Real-estate markets most likely to rebound

Yup. Especially since real-estate tax revenues show PRECISELY that.

LMAO.

It doesn't even mention Manhattan.

Top 5 cities most likely to rebound are listed at the bottom of the page
http://realestate.msn.com/buying/Article_Forbes.aspx?cp-documentid=12808843&GT1=35000

1. Seattle
2. San Francisco
3. Washington, D.C.
4. New York
5. Los Angeles

Yes, we can read. Can you? The survey was about COMMERCIAL real estate (not residential), and the #4 pick was THE NEW YORK MARKET (not Manhattan). The writer notes that commercial values are a leading indicator for residential prices. That's generally true. But for the moment, that's a terribly BEARISH sign for the residential side in New York, because commercial values are still sinking, and residential prices have just started to follow them down. So, even if both the survey and the writer's extrapolation to the residential market are correct, the light she sees is at the end of a very long, dark tunnel.

Oh no...when did the fall of Manhattan real estate happen...I must have been having lunch..

1818: If you weren't picking a fight, I apologize for treating you like a troll. It just seemed that you were misreading the article so egregiously that you must be doing it on purpose.

that was the post of a troll? of someone picking a fight?

ccdevi: Yes, creating a thread to distill that particular article down to "A speedy recovery is predicted for Manhattan" is troll-like behavior. The article doesn't mention Manhattan, and it doesn't say anything about the possible timing of a residential rebound, aside from saying that it would tend to follow an upturn in commercial.

Note that the highest score on the survay was just 6.15 out of 9 (Seattle). How New York coming in fourth - with an undisclosed score - translates to ""A speedy recovery is predicted for Manhattan" isn't entirely clear. And what does "speeedy" mean? Speedier than Detroit? Sure.

I don't think 1818 is a troll, though. I think 1818 accidently posted something trollish.

spell-check: "survay" s/b "survey".

funny - you don't LOOK troll-ish.....

thanks for the explanation

so 1818, you got that, no saying Manhattan when an article says "New York," West is right they may have been talking about Albany. And yeah I know you didn't specify the residential market in your post but still. Please don't do this again.

In any case, I overreacted. Read enough posts from people with an agenda, and you start seeing agendas everywhere.

Looks like West81st has been cranky lately. I don't think 1818 was that far off from what the article says. The article is discussing both commercial and residential real estate, and it projects that New York City will recover relatively faster than other cities. Why are you jumping down his throat?

Trump: Michael, I am glad you hit the velocity argument. That was going to be my next point, as the substantial decline in velocity is effectively the start of the decrease between the bid-ask gap--and, barring any crazy positive economic outlier, that no one fully anticipates the decline will be upon the fairly stable markets shortly. If the stimulus package works for the market as a whole I don't see how for New York City that can outweigh the incredible loss of jobs from banker types who went from making high-six- to lower-seven-figure salaries. Because so much of New York City compensation is bonus-based, many of these guys went from making $3 million to $0--not $3 million to $2.9 million--it will be hard for any stimulus to bail out the financially driven marketplaces.

Feder: Don't forget the "investors from abroad" who have had substantial hits in their portfolios recently. New York is unique in its historic appeal as an "investment" market. Data today show that has come to a standstill. Time will tell if that means prices need to fall, but at the very least the gap between the bid and the ask is much too large right now.

Trump: The other major factor that has stopped the money-from-abroad boost that has helped New York stay afloat longer than other markets was the low dollar. With the dollar rallying against the other major currencies, especially the pound and euro, the decision to park some capital in U.S. [real estate] is a lot less appealing than a year to 18 months ago where foreign buyers were effectively buying at a 40%-50% discount.

http://www.forbes.com/intelligentinvesting/2008/11/04/intelligent-investing-real-estate-lending-stocks-panel.html

Hey West81, get over yourself, your not that important and stop calling everyone trolls. Who the h-ll do you think you are?? Shh don't say anything you might upset West81!

steveF/LICC: I already apologized for the harsh language. Anyway, all I said was that the thread starter was misleading, which I think it is. I never called 1818 a troll. I save that for the real thing, like Rufus and SteveF.

"I never called 1818 a troll. I save that for the real thing, like Rufus and SteveF."

you know what that means to me?..nothing... and btw I thought i was on your ignore? whatever..see ya..

Hey SteveF, good to see you. I've been thinking about all the properties you're trying to sell and I'd be willing to consider paying 50% of recent comps. You in?

lol west81st, while i also think the article is hogwash, your reading comprehension skills are laughable. i also presume you didn't do so well on the pattern recognition section of the iq test.

1. Seattle
2. San Francisco
3. Washington, D.C.
4. New York
5. Los Angeles

"It doesn't even mention Manhattan. "
"#4 pick was THE NEW YORK MARKET (not Manhattan)."
lmao... yeah so seattle, sanfran, dc, la are also states

the troll with an agenda is you, get over it and enjoy the show

West81,
you are one of the most intelligent and useful posters in this site. Please don´t get aggravated by SteveF. Rufus is an idiot, but SteveF has real anger issues, probably caused by either andropause or long-time unresolved psychological problems. Most of the people here continue consulting Streeteasy BECAUSE people like you and IN SPITE people like SteveF.

Gumball: I don't think I ever interpreted "New York" as New York State. (Ccdevi mentioned Albany - facetiously, I think.)

The New York market is much bigger than Manhattan. The exact geographic definition of that market varies widely depending on context, but it's usually the whole city plus the suburbs, and sometimes even far-flung exurbs.

In some contexts - single-family homes, for example - Manhattan represents a tiny sliver of the New York market. In other contexts, like condos, Manhattan is a huge piece of that market. But in no context is "New York" synonymous with Manhattan. That's all I was saying, and I subsequently apologized for saying it rather harshly.

Mimi - thanks. SteveF doesn't bother me at all. He's a fun troll.

I read Crain's, with lots of commercial RE coverage... all I know is, lease deals are few and far in between, prices are lowering, and vacancy rates are moving steadily up. TONS of places are dumping space.

"creating a thread to distill that particular article down to "A speedy recovery is predicted for Manhattan" is troll-like behavior. The article doesn't mention Manhattan,"

What a double standard. I've read countless threads on this board misrepresenting facts to support doom and gloom. 100x more often and much and worse than what 1818 did. West81st, if you want to give people shit for posting garbage, at least be consistent about it.

I don't know, it sounds like West 81st is just pushing her agenda to get prices on the UWS down....and I hope you know I am only kidding.

I would say that it is pretty common that if the term New York is used for RE purposes they are talking about the NYC metro area (NYC, Westchester, Long Island and parts of Jersey). They usually are very clear about putting New York State or New York City to differentiate, so in this article I took that as meaning the NYC metro area.

> I've read countless threads on this board misrepresenting facts to support doom and gloom

Difference is, they seem to be correct...

;-)

Down under 8k, pretty doom-y to me...

"What a double standard. I've read countless threads on this board misrepresenting facts to support doom and gloom. 100x more often and much and worse than what 1818 did. West81st, if you want to give people shit for posting garbage, at least be consistent about it."

Absolutely right. West81 I too have appreciated your reports about the UWS and in general but more and more you are showing your own agenda or bias. I can't believe you continue to focus on the difference bw a reference to New York and a poster saying Manhattan.

Well, I hope 1818 will accept my apology... not that he/she should really care what I think or post.

ccdevi/JuiceMan: Point taken. Bearsh!t and bullsh!t smell equally bad.

mimi you are one of the most intelligent and useful posters in this site. Please don´t get aggravated by SteveF. Rufus is an idiot, but SteveF has real anger issues, probably caused by either andropause or long-time unresolved psychological problems. Most of the people here continue consulting Streeteasy BECAUSE people like you and IN SPITE people like SteveF.

mimi, you know you want me..:)

but seriously, have you bears bought yet?? obviously not, as you continue expressing your hopes for price decreases. This real estate stuff isn't brain surgery as stvejhx and west81st would like you to believe. As they are such sophisticates with their verbatim and quick wit...not..as Warren Buffet says buying stocks is not brain surgery it's common sense. When supply > demand = bear market....when demand > supply = bull market. Right now we have 2+ years of pent up demand waiting to swoop in on the modest(less than 3Q 2006) inventory. What does that tell you?? it tells you that prices have increased 3Q yoy even in this tough economic time. Watch what happens early next year when Doug Heddings of True Gotham will be shouting "who let loose the tsunami of buyers!" Speaking of tsunamis....
look at this link...that unbelievable, totally amazing amount of inventory caused prices to drop 35% in the crime ridden, recession early 90's....inventory is my main concern and with new development being squashed by this credit crunch, supply should contract significantly in 2009.

http://www.millersamuel.com/charts/gallery-view.php?ViewNode=1132752161iuzhS&Record=6

doesn't that graph look like a tsunami...yes, a tsunami of inventory, not the pathetic increases we have now.