Curbed Avoiding the Bad News

It's just you Eddie.

curbed is mostly funded by real estate developers. no reason they'll diverge from the party line.

eah, still think posting ever 3 minutes will keep your queens condo from being hit by the crash?

The link constantly to market reports and have an almost weekly PriceChopper. Where is the avoidance?
They never censor comments; many of them are very down on NY real estate. Just because it is not Streeteast which allows anyone to start a thread does not make it biased.

My Queens condo? Uh, yeah...Eddie, thats what I own and think.
What is your motivation for posting relentlessly. And even on the weekends.

I would like to be around to see Eddie curse like a crazy maniac when prices in NYC don't crash and his rent keeps going up and up . . .

Hey, LIC, you asked for where you said NYC prices won't crash... well, there you go... one more time.
;-)

BTW, rents are *also* down...

> What is your motivation for posting relentlessly.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. For a guy who doesn't care about the market, is insulated, and it above it all, you SURE spend a lot of time posting.

on the weekdays I do, thats very true. it's fun. when did i say/imply i was above it all? before the discussion became totally focused on the "bull" vs "bear" debate i often posted about real estate failures i had and plans for future investing.

> when did i say/imply i was above it all?

Uh, right here...

"My favourite part of this is that the "bears" spent their Sunday romping around on anon. boards celebrating bad market news. Maybe the "bulls" were so quiet because we were enjoying our families and money in our vacation homes. But, glad you guys had a nice time. A bit sad. But not entirely suprising."

And that was the entire post. No facts, no observations, no relevant opinions on the market. Maybe some day way back when you used to post useful info, but I don't think you can claim that anymore...

Ok, Eddie, let's take this slowly. Saying prices won't "crash" is not the same as saying prices will never "decrease." Try to bone up on basic vocabulary. Thanks.

Eddie, you are a stupid steve. At least whwn he twisted facts and posts there was a certain flair. And it was well written. I don't think the fact that I don't rejoice over people losing money means I think I am above it all.

You're not posting facts, per se, either. You're compiling info and projecting a future outcome.

LICComment "I would like to be around to see Eddie curse like a crazy maniac when prices in NYC don't crash and his rent keeps going up and up . . ."

But you won't because prices will collapse just like they have everywhere, and rents are falling.

You may find it emotionally pleasing to call me a bitter old man, but bitter old men remember stagflation, hour-long gas lines, Black Monday, the savings and loan collapse, the near collapse of Bank of America (where that bitter old man worked at the time), the bankruptcy of SeaFirst and Continental Illinois (do you know what they were, where they are today?), the dot.com disaster, and many other ups and downs of the business cycle.

In other words, experience has shown us just as there is an upside, there is a downside. Real estate is a cyclical venture - look at the charts. Prices are tied to income and leverage. Period. Owner-occupied residential real estate is not an "investment"; it pays no yield or dividend, increases in price very slowly over time, always reverts to the mean.

It is a capitalized expense. Period. It has never in the history of humankind seen such an explosion in price increases in such a short time frame.

Look at the charts, it has nowhere to go but back to the mean.

LICC, if you think this bubble is self-sustainable, you're deluding yourself. And what will fall fastest in value are marginal neighborhoods, such as Prime Long Island City, whatever the hell that is.

Do you think gas will go back to its average price?

Eah - Come on. I don't have a degree in economics or market theory, but I know that is an apples to oranges question. Is real estate a consumable commodity? Once you buy an apartment do you then promptly destroy it and prevent anyone else ever again from getting usefulness out of it? Are you and a tut-tut driver in Shanzen both competing for that park avenue apartment? What is the current estimated real estate reserves for manhattan (1000 more apartments, 10,000 more). Have we hit "peak Apartment" yet.

Challenging doom and gloom scenarios are a valid pastime. Calling out Steve on a theory is also valid. But that argument is just plain silly.

"Are you and a tut-tut driver in Shanzen both competing for that park avenue apartment?"

But I thought Manhattan was an international market with foreign buyers who will make sure that the property values here will never go down, and so on.

I was making a vague comparison. We need oil, so it will remain high. If people need housing on an island prices might not crash. If we need an iPhone the price will remain high. No one knows what will happen. The fact that you have a degree in market theory means essentially nothing. Most of the agreed upon market experts are scratching their heads. Housing like oil is an essential need; whether you rent or own.

> If people need housing on an island prices might not crash

If those people have a *lot* less money it will.

Not to mention, nobody "needs" housing on Manhattan anymore. You work downtown, Brooklyn is close. Midtown, Queens is close. And everywhere 'aint too far from Jersey.

White kids with decent jobs will live in 5x the number of places that the same kids would have lived 15 years ago. The "island" is expanding greatly (not to mention all the neighborhoods in manhattan that they now inhabit that they never would have walked through 10 years ago).

> Housing like oil is an essential need; whether you rent or own.

With that logic, we would have never had a housing crisis before. But we have. And we clearly have a national one.

And, the oil bubble is also based on speculation... just like the housing market. But, unlike oil, housing has no oligopoly. Millions of people in this country would love to sell you their house.

"If people need housing on an island prices might not crash"

Prices in Japan crashed. Prices on Palm Beach are down 10%. Prices on Miami Beach crashed. Prices in England are crashing as we speak.

Do you know what all the above places have in common? THEY ARE ALL ISLANDS!

On the high end perhaps. There is a difference between prices dropping a bit and a crash. The laid off banker might not buy in CPW but a scaled down apartment. Is that not possible? Asking for 5 million and getting 3 million still offers a lot of options.

> Housing like oil is an essential need; whether you rent or own.

With that logic, we would have never had a housing crisis before. But we have. And we clearly have a national one.

Exactly. We already discussed irrrational behaviour. Markets overshoot all the time. They don't always have to crash back. And often when they do it is very short term and they settle in the middle.
Currently I work in a biotech bubble. It will surely crash too, but never disappear.

When will people learn once and for all that available land does not affect housing prices? Shiller proved it over 350 years in Amsterdam, which is more constrained for land than Manhattan, especially 350 years ago, where he traced the price of a single home back that far.

You have a supply curve and a demand curve. Both are elastic. Build $1 billion dollar apartments on Manhattan and no on will buy them. Build $50,000 apartments on Manhattan and everyone will want one.

Somewhere between the two, the twain shall meet. And that somewhere is - long-term - precisely where the number of units offered for sale equals the number of units desired at a particular price. That desire at a particular price takes into account incomes and leverage (assuming no shift in the curve).

K?

"The laid off banker might not buy in CPW but a scaled down apartment."

If they are out of a job, they are going to buy NOTHING because no lender will give anyone without a job a loan, nor will they be approved by a co-op baord.

There goes steve again with his genius theory that supply is no factor whatsoever in price.

alpine, do you have any idea the amount of money most bankers have saved? lets not get ridiculous. yes, some are over leveraged but the last years have been exceptional. and there is always other jobs to be had. they're not steel workers in detroit.

Please read - I don't have a degree in market theory. That was the point, that me and my NO DEGREE could figure out that there is a fundamental difference between Oil and Housing.

Also - I am sure that smarter people WITH DEGREES (but not me since I don't have a degree in market theory), could explain why the price of oil and the price of housing are not the same type of "need". Especially since I am sure no one really "needs" to live on Manhattan Island in the same way that people need heating oil. But sure, i agree that demand for certain things makes prices high. However, that is not always the case, if it were, apple could probably sell Iphones for $1,000 a piece. Demand, when not backed by the ability to afford it, results in no one getting what they want.

Of course they are not the same type of need. But they are both a need. And you NEED to live in/near Manhattan if you work here. Or you MUST pay the taxes and commuting cost to live somewhere else. If by the time you factor in a car payment, gas, parking, car insurance, what it costs to heat you McMansion and insane property taxes..maybe you realise you NEED to live in NYC and what was previously unaffordable suddenly becomes shitty reality.

> alpine, do you have any idea the amount of money most bankers have saved?

I do. About 25% of my graduating class went to Wall Street bulge bracket.
Short answer is... not much, especially relative to incomes.

There is a spending arms race, with gadgets, apartments, and the like. The majority buy their apartments based on what they could afford (well, what the bank says they can afford), not what they need. The other crashes also came after good years. On Wall Street, it doesn't mean much.

> and there is always other jobs to be had.

"other jobs" generally means other banks. When those are toast, there really aren't "other jobs" for them to consider. What, you think they're going to go be brand managers at kraft? Go into dotcom?

Its not like ibankers have translatable skills...

Oh man, and how could I forgot... you realize that at a lot of the banks, 75% of bonus was paid in STOCK.

So, when you lose your job/income, having a bunch of UBS/Bear/Lehman/Morgan stock you can't sell for 3 years isn't going to help a lot. It isn't cash they got.

You can't really buy an apartment with declining stock you can't sell.

Its not like ibankers have translatable skills...

oh god, what ARE you going on about? you are right now arguing with a former ibanker who moved industry. i suspect there are a few others on the boards right now. think what it takes to get selected by a top ibank. then think about the resumes flooding the market. think the guy from SUNY will have a chance against the mba from wharton?

EddieWilson - maybe people at curbed actually believe there are some opportunities to make money in RE.

This board seems to be reserved for those who are completely paralized by fear and cannot even begin to try to figure out how one could make money in a RE market with histroic softness, less compettion, and more units on the market.

The guy from SUNY has about the exact same chance as the guy from a top ibank at getting a job that doesn't exist.

> you are right now arguing with a former ibanker who moved industry.
so are you, genius. and I stand by my words.

> think what it takes to get selected by a top ibank.

ironic, because in the hiring binges in the last few years, quite a few bulge bracket banks took SUNY folk...

The standards go up and down every year, of course. But when you have a binge and purge, there are a lot of SUNY types walking the streets.

> then think about the resumes flooding the market. think the guy from SUNY
> will have a chance against the mba from wharton?

You sort of said it right there. At times when resumes are "flooding the market" - your words - it don't really matter. An ivy degree won't get you far when you're going up against other ivy leaguers who actually have experience in the space you're trying to get into.

Interesting way to interpret the post. I am sure you know I meant former ibankers will flood into management consulting and all other careers. You're also forgetting that boomers are retiring at a nice clip. So, educated workforce is in fairly good shape. There is always emerging markets. Money can always be made.

I dont ever recall a suny grad working in a top bank. seriously. Maybe if he then went on to harvard to had some exceptional advanced degree in maths..but never just a straight up state school degree.

or former ibankers could be forced to start thier own companies now and essentially we could be in the building process for an explosion of new banks, dot coms, jobs, industries, etc.

When times are tough people worl harder and more creatively. Expect to see the results from these times in the next few years. The NYC economy and industries will be reinvented.

this is why i can say with certainty that EddieWilson is not a wealthy man. he would not be so limited/negative in his thinking if he truly was self made.

"supply is no factor whatsoever in price."

Per se it's not. Shiller proved it over 350 years. For supply to be a factor per se, you'd need to have a monopoly.

And even then you're constrained.

An unlimited supply at an infinite price will have zero demand. Your "theory" requires people to pay amounts they can't afford, just because there's not a lot of something. Can't happen. There is a physical limit to what people can afford, remember? Ask whatever price you want.

There was a limited supply of real estate in Manhattan between 1983 and 1993. Prices fell 20% to 50% in nominal terms. Just another fact.

People are not limited to living in Manhattan, or even in a nice neighborhood in Manhattan. They can live anywhere, and millions have voted with their feet in the past. It took 50 years to recover Manhattan's population in 1960. Remember?

You have increasing inventories precisely because no one can afford at the price levels being offered. Ergo, barring new liquidity (not) or rising incomes (not), prices can do only one thing, regardless of a relatively finite supply.

> You're also forgetting that boomers are retiring at a nice clip.

And their kids are entering the work force at new highs. It was literally last year that we peaked in 18 year olds. So, we're just a few years off the peak in college grads.

> Money can always be made.

Sure, money is always made, through recessions and housing crashes. But that doesn't mean you don't have recessions and housing crashes. 10% employment means 90% employment, but thats still a LOT of people out of work.

> I am sure you know I meant former ibankers will flood into managemen
> consulting and all other careers.

Yes, I do. In good years, McKinsey will take 3rd tier schools and take bankers. In bad years, theyre not gonna take much of anyone. And, to be honest, McKinsey has an anti-MBA bent all things considered. Its their largest pool, but they're MUCH more likely to take the same person with an "interesting" degree than another Harvard MBA (which they have tons of). I have friends who didn't have a shot as in undergrad, and probably not if they got their MBAs. But they get some PhD in something useless, and McKinsey loves 'em. But, short story, the consulting firms are having their troubles as well.

> or former ibankers could be forced to start thier own companies now and essentially
> we could be in the building process for an explosion of new banks, dot coms, jobs, industries, etc.

Wishful thinking, but M&A experience (in particular, 3 years as an analyst running EBITDA models) does not give you a whole lof the skills you need to start a company. There were tons of bankers in the dotcom era jumping over and trying, but guess how well THAT one turned out.

> When times are tough people worl harder and more creatively. Expect to see the
> results from these times in the next few years. The NYC economy and industries
> will be reinvented

I don't disagree, but that sort of makes the point. Yes, there will be "creative destruction" as its known in economics departments. But that includes the DESTRUCTION part. Sure, some folks will use this as an oopportunity to try new things.

But that doesn't mean anything other than a lot of people out of work, and a lot of people making a lot less money.

Plus, who says you have to stay in NYC to be creative? We lead the nation BY FAR in folks who develop patents and then build the company elsewhere.

the above is why Steve lives in NY. He renst in NYC because he cant find a good deal in the RE market with the highest inventory in 20 years and more motivated seelers than there has been in a decade. But Steve can you how not to spend your money.

If you listen to Steve's advice you too can be a 50 year old, single renter, who makes his "living" in trading crap brazilian equities. Steve is a model of success. Please listen to him

> this is why i can say with certainty that EddieWilson is not a wealthy man. he would not be so
> limited/negative in his thinking if he truly was self made.

The richest folks I know are absolutely among the most negative right now.

And, I don't need you to think I'm rich....

> He renst in NYC because he cant find a good deal in the RE market with the highest inventory in 20
> years and more motivated seelers than there has been in a decade

Even as a freshman, we were taught... "A bargain about to become a bigger bargain is no bargain at all...."

>If you listen to Steve's advice you too can be a 50 year old, single renter,<

So...Steve's theories, in addition to making you a renter, also make you single. Forget real estate Steve, you should go into Marriage counseling!

Seriously, again with the personal attacks....

Eddie, the 18 yr olds have no experience or education. Stop making fooloish comebacks. Take time to be reasoned and brief. You can believe that the world economy is going to sink into a Depression and that we should all locate our canned goods and guns but don't retrofit reality around your negativity.

Memnonhi - it's not that Steve is a renter. It is being 50 and a renter. That is sad. Most peasants seem to own their land by that age. That's not a personal attack on Steve...it's kind of like being 30 and living at home. Some things are just odd. And taking real estate advice from a 50 yr old renter is one of those things.

Steve used to own in the city - so he says. He is now timing the market which is a sound financial strategy.

"Eddie, the 18 yr olds have no experience or education. Stop making fooloish comebacks. Take time to be reasoned and brief.

Eah, READ THE POST before you comment. Right after I mentioned the 18 year olds piece, the NEXT SENTENCE says "So, we're just a few years off the peak in college grads."

Apparenly, you can't handle the brief, you need it spelled out (twice) for you. In terms of "boomers leaving the economy" is good for keeping the workforce down, its just not correct... its being met with their kids entering the work force in higher numbers than its been in years. The peak will probably be a few years from now, but we're *already* in a point of major increase. Boomer kids have been in the workforce for years now, and they're numbers are steadily increasing.

"You can believe that the world economy is going to sink into a Depression and that we should all locate our canned goods and guns but don't retrofit reality around your negativity."

Again, you should actually read the posts. I never called for a depression or anarchy. Just the fact that we're going to go through a few years of trouble, so better to just rip off the band aid and work on a fix, instead of just rationalizing.

Long term, the trend of more youngins is good... someone will have to pay for boomer social security. But short term, we have a lot of pain to go through to assimilate all of the changes.

"So, we're just a few years off the peak in college grads."

uh, yeah..four years then about another four if they get a masters and then a few more whilst they get experience. so, we're many more than few years. plenty to absorb well educated, well connected bankers. and in this economy the emerging graduates will be hit hard.

Just the fact that we're going to go through a few years of trouble, so better to just rip off the band aid and work on a fix, instead of just rationalizing.

OK--so why don't you blog on seeking alpha? this is a real estate site. yes, real estate is related to the world economy but, really, don't you think at this point you're overplaying the hand a bit?

> uh, yeah..four years then about another four if they get a
> masters and then a few more whilst they get experience

You missed the point again. Its not the peak thats the only thing to worry about it, we've had thea big run of boomer kids in the workforce for a good 10 years now. The absolute peak might be a couple years away, but we're already well in it. And, if your only hope is that they'll all get masters so they don't enter the workforce... well, the majority of folks don't, even in bad years.

Eah - I see what you are trying to say, but shutting down an argument on the basis that someone is 30 and lives with their parents IS a personal attack (unless the argument is about living with your parents).

It isn't that I mind the personal attacks, but in this forum they are the harbinger of pointless back and forth arguments about "bitter renters" and "underwater owners" and other such nonsense.

Memnonhi - not sure I agree. Steve makes large claims and did miss the NYC real estate boom. But claims to have made money in Miami. So his authority on a NYC real estate board seems odd when he is fairly long in the tooth and apparently has a significant salary. In addition, he often has to let us know all sorts of personal details about his life...so sometimes we feel entitled.

Eddie, personally I could care less if they enter the workforce. Anyone who can make a success of themselves deserves it. I have no issues with Darwinism.

I have just officially "ignored" petrfitz. His claims have become too bizarre:

1) Singer/actress/songwriter/trust fund/beauty queen wife
2) Celine Dion's next door neighbor
3) 4000 sq. ft. home somewhere in Manhattan with a view of the Hanging Gardens of Babylon or something
4) $10 million in Lower-East Side properties with renters banging on his door to rent
5) Made his money in telecommunications
6) No - owns his own television production company
7) Knows everybody on Alpine New Jersey but "Main Street" escapes his short-term memory
8) Posts under multiple names but not quite bright enough to realize that he's singing the same song on each
9) His most detailed post is, "You can make money in the real estate market today"
10) Despite all these interests, spends all day long posting on streeteasy.

So no, sorry, petrfitz is now ignored, just like eah. I say bring back spunky.

Something is amiss.

You forgot the chaffeur driven Prius, steve. That is what led me to call BS on him.

Wait - I forgot one! He has a chauffeur-driving Prius.

Thats great that you care/don't care/are writing a book about it, but that was the exact point you responded to. This economy isn't absorbing the job losses (in fact, other sectors are losing jobs overall). And there aren't enough folks leaving the workforce to offset this.

If you don't care about it, don't respond to it. If you do respond to it, don't come back with "I could care less" when your comments are shown to be wrong.

alpine, we overlapped!

I guess bears just hit "ignore" once they're sufficiently challenged.
Though, petrfitz...your experience will be better without draining energy going back and forth with steve.

10) Despite all these interests, spends all day long posting on streeteasy.

LOL - kinda like the rest of us?

And, if your only hope is that they'll all get masters so they don't enter the workforce... well, the majority of folks don't, even in bad years.

eddie, we discussed it broadly in relationship to laid off bankers right now. then you somehow made it about me. i was clarifying. i am outside the age range of competing with them. hence why i don't care what they do in a few years.

> eddie, we discussed it broadly in relationship to laid off bankers right now.

And the majority of hiring is analysts (21-22) and fresh MBAs with 2-3 years experience prior to school(25-26).

> i am outside the age range of competing with them.

And we were never talking about you and your job prospects. Just the prospects of bankers overall as participants in the RE market, and this influence on the trends.

Even your first post was about bankers overall... and how much they have saved.

> I dont ever recall a suny grad working in a top bank. seriously.

sorry, i forgot to hit this one earlier. This might be because you've been off the street in a while. I saw a few in my day, and I've *definitely* seen 'em lately. And like Fordham MBAs. Each time Wall Street goes more bonkers, they lower their hiring standards. Especially when the top MBAs have been looking for hedge for years. Ibanking has been a 2nd tier job for years out of harvard (probably going back to when consulting took over in the late 90s, then dotcom)...

sorry, i forgot to hit this one earlier

you mean you forgot to google and reasearch and copy and past this one earlier?

you know its bad when you're arguing with a 50 yr old renter, a dude from NJ and a loser from Brooklyn.

Steve you described me accruately for the most part but you sound really jealous. Why is it hard for you to beleive that someone else is success?

Did you know that Alpine NJ is heavily populated by telecom execs who become millionaires from their AT&T buyouts? Did I just make that up? Is that common knowledge?

Do you know any differently?>

Hmm - how would a person like myself who claims to have made money in technology have inisde information on other people who made money on technology?

Yes very suspicious of me. But we should trust an interpreter from Fire Island who doesnt own any RE in NYC as an ecxpert in NYC Real estate.

Not to get caught up in this nonsense, but petrfitz "is success"! Personified!

Alpine is dominated by Wall St. people, and celebrities. P. Diddy, Chris Rock, Lil' Kim, Wesley Snipes, Jay Z, and Stevie Wonder all live in Alpine.

Now STFU perfitz since you don't know sh!t about Alpine.

There goes the neighbourhood! lolololol

> you know its bad when you're arguing with a 50 yr old renter,
> a dude from NJ and a loser from Brooklyn.

You know the market is absolutely fucked when all the bulls have to say, they learned in 3rd grade.

admit it, eddie, that is a sad lineup.
come on.
for a NYC real estate board.
that's pretty grim.

when you want hard market data and facts - perhaps gossipy blogs are not the best resource. take a look at the numbers - particularly price reductions, and sales history. streeteasy offers lots of that stuff. nyc is a different market than the rest of the country because it appeals to the world economy. not too many foreign buyers looking in edgwater nj or gainsville flordia. nyc is a unique place. if the americans cant afford it, the foreigners will buy it.

herman a - http://promediacorp.com/herman/index.htm

what, because Zeckendorf is normally posting on these things?

RE boards are generally the spot of folks praying for things to go down, or those praying for them not to crash. Anybody generally comfortable isn't here...

I guess the lineup on this forum sucks because nobody wants to talk about Manhattan real estate anymore. I wonder why...

Then get off the board...

"nyc is a different market than the rest of the country"

Yes, because the laws of supply and demand don't apply here.

"because it appeals to the world economy."

Unlike London or Madrid or Los Angeles or Miami.

"not too many foreign buyers looking in edgwater nj or gainsville flordia."

Or in London or Madrid or Los Angeles or Miami."

"nyc is a unique place."

Yes, because unlike London or Madrid or Los Angeles or Miami, the laws of supply and demand don't apply here.

"if the americans cant afford it, the foreigners will buy it."

And get their pieds-a-terre that co-ops won't let them have, and get their green cards to use them, or their foreign currency mortgage that they can't hedge.

Give me a break - stop drinking the Kool-Aide.

BREAKING NEWS:

Governor Patterson has just repealed the laws of supply and demand in NY state! Prices will now go up forever and forever! YEAH!

alpine, as eddie would say: You know the market is absolutely fucked when all the bears have to say, they learned in 3rd grade.

Sorry, I have Been gone most of the day. I know how much you missed me. I have to tell you that I just finished reading the thread and it was long and tough. I'm wiped. Well I see, I have not missed much and everyone still has their minds made up. Actually I was about to dive right in but I just don't seem to have the energy right now. I'm sure I will talk to you guys/gals later and remember we're all New Yorkers, except you NJ people. I have no idea what you people are. Just kidding. See you later, I need a nap.

"...you sound really jealous. Why is it hard for you to beleive that someone else is success?"

petrfitz... enough with your success stories already!!! seriously, it's getting so old that even when others make sarcastic jokes about it, it's corny now.

no one is jealous. and quite frankly, no one really cares. if you want to look at the mirror the whole day and pat yourself on the back, please do so, but really, your gloating over in this board is played out.

steve, maybe nyc is different because there is more demand and less supply relative to one another here compared to other places. Another difficult concept, but I think you can figure it out after a while.

LICC..watch it...if you disagree with Steve you will endup on his ignore list...

Get some sleep dco, feel better buddy.

eah
On the high end perhaps. There is a difference between prices dropping a bit and a crash. The laid off banker might not buy in CPW but a scaled down apartment. Is that not possible? Asking for 5 million and getting 3 million still offers a lot of options.

> Housing like oil is an essential need; whether you rent or own.

Why would the banker buy anyway? Isn't he living in a condo right now? If he has to scale down that does not create demand. At the most it's a wash. Sell one to buy one. And if he is under pressure to sell then there is going to be price erosion regardless of a declining market. Add to that the current market where we are seeing increased inventory and DOM. The writing is on the wall.

And housing is not like oil. You put oil in your car and the car in the garage and the garage is in the house. Just some convoluted logic to mirror yours!

"steve, maybe nyc is different because there is more demand and less supply relative to one another here compared to other places. Another difficult concept, but I think you can figure it out after a while."

The problem with that view in basic economics is that that was *already* factored into the price. Even if NYC falls by 30%, it is *still* going to be factored into the price relative to other cities. We already knew supply was what it was. We also knew demand was high. But that was already put in prices for YEARS.

Say NYC prices doubled tomorrow. And then went up 10x. Even if your assumption is true - and I'm not disagreeing - you can ABSOLUTELY get to a point where its been factored in and more. Even if it ends up being 90% true, that still means a decline is in order.

So, that could all be true, but it doesn't mean that a major correction isn't warranted.

Alpine - I also hear that Jim Morrison, Bruce Lee and the Easter Bunny also live in Alpine, NJ. I am really surprised that this suburb paradise just across the river from Yonkers is not called "the Better Hollywood"

You are laughable in thinking that any suburb is holding value these days.

In any case MMAfia, it's "envious," not "jealous," neither of which could anybody be.

"maybe nyc is different because there is more demand and less supply relative to one another here"

What? That makes absolutely no sense. Are you saying that the supply and demand curve have a different shape here than elsewhere? No question about it. And as long as incomes remain high and leverage remains high, prices will remain high. That is what has made Manhattan expensive: a lot of income and a lot of money with an inventory that was relatively fixed in the short-term.

However, I believe we have seen two marked shift: downward for the demand curve due to (again) falling incomes and decreasing leverage, and a sharp increase in the available supply. Not the TOTAL supply which is what you seem to think matters (not), but the total supply available for sale which is the supply.

Here's the fallacy of your argument: you say that land is limited in Manhattan, which limits supply. That limits TOTAL supply, not all of which is available for sale. When you do the supply curve for automobiles, you count ONLY AUTOMOBILES AVAILABLE FOR SALE, not all the automobiles there are in the country.

That is why limited land does not matter. What matters is how many units are available to be purchased and/or rented, and how many people want them and what those how many people can afford. Can I be clearer?

At these price levels there is not enough income and leverage to allow people to buy, so inventories rise, and will continue to do so until prices fall to the point where the inventory can be absorbed. We are far from that happening.

Being an island makes absolutely, positively, 100% ZERO difference.

surdy, i asked if people thought oil prices would go back down. it was a vague question and then it took off. and we assumed the banker was buying because the article was focused on bankers who were buying.

any other question will have to wait till tomorrow.
off to home now.

Just to make it clear: "When you do the supply curve for automobiles, you count ONLY AUTOMOBILES AVAILABLE FOR SALE, not all the automobiles there are in the country" means "available to sell at a particular price."