projections of future of NYC RE

It hurts the first time home buyer the most, the person starting off with his or her first studio or one bedroom. We've also seen a change in the market with more of these units going to investors, many who pay cash.
How much the increase in rates affects things, I'm not so sure. It probably pushes people considering buying into doing so sooner. Also today's rates are still very low by historical standards, we'd need to see rates go up a lot more for it to have real impact.

Over the next 15 years I see the market for buyers completely shutting out everyone but the top 5% of earners (in 2011, that was households -- not individuals, but households -- making $167,000 and above).

Frankly, it's hard enough for someone making $167,000 finding an affordable co-op or condo in New York today! There aren't a whole lot of options today in the $400K range.

Manhattan has become a luxury product; a commodity like Monaco where wealthy will park their money. As long as Bloomberg's "virtuous cycle" can be continued in a future administration and the economy continues on an even track, RE goes sideways even in a rising rate environment. The fever pitch of recent upswing cannot be sustained.

I think prices are headed up pretty aggressively over the next year especially in the $1mn to $3mn range.

In the short term, rising interest rates add fuel to the fire of demand. People want to get in before rates go even higher. Also, the Manhattan market is not as correlated to interest rates as other markets. More cash buyers for one thing. Also, co-ops typically require more stringent affordability standards than other markets. This mans that most buyers can afford rates to be in the 8% range and we're nowhere near that.

On the supply side, inventory is more than tight. I'm seeing less than 4,000 active inventory right now. This appears to be the lowest inventory heading into Labor Day in at least 7 years. We know that there's almost no new inventory coming onto the market (outside of the super luxury end of the market) and that would take years to correct. By this October, the papers will be full of data highlighting how high prices have risen in the last 12 months. The question is whether this will result in a significant uptick in listings in January/February or whether demand will continue to far exceed supply.

My guess is we'll see continued tight supply in January/February. There'll be more new listings but there'll be much less existing inventory carried forward. Unless there is a significant event to derail buyer sentiment, then I'm guessing we'll see a 20% uptick in prices over the next 12.

I would think the majority of purchases are rate insensitive.

I can't help but have a bearish out-look going forward. Despite the false reality many on here seem to involve themselves in, there are many factors that validate this type of opinion. Changing of the guard for starters. Hypothetically if Quinn were to be elected, I might actually have that opportunity to purchase the apartment I passed on in the West Village in 1997 for $62,000 (kidding, well kind of). The budget is a concern and shouldn't be easily discounted.

I can't put my finger on it, but something isn't right in the market place. Inefficiencies all around real estate industry right now. Banks being brutally difficult with very qualified buyers. While I don't see the market tanking, there is too much capital on the sidelines for that to happen, I do see a lot of $1500-$2000 a sf apartments coming in on price quite a bit. There are various segments of the real estate market that are acting very unhealthy and I'm personally witnessing many buyers making very poor purchase decisions based on price. Again, its difficult to site one particular case, but I strongly believe there are going to be many individuals who has the "car leaves the dealership" valuation issue.

Didn't Jamie Dimon state in response to congress several years ago there is a financial crisis every 5-7 years? If that's true, we're already approaching year 5 since our last.

And back to my "people on here detached from reality" comment. People are struggling whether its been exhibited on the streets or not. I know several apartment owners with no back up security I.e. family wealth, etc and stagnant income that are just getting by. Folks, these repeated articles that people spend 35-75% of their total income on housing and healthcare aren't being written for fun. For the ones in finance I understand this doesn't compute as easily. Actually it doesn't matter what industry, but what does matter is there are people making $250k-$400k a year and great for them, but many of these same people think this is fairly standard. To a degree it is in Manhattan, but that pool is not as large as people think.

The trade off, however, is to rent a 1bdrm for $3200 (a decent one) and more likely $4k, which is absurd, again if not being financially sponsored by a parent.

Believe it or not safe financial bets are places like Hamilton Heights, etc, in my opinion. I don't know, but my overall feeling is not very positive about this market. There are other intangibles that can be explained on here that also give me pause on the direction of things.

We'll see. I'm just one opinion.

Also the next set of mayoral candidates do not seem to be very pro-business or pro-development.

VOTE CAREFULLY PEOPLE!!!

Nah,

I think the trials and tribulations of normal working folks have little to do with the Manhattan marketplace nowadays. I don't want to get into a social discussion here and don't want to diminish any argument against the increasing disparity of wealth but this is Manhattan real estate we're talking about. I'm not suggesting that this is a false reality. I'm just suggesting that for the most part it's not relevant to Manhattan real estate prices.

Nah, there are over 2.8mn households in the U.S. earnings more than $250k. that's a pretty deep pool even if nationwide.

Over the past 25 years the number of billionaires in the U.S. has grown from 41 to 425 (according to Forbes). That's 10% annual compound growth over 25 years. I'm sure if numbers were available, a similar compound growth rate would exist for those with wealth of $10mn or $100mn.

Put it another way, the 95th percentile of income in 2003 prices rose from $75k in 1967 to $155k in 2003. (72%). Even the 80th percentile only grew by 55% in real terms during that same period.

The wealthy, more broadly, defined have been growing wealthy by far more than whatever measure of price inflation you care to use. The inevitable reality of that is that for most people in real jobs where incomes are more closely correlated to inflation that Manhattan has been and will continue to be increasingly out of reach.

I guess my point is that people can rationalize that prices are too expensive any way they choose. The reality is that I always reduce things to simple supply and demand ecnoomics. Right now there appaers to be many metrics which would suggest demand > supply.

Flmaozzz. 1990 to 2013. The greatest real estate based credit bubble which almost caused a complete shut down of our financial systems.

Meh thinks the fact $50mm buy out of streeteasy doesn't even move one's wealth meter is more reflective of $2mm studios on west 42 than any expansion of 'real' wealth.

R u really rich when a cop's house on Long Island trades for $3mm when he bought it for $200k in 1990? So it's an asset bubble keep up with the joneses game. Not a get an education get higher paying job game. W81's mama made more home squatting than the entrepreneurs selling out at $50mm. Fk she don't even gotta pay cap gains on $500k. Hilarious.

>Flmaozzz. 1990 to 2013. The greatest real estate based credit bubble

23 year bubble?

67, where on the bubble scale do your 67 condos sit?: http://streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/35745-well-well-w67-says-he-owns-67-condos