangement, guess who pays for the cost of developing those 47 units - the buyers of all the other units! That's one of the reasons why their units cost in the high-800's per foot and the rest of Central Harlem averages in the high-700's per foot (according to Street Easy).

lowery, I'm also not well-versed on Harlem and know nothing of those specific buildings (though I appreciated iMom's info on 5th on Park), but generally, low/middle income units are required of a developer in order to secure exclusionary zoning (a taller building than is otherwise allowed in an area) and/or a tax abatement. I think developers are usually giving something to get something, not just providing a setting for something publicly subsidized. In some cases the low/middle income housing isn't even on the same site as the development. I don't remember any specific examples of this, but it's a detail I recall from an article on tax abatements.

The arrangement at 5th on the Park sounded different from arrangements I had heard of before, i.e. Kalahari, but also the Trump Riverside South development (lottery for below-market rentals). The Kalahari, BTW, was $600 per sq ft summer/fall '07, and started at $500 a year before. I thought they were already a sign the condo market was cooling, because, as with the Charleston on E.34th, there was no stampede pre-construction and only a half-dozen or so units were "released" at a time, so that the entire project took a year or more to get contracts on. I don't know if this staged-release strategy is to ride the price increases rather than have the first buyers flip their units by the time of closing, or whether it was part of the handwriting on the wall, but in Kalahari's case I think the prices moved on a straight line upward. I don't believe 5th on the Park is going to sell out without reducing their prices. I met the developer of a series of condo projects in West Harlem who I asked point black, "How much do they cost?" and he hesitated a moment before lying, "from $700 to $1,000 a square foot." I didn't miss a beat and said, "No way. People don't pay that much yet in Harlem, unless it's on CPN." Oh, but if you have exterior space, a large layout, etc., he claimed. Nope. Kalahari had a 2-brm unit for $600 per sq ft. with a large private terrace. I don't know where this will end and how long it will take, but I believe we're seeing the lying stage, as people stretch the facts just a little bit here and there to create the illusion the market is rip-roaring. It isn't hurting yet, and there are no bargains, but the Road Runner Moment may be down the pike.

kalahari: visited today -- their prices are pushing $800/sq ft -- remarkable given that the start in 2006 was $500/sq ft...but then they did not release the high floor units until recently.
More remarkable that even in the current climate they indicate that they will not accept lower offers but may contribute $10k towards closing costs.
No sign of desperation visible

"More remarkable that even in the current climate they indicate that they will not accept lower offers but may contribute $10k towards closing costs. No sign of desperation visible"

That is the single most sign of desperation I have seen. "We won't lower our prices."

Yup. And you won't sell your apartments.

> Yup. And you won't sell your apartments.

38% decline in sales in Manhattan, 44% in Brooklyn... its exactly whats happening.