Skip Navigation
StreetEasy Logo

Rent-controlled tenant

Started by Peterbern13
almost 3 years ago
Posts: 1
Member since: Nov 2019
Discussion about 130 West 16th Street #53
The listing description of this unit says there is a rent-controlled tenant in place which would explain the low price, but it makes no sense with the photos. Those photos are of an empty apartment. Would there be any chance in hell of not renewing the tenant's lease and then moving in afterwards in a place like this?
Response by 300_mercer
almost 3 years ago
Posts: 10570
Member since: Feb 2007

If rent controlled tenant is paying less than the maintenance and upkeep of the apartment, is not only 50 and has some young kid living with them, , why shouldn't the price be zero. Not saying that is the market but just commenting on the information disparity and wide valuation range. This type of deal is typically for professionals who understand the nuiances of rent-control as it comes to coops and have ability to do buy-outs etc.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by 300_mercer
almost 3 years ago
Posts: 10570
Member since: Feb 2007

If rent controlled tenant is paying less than the maintenance and upkeep of the apartment, is only 50 and has some young kid living with them, , why shouldn't the price be zero. Not saying that is the market but just commenting on the information disparity and wide valuation range. This type of deal is typically for professionals who understand the nuiances of rent-control as it comes to coops and have ability to do buy-outs etc.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by KeithBurkhardt
almost 3 years ago
Posts: 2986
Member since: Aug 2008

If you squint, you'll see the photos state that these pictures are from a similar unit after renovation.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by 30yrs_RE_20_in_REO
almost 3 years ago
Posts: 9877
Member since: Mar 2009

These deals made a lot more sense before the Tax Code change in 1986 disallowing passive losses. That kind of killed the market for small investors buying individual units looking for "tax write-offs." We still own a number of Rent Stabilized occupied units, but they really only make sense as a portfolio investment not individual units. The claim of potential gain is fairly ludicrous given this sale:https://streeteasy.com/building/130-west-16-street-new_york/55

For this type of transaction historically I would expect the price to be a small fraction of "as is" vacant value. It's also a LOT harder to do since ZIRP is gone and people actually care about tying up $ with zero current return.

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by 30yrs_RE_20_in_REO
almost 3 years ago
Posts: 9877
Member since: Mar 2009

This guy is the king of selling these kinds of units:
https://sites.google.com/view/markzborovsky/active-listings

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by Aaron2
almost 3 years ago
Posts: 1698
Member since: Mar 2012

Man... 7 listings with 6 representing buildings with ~ half of the units still held by the sponsor, and many units (most all of them?) regulated, i.e, no material growth potential for some time. I'm sure it makes eceonomic sense for some buyer (as noted above, probably a large portfolio), at some price, but how many years of negative return can people carry? The link through to recent sales gives some of the #s...

Ignored comment. Unhide
Response by 30yrs_RE_20_in_REO
almost 3 years ago
Posts: 9877
Member since: Mar 2009

Aaron2,
Check out this portfolio of buildings and my comments:
https://streeteasy.com/talk/discussion/47688-pet-friendly-or-not

Ignored comment. Unhide

Add Your Comment