Double Whammy Effect on RE

Memories are short and one storm/blackout/terrorist attack hasn't diminished peoples' desires to live in this city. I think if people based their living situations on the probability such calamities occurring, the LA basin, Hawaii, Tokyo (just to name a few) would be sparsely inhabited at best.

We're not saying won't live here, I'm talking about impact on prices relative to perceived "value".

9/11 certainly creamed the hell out of prices, even if temporarily.

Yes, I understand what you're asking and my thought is that the only way to link the recent storm to a decline in prices is to find a causal relationship between NYC disasters and peoples' desire to move away thereby adding slack into the demand for rentals/condos/co-ops. 9/11 certainly drove prices lower but it was merely greasing the skids of a decline following the dot-com bust and the '01 recession.

when i buy again, i will carefully research the surge experience of any buildings/neighborhoods i will consider. and if the neighborhood floods, but the bldg i like is brand new, and "flood-proof", i will still shy away. why would i want to live in a functional building, in a flood ruined neighborhood?

i dont think i am unique among those who will be buying realestate in nyc in the future.

I would think that this would drive more people to live in Manhattan versus the burbs. Manhattan was probably the best place in the region to ride out the storm. Who wants to live in Jersey, LI, or Westchester after seeing that they went through?

good point--i was in backcountry greenwich this wknd and last, and it was a mess--no power til last friday, trees, fire nextdoor that burned the whole house--in spite of the fact that it is very high ground.

could be non-flood-prone neighborhoods in the city do relatively well

elsewhere's point, tho, about tangible value is legit--in general the concept of RE as a solid investment has taken another hit

Hurricane and Fiscal Cliff aside - what about the effects to NYC real estate from Obama's crazy socialistic policies, Potential Alien Invasions, Earthquakes and the coming Zombie Apocalypse?

Moving top marginal tax rate from 35% to 39.6% is not crazy socialistic policy. Aliens and zombies are a greater unknown, of course.

OMG, it's freakin' petrfitz!

WTF do you care, petrfitz?!
You are retired and living in Eze now.

"I think if people based their living situations on the probability such calamities occurring, the LA basin, Hawaii, Tokyo (just to name a few) would be sparsely inhabited at best."

Tokyo RE and rents have dropped by *a ton* since the 2011 earthquake. As an owner of a Tokyo condo, I sure wish people's memories would get shorter!

Toyko - values havent dropped because of the earthquake - its more due to the concentration of radiation...

No radiation in Eze, petrfitz.
Why aren't you up top
with the cati?

Just remember how I took Brooks down for his bullshit about being a retired Air Force fighter pilot.

With the cacti
I think you don't even know what I'm talking about.

Next bullshitter -- step right up!

the coming Zombie Apocalypse should be good for RE prices, as more and more undead need places to unlive

My take is that there will no big change. Continue stagnation for the coming year. Hurricane will be soon forgotten (NYC only), Sad but true.

youre kidding, right? you think the avg buyer wont check flood experience of neighborhood and building before buying, and run away or down-bid accordingly? dumb to think buyers are that dumb. to check such things aint xactly genius!

Petrfitz, there is no more radiation in the air in Tokyo than there was before the earthquake; you're thinking of Fukushima and its environs, which are the ones where radiation is dangerous.

Tangentially related to radiation, though, is the severe power rationing that seems likely never to end, now that a bunch of panicked children in 70-year-old bodies have lobbied to shut nearly all the nation's nuclear reactors. Businesses are moving away from a city where the recommended indoor temperature is 82 degrees F (no more air conditioning), which also contributes to falling rents.

I think the flood danger will be forgotten quickly. Maybe NYC could build dikes out in the sea and keep the low-lying land dry, Holland-style?

Not to trivialize the damage suffered by the hurricane, but unless this level of storm becomes a regular occurrence, I can't see most buyers seriously weighing the Sandy flood factor on a purchase decision (or renters for that matter), especially not after a couple years have passed. What's more is that the flooding zones didn't necessarily correlate to actual damage (at least this time around). Makes sense there's some knee-jerk overreaction right now, but I don't see it lasting.

>9/11 certainly creamed the hell out of prices, even if temporarily.
It did for around 2 years at roughly 25/30% below.
That had more immediate and longer lasting affects between the years of cleanup and years of fear.

But castles made of sand....... melts into the sea...... eventually

Good citizens of Pompeii propably went through decades of earthquakes before the big melt.

I'd worry more about a cap being put on mortgage interest deduction. I feel like that's a reasonable probability in the next few years.

89 from York to West End down to 14th is the new prime manhattan hahahaha

truthskr: The good citizens of Pompeii were party animals.
They were so busy partying they just continued on through the rumbles.
Until the big melt.

I can say with a fair amount of certainty that the people living in the 650 apartments at 2 Gold Street are not going to forget that they had no place to live for at least 4 months any time soon. Likewise for the 10 or so other large buildings downtown and as well as anybody living in the Seaport or One Brooklyn Bridge. In fact, anybody who is near enough or knows somebody will be taking it into consideration. That said, it probably mostly shifts value to apartments on higher ground.

any fool will ask to see the "sandy map" before buying, for a long time forward--and banks and insurers will consider sandy experience of any property they consider ongoing or future involvement with--commercial and residential.

polisson we differ--im glad no one was maimed or died rescuing you, for all sorts of reasons

We all know that malthus is a smart, serious gentleman.
But gator will suspect him of all kinds of no-goodery for the inclusion of OBBP in his comment.

Two storms in two years (Irene and Sandy), and both times the city took the unprecedented step of shutting down the subways for days.

My company paid me, even though I couldn't get to work for a week. I worked from home but there were some technical snags (cell phone signal, intermittent internet etc.)

I would think many other folks got paid even though they couldn't get to work or found their productivity hampered by the storm.

Won't companies start to ask themselves, "Isn't there a better place for us to do business, where we won't have a week of shutdowns every year?"

Storms are going to keep getting bigger and bigger until we stop putting so much carbon in the air, giving companies incentive to move out of the flood plain.

The difference today is we are all so interconnected for communication and everyone has a camera overloading our senses with every bad thing that goes on every minute of the day.
I don't recall getting much national weather news back in the 70s or 80s unless it affected a football game,and even then.

Just google "biggest storm" and play with the year. You'll find a terrible storm somewhere every year.

DO you think anyone knew about hurricane Fifi? A catastrophic tropical cyclone that killed between 3,000 and 10,000 people in Honduras in September 1974?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Fifi%E2%80%93Orlene

Let's see next google stop....1975
"The Great Storm of 1975 (also known as the Super Bowl Blizzard, Minnesota's Storm of the Century, or the Tornado Outbreak of January, 1975) was an intense storm system that impacted a large portion of the Central and Southeast United States from January 9 to January 12, 1975. The storm produced 45 tornadoes"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Storm_of_1975

1976...
"The Groundhog Day gale was a severe winter storm which hit the northeastern United States and southeastern Canada on February 2 (Groundhog Day), 1976.
At this time, maximum sustained winds of 164 kilometers per hour (102 mph) in coastal areas (equal to a Category 2 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson hurricane scale), with wind gusts of up to 188 kilometers per hour (116 mph). By February 6, this cyclone was absorbed by another system in the northern Canadian archipelago"

You get the picture......

actually some of you most assuredly will not.

I remember all of those severe storms/weather systems, truthskr.

When on concert tour, the weather is a promoter's hot topic.
Will the concert need to be canceled? Should it be canceled?
Does the Tour move on to the next stop?
Do we cancel additional concerts in order to get as far away from the weather system as possible?
You get the drift.

Middle Class is getting screwed by Obama's regulatory invironment
You're better off being one of the 47,000,000 on food stamps ,( 10,000 new additons every day ), than being Middle Class

In 1975 = big storm once every 50 years.

In 2012 = big storm once every year.

That's what it boils down to, truthskr10. Of course there have always been big storms, but in the past they only came once in a generation or so.

Now they come every season, which doesn't give us enough time to recover economically, nor enough time to recover infrastructure -- houses, roads, schools, etc.

And I do get your point about more and better communication technology, but our conclusions are not based on consumer chatter, they are based on official storm records. (Which they were keeping in the 1970s, the period you cite.)

If you as you suggest, all the chatter is irrelevant, then look just at the official records and you'll see that more big storms are occurring.

GG
Are you joking? Once in a generation? Do you mean to one location? ie New York?
My point with googling biggest storm and inserting a year was to point there is a big bad storm somewhere EVERY YEAR.

>And I do get your point about more and better communication technology, but our conclusions are not based on consumer chatter, they are based on official storm records. (Which they were keeping in the 1970s, the period you cite.)

Im confused, who is "OUR" conclusions? THe anthropogenic global warming enthusiasts? THe worlds scientists? GG and AL Gore?

So how about that cyclone in 1974 that hit Honduras and killed between 3000 and 10,000 people? (that's quite a spread by the way, today we'd probably be able to estimate within 10%...yes because of better technology)
How many people you think even knew about it in 1974/5? Did they read about it online? Watch it on NatGeo tv? Now you do concede modern communication tech has a possible influence on perceptions of worsening weather. So we'll leave that be.

>If you as you suggest, all the chatter is irrelevant, then look just at the official records and you'll see that more big storms are occurring.

THats what I have been doing. Chrichton's book opened my eyes(read it 8 years ago) and I really read and paid attention to the fine print of many publications and the studies. (not the headlines and the half assed articles with conclusions but the actual facts)
I also read and dissected all 4 IPCC reports.(his book was out after the 2nd or 3rd). The whole purpose was to ascertain anthropogenic (human) affect on global warming. Disclaimers on specific sections on whether something was anthropogenic or not made several conclusions practically useless.

You know, I hate big oil.
Im not a conspiratist but do recognize there are powers that be that keep us on our current energy system to maintain influence and true power.
I also have to believe pumping so much CO2 can't be a good thing.

But what Ive seen coming from the "Green Meanies" is embarrassingly ludicrous. It actually hurts environmentalism.

These are things guaranteed to come that we DO need to prepare for;

Overpopulation.
Fresh water shortage.
An ice age.
An asteroid strike.

I figure it's my duty to help as many people as I can seek the truth.
GG, you seem intelligent and that's why Im trying to reach you.

You know one big volcano will cool the planet 3/4 degrees within 2 years!
I also have to think some bad solar storms will do the opposite.
Mars has been warming as well as martians are supposed to be green. (sorry couldnt help myself)

Aren't you the least bit curious why NYCNovice and I and I'll bet just about anyone else you speak to who read this book will echo our arguments?
Are you afraid you'll stop recycling? Dont worry. :)
I beg you, read State of Fear. The worst thing to come out of it is you'll have read an otherwise entertaining book.

1978 Great Blizzard of '78
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Blizzard_of_1978

1979 Typhoon Tip
Largest cyclone on record
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhoon_Tip

I will not continue, but since we are up to 1980, her eis a list of weather disasters 1980 to 2011
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0882823.html

Yes, seek the Truth.
Just don't ask me any questions now, I'm going to dinner.