Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Luxury condo glut in Brooklyn

From NY1:

It is not an uncommon sight in Brooklyn to see a new luxury condominium building empty, except for the security guard. There are currently hundreds on the market that remain vacant.

Then there are hundreds more being built.

"A recent study shows 5,200 luxury apartments are set to hit the market by 2010," explained David Amsden, contributing editor for New York Magazine. "So what's going to happen to those apartments is a big question on a lot of people's minds right now."

The question is especially nagging for developers who started constructing high-end condominium buildings when the real estate market was at its height. Then the economy slowed down, financing fell through, construction loans disappeared.

Some projects cannot be completed. Many that are done cannot get the buyers.


Meanwhile, Miss Heather is having "Fun with Bloomblight."

34 comments:

Anonymous said...

Let'em go into foreclosure. Dont prop them up. You want affordable housing? Let these apts sell for what people will buy them for.

Anonymous said...

What's so luxurious about these barracks/boxes?

With smaller windows and bars on them they'd make perfect prison cells!

Which only proves you can always sell an almost Manhattan address to a wannabee yuppie from out of town or one who was just priced out of their digs on the other side of the East River.

Missing Foundation said...

It used to be funny to read the Queens weeklies, and see the pictures of their owners/editors, Vicky with her hair, and Gary without his, and chuckle that these oldsters were out of touch, tired, and harmless.

But the relentless drum tumping of tweeder articles extolling the vitures of slum living (after 3 decades, dont you ever get enough) and coarse developers beaming back at us with the latest 4000 being crammed into a stucco clad 30 story warehouse, I am starting to get a bit unsettled by it all.

Anonymous said...

Looks like the wall the Vallone$ have planned for the Astoria waterfront.

Wade Nichols said...

Abolish the rent control/stabilization laws!

Then you'll have affordable housing!

FlooshingRezident said...

Why not send them some of Flooshing's lovely residents? And forget about the new construction planned for Willets Point? Took the train to NYC yesterday - the MTA is totally overwhelmed! It was unreal - so different from my civilized youth in the 60's and 70's.

Anonymous said...

LUXURIOUS INTO PUBLIC HOUSING

WELCOME TO NEW YORK!

Anonymous said...

So there is plenty of housing now in NYC, correct? Guess the landlords can keep paying out of their pockets to keep them empty, or they can put them on the market and let folks move in. Sounds like win-win.

Sam said...

Wade Nichols said...
Abolish the rent control/stabilization laws!

Then you'll have affordable housing!
=========

Maybe I'm a little slow this morning but you'll have to explain that one to me.
without rent stabilization, the owners/land lords will be given carte blanche to charge whatever "market rate" they can dream up. Always crying poor about cost of maintainance etc, do nothing and still collect top dollar for crap.

Anonymous said...

"Maybe I'm a little slow this morning but you'll have to explain that one to me.
without rent stabilization, the owners/land lords will be given carte blanche to charge whatever "market rate" they can dream up."

The market rate is NOT what they dream up, it is what somebody will pay. They can 'dream up' a $1 mil price tage on a condo, but if nobody will buy it, all that dreaming is just a mental exercise. I am more wary of the 'dreaming up' of public officials on the take.

Wade Nichols said...

Maybe I'm a little slow this morning but you'll have to explain that one to me.

No, it's not just this morning, you're always a bit slow.

I'll let economist and polymath Thomas Sowell do the explaining, since he's researched the topic extensively:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/
sowell082100.asp

As Sowell says in the article (you probably won't even bother to read it):

"Meanwhile, there is a whole movement of rent-control activists and tenants' rights advocates who say things like, "Housing is not a commodity." Mindless mantras like that make them look and feel like the morally anointed, and apparently that is good enough for them. Who needs facts when you have myths that serve your purposes?"

Anonymous said...

Abolish the rent control/stabilization laws!
Then you'll have affordable housing!


Talk about Doublespeak!
Yes, let's remove the only barrier to landlords' jacking rents up sky high in an effort to make rents more affordable.

I realize you're citing the one "expert" you could find to support your opinion. Some scientist or other is always willing to sell out. Tobacco, climate change, rent control... what's next, creationism?

Anonymous said...

Wade, why should the abolishment of rent control create affordable housing when we never had affordable housing in the 350+ years of New York history from the time of the Dutch.

The simple fact remains that New York is a city of islands with very valuable square footage. At the same time it attracts, and needs, an army of underpaid labor to keep it going. Hence, the five points, typhoid mary, triangle shirt waist factory fire, all those golden oldies of our grandparents.

The poor did not cause today's housing blight, but rather moneymen with stars in their eyes. For an idea of how that can happen and will always happen, read McKay's "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds"--one hundred years old and still true.

Sam said...

As always wade, you're a tool. let me be clear that this statment was not made for you to turn around and say something snappy like "if I were a tool, i'd be a jack hammer" or something like that. you're just a tool.

He mentions in his article that cities without rent control laws have lower rents than cities with. That is probably true but the study that he referred to mentions cities where the cost of living doesn't come close to NYC and it's also from 1997.

in my experience, which is the perspective that I'm basing my comments on, rent control works.

Evil Condo Dweller said...

Wade,

Your citing of Sowell really proves no point at all here- and I say that from viewpoint agreeable to your assertion (however uniformed) that rent control/stabilization is a flawed system.

Sowell is an academic polymath, correct. Unfortunately he is only an academic and like so many of his contemporaries has never put his theories to work. He has also flipped flopped, or "evolved" as he would say, on many issues that he had previously written about.

The fact that you even know who Sowell is leads me to believe you are a study of free-market economics (near and dear to my heart), so then you must also realize that Sowell is more famous for being an African American scholar with ultra conservative view than he is for any specific writing of his.

He often overextends his newly found free market ideals to areas that he really does not understand from a practical perspective. One of those areas is Rent Control/Stabilization.

While I respectfully disagree with your conclusion and citation, let me say that it is nice to finally get some substance posted on this blog.

Oh, and f the crapmaster!

-Evil Condo Dweller

Queens Crapper said...

Aw, someone is still upset that his comment wasn't posted immediately and is now reacting inappropriately by striking out at the blog host.

Typical impatient condo dweller. The type who throws a hissy fit at Starbucks when they have to change the register tape while he is waiting to order his frappuccino.

gov. arnold schwarzenegger said...

Ach, zat vas anudder gut von. I tell you, Der Krepper ist sure kvik mit der Vit!

Wade Nichols said...

I realize you're citing the one "expert" you could find to support your opinion.

Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek are two economists on the "right" opposed to rent control; Gunnar Myrdal on the "left"; Swedish economist and socialist Assar Lindbeck. I could go on and on........

And I'm sure you could quickly Google a list of supposed "experts" to bolster your opinion.

Some scientist or other is always willing to sell out.

Sell out to whom? Where's your evidence that Sowell is receiving pay? Who's he receiving money from? Toll Brothers? Donald Trump? Sounds like you're the one who's drifting into the area of unsubtantiated claims, otherwise known as "religion".

For an idea of how that can happen and will always happen, read McKay's "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds"--one hundred years old and still true.

I've read that book a while ago, and I don't remember any chapter on rent control. A chapter on the Dutch tulip mania, the South Sea Company, alchemy, and witches, but nothing on rent control.

You're simply "name checking" a well known book and trying to play "connect the dots" in a lame attempt at erudition.

Asini pedanti.

As always wade, you're a tool. let me be clear that this statment was not made for you to turn around and say something snappy like "if I were a tool, i'd be a jack hammer" or something like that. you're just a tool.

I may be a "tool" according to you, but I don't need to resort to ad hominem attacks. But it's not surprising, since you can't properly defend yourself, you have to resort to such tactics.

in my experience, which is the perspective that I'm basing my comments on, rent control works.

Oh, how so? What's your experience? Have you conducted extensive studies of rent control laws? Have you read exhaustively on the subject? Have you thoroughly researched the claims of those opposed to rent control, and are you able to prove their statements are false?

Or, perhaps you're simply in favor of rent control laws because it conveniently fits into your political world view?

Your citing of Sowell really proves no point at all here- and I say that from viewpoint agreeable to your assertion (however uniformed [sic]) that rent control/stabilization is a flawed system.

How does it prove no point? He clearly mentions several studies conducted on the topic. Sure, there aren't footnotes listing the studies, but that's not an academic publication, it's more for a general audience.

It definitely proves a lot more than some of the fools here who simply say: "Rent control works, I know so, because I just know it!" "Wade Nichols is a tool!" "Anyone who opposes rent control laws MUST be on the payroll of the real estate industry!"

Miss Heather said...

There may be a glut of luxury condos in Williamsburg, but it isn't keeping the NYPost's subsidiaries (Courier Life & The Brooklyn Paper)from shilling them. Behold, the Brooklyn of tomorrow!

http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2009/07/brooklyn-tomorrow-2009-unlike-previous.html

Anonymous said...

"Extraordinary Popular Delusions" is the seminal book on bubbles. There is no doubt that we have been through one of the greatest housing bubbles in history. This has created artificially high rents due to inflated housing prices.

In order to service usurious mortgages created by these ludicrous prices rents skyrocketed.

Now houses are being foreclosed and market rate tenants are being driven into housing court because of the combination of insane, unsupportable prices and job losses caused by same.

The greater point of the book is that the "free market" is no sacred cow--it is often characterized by extreme irrationality.

I am glad that you read this excellent book, but I fear that you have wasted your time doing so since you missed its central lesson and still believe that the free market is a panacea.

Anonymous said...

Looks like the wall the Vallone$ have planned for the Astoria waterfront.

----

Bayside waterfront with Paul in office in about 12 years.

Anonymous said...

How does it prove no point? He clearly mentions several studies conducted on the topic.

Interesting how you responded to EVERYTHING BUT the real argument against your point. As Sam pointed out, Sowell merely asserts that "cities without rent control laws have lower rents than cities with."
Let's not fall victim to logical fallacies... This is a classic case of affirming the consequent:
1. If rent control leads to high rents, then cities with no rent control have low rents.
2. Cities with no rent control have low rents, therefore
3. Rent control leads to high rents.
This does not follow. In more pedestrian terms, what we have here is "correlation, not causation." Even YOU, Wade, must have heard that phrase before.

Besides, how do you explain away the overall higher cost of living in cities like NYC? Is this a result of "retail price controls"?

Lino said...

" Wade Nichols said...
Abolish the rent control/stabilization laws!
Then you'll have affordable housing!"

Aside from the sheer idiocy of your remark(s)..why do you use the handle of a dead gay porn actor?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wade_Nichols

Of course, if that -is- your real name, my apologies...and condolences.

Lino

Sam said...

in my experience, which is the perspective that I'm basing my comments on, rent control works.

Oh, how so? What's your experience? Have you conducted extensive studies of rent control laws? Have you read exhaustively on the subject? Have you thoroughly researched the claims of those opposed to rent control, and are you able to prove their statements are false?

Or, perhaps you're simply in favor of rent control laws because it conveniently fits into your political world view?
================
I'm not interested in a "political world view", just my budget.
My experience is having to move and find an apartment that I can comfortably afford. Thats what it boils down to wade, trying to survive. I don't have to do market research to know that you're wrong.
Do you even pay rent?

I resorted to calling you a tool, well, because you are.
You prove nothing. You confuse your opinion with fact and you cite outdated and irrelivant information to back up your opinion.

I'm just patiently counting the days until you show up on a Chris Hanson special.

Wade Nichols said...

In order to service usurious mortgages created by these ludicrous prices rents skyrocketed.

Usurious mortgages? How so? Usury generally means a high interest rate.

The problem wasn't HIGH interest rates, it was LOW interest rates, for too long, compliments of Mr. Greenspan.

The greater point of the book is that the "free market" is no sacred cow--it is often characterized by extreme irrationality.

I would never characterize the "free market" as a sacred cow either. I don't believe regulation is a panacea either. Somewhere in between is the "happy medium".

Aside from the sheer idiocy of your remark(s)..why do you use the handle of a dead gay porn actor?

You wouldn't dare use the word "idiocy" in my presence, I know that much, punk.

For all you know, I might just be a dentist in South Carolina specializing in endodontics:

http://drwadenichols.com/

But if you're foolish enough to "Google" the words "Wade Nichols" on your computer at work, and get snared in your employer's internet filtering software, then my work is complete!

Anonymous said...

Once again, Wade responds with sound bites but refuses to address the real substance. Sowell's argument is naught but hash.

Wade Nichols said...

Once again, Wade responds with sound bites but refuses to address the real substance. Sowell's argument is naught but hash.

Funny, I don't recall reading your extensive DEFENSE of rent control laws in this thread.

Why don't YOU address Sowell's arguments, rather than your lame attempt at attacking ME.

Miles Mullin said...

Damn ya gotta love Crappy!

Anonymous said...

In many cases they were usurious--remember the adjustable rate and option Arms that started the collapse rolling?

How about subprime? Ring any bells? Because rates on standard, fixed rate mortgages were low, this does not mean the mortgages were low across the board. The entire universe has to encompass the exotic mortgages that were particularly problematic.

Furthermore, many people were double-mortgaged with piggybacked loans or were given loans on appraised values that had been clearly falsified--often at the connivance of a loan officer.

Would you prefer an different term than usurious? How about blood-sucking, fraudulent, shylocking and so forth. Or do you think that the antics of the last few years are supportable?

The housing market is certainly in deep doo doo and it is not the rent controlled or stabilized tenant that is to blame for it, although many of us are paying for it with vicious trench warfare against rapacious chancers who would like to toss us to the curb.

Lino in rent regulated Manhattan said...

Ms "Wade Nichols said":

"You wouldn't dare use the word "idiocy" in my presence, I know that much, punk."

That just proves how dangerous ignorance can be. I am the son of a WW2 Paratrooper who trained me in Jiu-Jitsu. I have enjoyed occasional lessons in muay thai at my apartment in Bangkok.

You would need to bring more than skin to our little get together.

Again why use -that- handle?

-And why repeat the oft-discredited dogma of one of the right wing's house Negroes?

People who complain about rent, or any business regulation often have hidden masters and their agendas.

Lino

Anonymous said...

Dont sweat Lino.

Wade married well so rent is not an issue (tho Wade did downsize this year)

Wade Nichols said...

Hmmm....let's see here:

Here you said:

Lino in rent regulated Manhattan said...

And then here you said:

I have enjoyed occasional lessons in muay thai at my apartment in Bangkok

But the ironic bit is this:

People who complain about rent, or any business regulation often have hidden masters and their agendas.

Indeed.

Someone who maintains a rent regulated apartment in Manhattan, while allegedly maintaining an apartment in Bangkok, Thailand sure does have an agenda in maintaining the rent control laws.

You sure sound like one of those "poor, oppressed tenants" that rent control laws were intended for. You, Charles Rangel, Ed Koch, Lauren Hutton, Abbie Hoffman, Alistair Cooke, Shelley Winters, Mia Farrow, Carly Simon, et. al.!

That just proves how dangerous ignorance can be. I am the son of a WW2 Paratrooper who trained me in Jiu-Jitsu. I have enjoyed occasional lessons in muay thai at my apartment in Bangkok.

The son of a WWII paratrooper? That proves nothing!

I've parachuted myself (once), and it was my very first plane ride. I've bungee jumped 3 times in one day in New Zealand, one at a height over 400 feet. My uncle also served in WWII in Europe, and was shot in the leg. My wife has taken kick-boxing lessons at the gym.

But all those prove about as much as your statements!

Lino said...

"Someone who maintains a rent regulated apartment in Manhattan, while allegedly maintaining an apartment in Bangkok, Thailand sure does have an agenda in maintaining the rent control laws."

HA! Those Rambo films you have said you enjoy have not done much for reading comprehension. I live in an inherited co-op. I couldn't have afforded a condo so, I pay a glorified form of rent...they call it "maintenance" -not covered by rent regulation.

You advocating of stupid dogma that would only further erode the mid/working class and ruin many lives, is an example of your mean spirited, ignorant attitude.

Turn off the "action films", put down the comic books and look around you. Some very decent people would be forced out of their homes, into the street, for what, your brown nosing of the parasitic landlord lobby.

Thankfully, people like you are held in-check by people like me.

Lino

New York/Bangkok

Anonymous said...

Why don't YOU address Sowell's arguments, rather than your lame attempt at attacking ME.

I DID. I pointed out his argument was logically flawed - affirming the consequent. Correlation, not causation. That stuff that you never responded to.

I'm not attacking you, I'm just sitting back wondering why you lamely avoid any serious critique of your arguments and sources. But go on, issue another snappy retort without addressing the substance.