"Yet New York’s housing prices are doing remarkably well relative to elsewhere in America"

Despite Wall Street’s suffering, the New York area’s unemployment rate, 5.6 percent in the latest figures, is lower than that in many other major cities. The comparable unemployment rate for Los Angeles is 8.2 percent. ****The comparable number for Chicago is 6.4 percent.*****

Are you listening Rufus?

I already posted my response to this wildly optimistic article on the thread, "NYC-Resilient City"

If this had been a negative article, there would have been at least 7 respnses to this thread by now. Very sad.

alpine you are so right....if this had been a negative article than our bear friends would have been all over it....patting themselves on the back...but since it focuses on the continuing resiliency of Manhattan real estate they look away.
Doesn't it feel like the fear is going away? Look at the Ted spread down to 130 Bps from 450 from a couple of months ago and approaching normal credit times of 50-60 Bps. I think most people are sensing that 2009 will be a prosperous year.

you must be young, http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/7250-nyc-resilient-city

steveF, you are delusional. Almost every economist is predicting that 2009 will be a very bad year.

If this article is accurate, and I hope it is as housing prices doing well generally means new yorkers are doing well. However, i think all other indicators are pointing in the direction that the worst is unfortunately yet to come. Jobs that were lost and banks that collapsed simply aren't going to reappear overnight to save the day.

too busy making funnies to get here... but here I iz. In a war... the capital is the last to capitulate... and I believe NYC was the center of "leverage/bubble" creation machine....

Like I said... unwinding of the greatest asset bubble in the last 400 yrs at 10x warp speed... gonna be painful... don't care what the Ted spread is.. .the damage is done... and disintermediation/large structural shift in RE built over this bubble (builders, mortgage bankers, borkers, flippers etc) needs to get undone. Society as a whole needs to re-deploy these assets... and it's not gonna happen overnite... jobs permanently gone (signaling in econ parlance) agents (people) need to re-train (towards mariachi and hamburger flippers).

Very similar to the loss of manufacturing in US, but that happened over 40 yrs... this needs to get done in 10, plus it is disproportionately affecting the white collar workers... i.e. the bloggers on SE...

Happy New Year... tiny bubbles.... tiny bubbles....

steveF, you are delusional. Almost every economist is predicting that 2009 will be a very bad year

okay so than it will be a bad year...yes everyone saying it will make it happen, yes that's how it works, ohh man, sigh, the ignorance is mind boggling...btw, are you that Chicago nut rufus or another rufus?

"Today’s Case-Shiller housing price figures indicate that New York City’s prices dropped 7.5 percent in the last year"

If that is his premise, it is entirely wrong. Very little of the index includes New York City, as the index includes only single-family houses, and those are few and far between in the 5 boroughs.

Ergo, his conclusion is entirely wrong.

I think you're talking way too early. Let's see by the end of 2009, shall we? Didn't people just stop buying by mid-October? We haven't seen the numbers for the last quarter yet. People are still signing contracts like crazy this summer, and now they want out.

"The tailing off in November and December merely reflects the fact that there are far fewer contracts being signed in the first place."

http://nymag.com/realestate/realestatecolumn/53160/?mid=streeteasy

People don't have the urgency anymore to sign on the dotted line as if they're going to be priced out forever. You don't want to lower your price? Fine, whatever! Keep it, and I'll keep my money. Who wants to get duped esp when the scam is out?

Funny, before today, stevejhx used the Case-Shiller Report as his sole source of data.

Today, the guy is wrong? WTF? Is nothing sacred?
stevejhx claims he is just wrong. Guess he ran out of excuses, and from his tone and postings, is depressed.

Exaggeration of the year: " ...and I believe NYC was the center of "leverage/bubble" creation machine.... (posted by w67thstreet)

Ever heard of Miami? Phoenix? Las Vegas? Orlando? Port Charlotte, Florida? These were the epicenters of the bubble creation, and they have been paying for it for 3 years now. Port Charlotte, Florida is the epicenter for bubble creation. The entire economy was based on housing runups. NYC has a diverse economic background that is not entirely related on housing. Or finance. Last time I looked, people still have jobs here and the economy is still moving, although not as healthy as before. It is still alive.

oldbuyers, NYC may have other jobs, but finance was the city's lifeblood. Most of its revenues came from the financial sector. With this gone, the city is in for a dark period.

"stevejhx used the Case-Shiller Report as his sole source of data."

Find one instance, oldbuyers, before making absurd statements. I've never said such a thing.

"These were the epicenters of the bubble creation"

No. It was created here, and in Calabasas, California.

rufus, MSG, trans fat, and hydrogenated oil were the lifeblood of Chicago. Now that it's banned, what is Chicago going to do?
as for quoting Case Shiller...you told me to find 1 example how you quoted him. Done. And only 2 weeks ago. You called it "more accurate". What do you think now?
stevejhx
about 2 weeks ago
ignore this person
report abuse "peak to current loss in value -25.23%"

Peak to September 2008 for Miami under Case-Shiller is -38%. Prices have fallen more precipitously since September 2008. Case-Shiller is more accurate than "median values" because it corrects for the change in inventory mix.

If you want to see real price falls, go here:

http://buybeach.com/resi/condo_mls_reo.htm

And count the number of apartments.

"Put your money in the stock market and see the money lose 45% value in 3 months with nothing tangible to show for it?"

"Tangible to show for it"?

Stock markets are volatile, they recover far more quickly than real estate. Gee, up 20% from the bottom a month ago. Pick your start and stop dates, you'll get whatever result you want.

"based on fictitious numbers that have no bearing on reality."

I publish my sources. Where are yours? Where is that apartment in Manhattan that you can buy today and cover your payments in an arm's-length transaction?

Doesn't exist.

I don't publish on molecular biology websites, either.

"then ran away."

Actually, I was on the phone to a friend in California, discussing the real estate market.

w67 is correct.

and here's another example:

stevejhx
about 2 weeks ago
ignore this person
report abuse "if the analysis is done by steve"

It was done by Professor Shiller.

Wait! There's a "shill" in his name! He must be an impostor!

and another:

stevejhx
about 4 weeks ago
ignore this person
report abuse What Shiller says specifically is that real estate prices do not increase significantly over time, except in recent years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Shiller_IE2_Fig_2-1.png

Shiller shows that inflation-adjusted U.S. home prices increased 0.4% per year from 1890–2004, and 0.7% per year from 1940–2004.

That's it. And that's the same conclusion drawn about commercial real estate.

"does shiller say the specific condo I plan to buy today will definitely not be a good investment?"

That is a truly absurd question. He doesn't even know you.

"if not, then i'll go ahead and buy anyway."

Buy away!

"does Schiller specifically state that residential real estate in NYC is not a good long-term investment?"

Another ridiculous question.

and another of stevejhx's numerous references to Case Shiller

stevejhx
about 4 weeks ago
ignore this person
report abuse 100 years of Commercial Real Estate prices in Manhattan

By William C. Wheaton, Department of Economics, Center for Real Estate
MIT, and Mark S. Baranski, Cessarina Templeton, MIT Center for Real Estate

ABSTRACT
This paper is able to put together a data base of 86 repeat sales transactions for office properties in lower and mid town Manhattan spanning the years from 1899 through 1999.

Using this limited data base, decade-interval changes in real property prices are estimated - with varying degrees of precision. Our conclusions are two. First, adjusting for inflation, commercial office property values are 30% lower in 1999 than they were in
1899. Secondly, within any decade values often rise and fall by 20-50% in real terms.

With these results, the long term appreciation in commercial property is seen to be no greater than inflation and to experience considerable decadal risk.

web.mit.edu/CRE/research/papers/WP90wheatonbaranski.pdf

Commercial real estate includes rental apartment buildings.

Not coincidentally, that is EXACTLY what Shiller of Case-Shiller says about owner-occupied residential real estate:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9806E6DB1631F936A35750C0A9609C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=4

stevejhx really used to love this guy:

stevejhx
about 4 weeks ago
ignore this person
report abuse "If Schiller doesn't say specifically that residential RE in NYC is not a good long-term investment than what's the point of the post?"

Maybe you'd like the question to be more specific: what does Shiller think of apartment 3D on the corner of Park Avenue South and 22nd Street?

That's why your question is ridiculous.

The p/e ratios are there. Draw your own conclusion.

"What if the ratio for NYC is 16 or 17? Then that changes things significantly, since we were at 17.8 last year."

And what if they're 8, as they were in 1998?

oldbuyers, you are mixing apples and oranges. Not one of those posts relates to Manhattan real estate. Let's see:

#1 - Discussing Miami
#2 - Discussing real estate in general, throughout the US
#3 - Discussing Manhattan commercial real estate using a methodology similar to Case-Shiller's
#4 - Answering a stupid question from somebody else about price-to-rent ratios.

Try again. I've always said that Case-Shiller says nothing directly about Manhattan real estate, as it only includes single-family homes. I did not say that the methodology wasn't valid for Manhattan, I said the data don't include Manhattan.

Pitiful.

the data for case schiller released today is from october, which represents signings a month or two before then. so you have only to wait a bit to see what will happen. once layoffs hit full steam and severance runs out...

I stated you used Case Shiller as your sole source of data. Didn't qualify it in terms of Manhattan or any specific area.
You challenged me to name 1 instance.

I named 4. Now you want to qualify it? Nice try. By failing to admit you were wrong, your entire arguments lose credibility. If you would have just said you have used his data and opinions before that would be a different story. Your larger than life ego has once again spoken. No one likes a "know it all" who cannot even admit when he's wrong. Now I am beginning to see why you have such few friends.

I made no mention of Manhattan, or qualifying it. You challenged me to produce. And I did. And even showed how highly you thought of him. "Professor Shiller".

Honestly, I don't care how you spin it, how you try to do damage control. The real estate market is of minimal concern to my life. It's just funny how you pick and choose the sources you derive your opinions from. There is none so blind as he who won't see.

"I did not say that the methodology wasn't valid for Manhattan, I said the data don't include Manhattan."

To be fair, there ARE single-family homes in Manhattan (actually, does anyone have data on the approximate number of single-family homes here?), it's just that they are few. I'm assuming they're actually included in the data, no?

The larger point though, is that Steve is right - you can't really look at Case-Shiller to deduct exact conclusions about residential real estate in Manhattan. It can be useful to get a sense of general trends in the market, and I think (correct me if I'm wrong, Steve), that's the main use he's drawn from it here.

"steveF, you are delusional. Almost every economist is predicting that 2009 will be a very bad year"

I'm predicting that 2009 is going to be a very bad year for Chicago. And in case you don't know Rufus, finance plays a very large role in Chicago just as it does here in NYC. Don't you guys have the Chicago Merchantile Exchange? How's that doing?

"Didn't qualify it in terms of Manhattan or any specific area. You challenged me to name 1 instance."

This is what I said: "Very little of the index includes New York City, as the index includes only single-family houses, and those are few and far between in the 5 boroughs."

You've not cited anything but strings taken out of context, where I'm not discussing Manhattan. In fact, for the cases you cite, Case-Shiller is applicable.

Pitiful.

and wasn't the 4th example I provided a prime example of your numerous postings on this site. That the purchase to rent ratio is the primary factor in determining purchase price. And that was an example on Manhattan. Manhattan real estate.

I would love to debate someone like you. You convince yourself you're right no matter what truth is. You become clouded in your own "superiority".

It is obvious from reading your posts that you are not a dumb guy. Actually very intelligent. Yet, you feel the need to justify your intelligence and lifestyle to anyone who will listen. This is a classic example of what happens when you don't use your intelligence to benefit your career. You should use your intelligence and go into financial planning or investment. Not be an interpreter. People like you should not be translating other people's thoughts, business plans, etc., into a different language. You should be creating the thoughts and having other people translating those thoughts for you. Or better yet, do both. Frustration in focusing your intelligence to benefit you and your career takes its toll. Yes, you took the more conservative approach in a career field, but it obviously hasn't satisfied you or your intelligence. Trust me, I read between the lines in your posts. It's time for you to step up. Then you won't have any desire to spend hours everyday on streeteasy picking fights with people and comprimising your intelligence. It's the safe, easy way out. But in the end, you're the loser. In the end, you translate other people's thoughts. Other people's motivations.

Pitiful?
Hardly, I answered your challenge. You were wrong. You used to rely on this God all the time. Now you claim he's wrong.

You know what, keep translating. Keep being frustrated with your career. Keep being frustrated with yourself. You're so miserable, you've created an entire facade for yourself and your identity. You are the classic underachiever. If you are older than 40, it's way too late. Keep translating, spending half your day or more on streeteasy and keep thinking you know it all. That seems to have worked very well for you so far. Keep at it. Someone younger, more ambitious will have that successful, satisfying, happy life you crave for. Good luck.

why oldbuyers, thank you for your concern and your psychological diagnosis.

I'm not an interpreter.

And the fourth example is not an example of what you claim. It is an example of what Case-Shiller indicates for the entire country, not for Manhattan. That said, believe it or not, Manhattan is subject to the same economic laws as everywhere else.

Sorry, interpreter is a promotion. You're just a translator. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, but I see that was unwarranted. You don't even have to leave your apartment to translate.

I'm sure at the end of the day, translating is very fulfilling.

oldbuyers, no need for the ad-hominem stuff. People can form their own opinions about Steve, for better or worse, but that's not what this board is for.

Good luck to him.

Actually, oldbuyers, translators make far more money than interpreters. Just FYI.

And you're right - I don't even have to leave my apartment. On the flip side, I can work at the beach if I want to.

5 comments in a row. Glad I keep ignore on.

Ignoring comment by oldbuyers. Click here to reveal it.
Ignoring comment by oldbuyers. Click here to reveal it.
Ignoring comment by oldbuyers. Click here to reveal it.
Ignoring comment by oldbuyers. Click here to reveal it.
Ignoring comment by oldbuyers. Click here to reveal it.

Case Shiller is a fair index of the state of things - at least as fair and empirical as anything else out there. At the same time, comparing NYC 7.5% decrease to other cities is a fairly meaningless endeavor; each market is discrete in and of itself. While the larger economic downturn exerts a downward press, the velocity of decrease are governed by many other non-economic factors. Folks in Manhattan co-ops are likely to have excellent financials given the tough vetting process - foreclosures in Manhattan are very low, as are in choice areas in Brooklyn (ie Park slope), Queens (Forest Hills) and Bronx (Riverdale). In other words, there is not a deluge of short sales flowing into the market and driving prices down quickly. That said, it does not mean that when things are said and done, there would not be a 30% drop. All models move toward homeostasis and it would seem that a 20-40% decrease off peak is the homeostatic price nationwide. Case Shiller data just means that NYC is at the top of the trend; other cities are ahead of us and will hit the bottom first, NYC is just one the last off the building and has the privilege of witnessing the splatter to come.

stevejhx
about 8 hours ago
ignore this person
report abuse "Today’s Case-Shiller housing price figures indicate that New York City’s prices dropped 7.5 percent in the last year"

If that is his premise, it is entirely wrong. Very little of the index includes New York City, as the index includes only single-family houses, and those are few and far between in the 5 boroughs.

Ergo, his conclusion is entirely wrong.

- uh oh! disavowing Case Schiller, how unlike stevejhx

wowAdmiral = another same person who wants to post under several identities.

I've always stated my case, with data, theory, & calcs. Let others.

Thantos - Thanatos is a much better name for NY RE.

stevejhx
about 7 hours ago
ignore this person
report abuse oldbuyers, you are mixing apples and oranges. Not one of those posts relates to Manhattan real estate. Let's see:
#1 - Discussing Miami

werent you the dude who compared California and Florida real estate to NYC real estate? Doesn't this denial sound a bit strange today?

"Not one of those posts relates to Manhattan real estate."

steve, insert foot.

"uh oh! disavowing Case Schiller, how unlike stevejhx"

steve is correct. Case Schiller tells us very little about Manhattan.

wowAdmiral, Not.

I said there was a bubble in California, Florida, and Manhattan (and Las Vegas and other places, too). For different economic reasons, but a bubble nonetheless. & I stick by it.

What's your point?

"uh oh! disavowing Case Schiller, how unlike stevejhx"

Again, the same sh*t. No one "disavows" CS: what I (and others) rightly say is that it includes virtually no data from Manhattan.

& it doesn't.

But the methodology remains valid.

4 everywhere.

Thantos - Thanatos is a much better name for NY RE.
From 300 Blood.......YASOU

Thantos - Thanatos is a much better name for NY RE.
From 300 Blood.......YASOU Steve

For quite some time, "bulls" (or whatever one would like to call folks calling a market increase) pointed out case shiller as problematic, it wasn't manhattan, it wasn't condos, etc, etc. I think that was basically right, although it did certainly show metro trends.

To pull it out now, well I do think it a bit hypocritical then....

That being said, if you ARE going to pull it out, pull it out honestly. YoY calculations don't mean quite so much when this index has been declining for more than a year. The peak in the index for NYC was JUNE 2006. Yes, over 2 years. By that standard, we've been declining for quite some time.

That actually gets a 12% decline. Which means the 7.5% decline notes is undercounting by 60%.

Also, of course, this only goes through October... which is just when the panic began. The manhattan data shows large drops since then.

So, besides the switch back to case shiller as what to look at being a bit hypocritical, it is also very short sided given the data is outdated compared to manhattan stats we do have now...