More Broker Square Foot Lies From Rachel Glazer!!!

this is chump change from these guys...a rounding error...

p.s. pick the larger number!

Maybe it is Wendy who is the square footage inflator. Geesh, when the body of the text does not even agree with the text on the right side of the page. Too funny. Let's all figure it out. Is the square footage between the two numbers?

"with soaring 10 foot ceilings and approximately 1600 square feet of interior space"

Can't wait to see the floorplan. No "common space", no inside of walls, in that 1600sf, as they said "interior space" so it should be easy to verify.

I ask for the 10th time: Why isn't this considered fraud?

If in other businesses you would inflate numbers by 15-20% it would be considered fraud, yet in NYC real estate is just a "cute" game where "if you aren't smart enough to measure things yourself, you deserve to be ripped off" (paraphrasing some reponses regarding the buyer's responsibility to figure out square footage).

i think many here (myself included) absolutely believe that this is fraud. i don't understand the apologists either and share your frustration. not only is this not cute but becomes yet another turn off for buyers.

Memito: Here's the floorplan, from a previous listing: http://img.streeteasy.com/nyc/image/49/2742649.jpg
Probably around 1300 sq.ft. 1,476 is the developer's number, and incudes an allocation of common space. (Misleading, perhaps, but standard for condos.) The 1,600 number seems to have come from Darren Sukenik's previous listing for the apartment, and it's wildly inflated. Very careless of BHS to show both numbers. That looks more sloppy than fraudulent, but it's still weak.

The focus on here on the junior salesperson is strange. You have two experienced brokers to blame, Sukenik and Maitland. Under license law, they're responsible for any deception, and it makes intuitive sense to hold them accountable.

forgive me---my focus is on the fraud and the acceptance thereof. i think we can all agree that if the maintenance was deflated and the asking price lowered to sucker people in, there would be yelling and screaming. why the wink, wink on square footage?

p.s. this allocation of common space is particularly irritating because it makes no sense. which common spaces are included and how are they allocated?

I completely agree: This is fraud.

What do you think would happen if Haagen Dazs was found to under-report the calories
in their ice cream by 30%? A class action lawsuit for $ milions.

This is not rocket science. The surface area of an apt does not change with the
weather or the time of day! It IS WHAT IT IS! It is simple math. And "approximately"
should not be tolerated. Neither should excuses like "well I calculated it to be"...

I don't understand why this is not monitored more carefully, especially since the size
of an apt is one of the (if not THE) most important parameters for evaluating its worth.

And the broker, representing the seller, and in fact making a commission from the sale,
is obligated to truthfully represent the product. They should make exact measurements
on the floor plan and correctly calculate surface area using accepted standards!
(ok, they are allowed to use metric...)

There is a reason why the EXACT length of 1 meter is held somewhere outside Paris along
with other international standards of measurement...

Memito said: "I ask for the 10th time: Why isn't this considered fraud?

If in other businesses you would inflate numbers by 15-20% it would be considered fraud, yet in NYC real estate is just a "cute" game where "if you aren't smart enough to measure things yourself, you deserve to be ripped off"

Don't blame me. I have been posting since my first day on Streeteasy about the many ways that realtors, more than any other profession, seem able to thumb their noses at society and get away with practices that would have had me stripped of my professional licenses a long time ago.

It's pretty clear that Andrew Cuomo is too busy picking on ex-bankers and that the law may not do anything about this anytime soon, and it is even more clear that realtors (unlike lawyers, CPAs, CFAs, Doctors, and other professionals) will never self-regulate.

The only answer, then, is the one I have been politely advocating on these pages: VIOLENCE AGAINST REALTORS! Knock their teeth down their throat. Pour gasoline on them and light them on fire. Feed them to Travis the face-eating Chimpanzee. They deserve all of it, and more.

I too agree that this is fraudulent but unfortunately this happens everyday in New York so I guess buyers should beware to do their own measurements... Don't believe everything you read!

I saw this listing by Scott Harris and Wendy Maitland months ago when it was first listed for sale. I didn't measure it out, but my first reaction was that it didn't seem like it was 1500sf. As I remember the second bedroom, you would need to be very creative to fit a bed, a very small one at thant, in there due to a structural column that is situated in the middle of the room.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/430274-coop-255-west-98th-street-upper-west-side-new-york

The meter is a made up unit anyway, you know, it was an excuse for a couple of French guys to eat their way around the equator to measure the circumference of the earth and then divide by some number. Yeah right. I think the circumference of the earth is basically infinite and you need fractal geometry to measure it. There we go, we need a fractal measure of these apartments.

Can we get cubic numbers as well? Why can't we find out the volume of the spaces we inhabit?

Given how layouts are funny, I can see how the numbers can vary, but, these broker numbers always seems to be optimistically high.

407PAS, yes, if people are going to over-weigh square feet, you'd think they'd further and obsess over the cubic feet.

The developer gave up floors and their rental income for going with more floor-to-floor height, so subsequent owners should reap the benefit too. Let's take the choices a pre-war builder had:

12' for 12 floors = 144'
11' for 13 floors = 143'
10' for 14 floors = 140'
9' for 16 floors = 144'

We looked at an apartment in the Hayden House (11 West 81st) that had 11 foot ceilings:

This one:

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/268293-coop-11-west-81st-street-upper-west-side-new-york

No matter how many times we measured the floor space, we could not figure out a way to fit ourselves into the apartment. The small kitchen was a deal breaker. Still, a great building, and a wonderful location. We also spent some time investigating 11 foot high storage solutions, all for nothing.

So, people, bring your own tape measure when you get serious about an apartment and measure it yourself. Don't obsess to death about this number. Find a place you like and see if it works for you.

"beware to do their own measurements"

BTW, this doesn't only apply to real estate! I can't tell you how many times i've been fraudulently induced to believe a set of measurements, only later to learn it was all the result wonder-bras, thick sweaters, and girdles...

While I firmly agree that the mis-statements made by brokers regarding square footage is ridiculous at best, and criminal at worst, I encourage those on the hunt to not focus too much on square footage. While it certainly matters and is an easy way to gauge relative value, an apartment (or house) is so much more than its square footage. Usability, layout, wasted space, etc. should all factor in toward the decision on whether or not a space will work for you and your family.

Of course the meter is made up and an arbitrary unit, but it is a unit of measurement!
It doesn't fluctuate, so measurements made based on it should be accurate and not
subject to interpretation.

It appears that brokers play their part in inflating such things as layout, usability,
etc. as well! They always reference "breath-taking views," "spectacular finishes," and
"generous spaces"! The amount of exaggeration that exists in real estate (especially
in NYC) I don't think can be found in other industries. Anywhere else you could be sued
for false advertising, why not in real estate?

The ONLY reason I care about listed or stated f2 is the fact that it is a determinant in my decision on whether to visit the apt. If an apt is over stated by 400 sq ft, chances are I would have never got out of bed to see it in the first place, thats what annoys me. The broker has made a conscience decision to waste MY time, and this I will not take. I am debating a new personal policy that I have almost completed. It is a contract that the broker must sign before I visit any listings, included is an hourly fee they need to pay me while we are viewing apts. I can assure them my time is more valuable than the brokers. Additionally, I am of the rarest sort, the most sought after, a buyer with cash in hand! I think brokers should be bidding for my time.

"...with cash in hand! I think brokers should be bidding for my time."

They do, in their OTHER job: Call girl....

I'm not surprised by these lies.... have you seen the moronic posts from this imbecile?

They updated the text to say 1,476!!!!!

"Of course the meter is made up and an arbitrary unit, but it is a unit of measurement!
It doesn't fluctuate, so measurements made based on it should be accurate and not
subject to interpretation."

Sure, and the foot and yard don't fluctuate either. Please don't ask the agents to start posting in meters when they are having trouble with the square footage. I don't think most Americans have a good handle on square meters.

lol

Update on the BHS/Maitland listing for 255 West 98th #6A:

It's now with Elliman - http://www.prudentialelliman.com/Listings.aspx?ListingID=1096161

does this mean that Wendy is no longer a power broker? or, can she simply blame AR (agent liar) and retain her status as power broker?

i bet that they both lie about their bra size too

"power jugs"

So, what do you all think price per square foot should be on Park or Fifth about now?

Not including ultra-prestige buildings such as 720 and 740 Park, I think most buildings on Fifth or Park will wind down to about 1000-1100psf. More for open CP views, as always. So significantly more than the 700-800psf people are predicting for regular doorman buildings, but back in the realm of sanity.

thanks -- so the 700-800 is for cookie cutter-type apts? Some people are predicting 600, realistic?