3 ms·
Supply is supply. Unless they are tearing down older units, new expensive apartments should make the older, less trendy units cheaper.
by throwawayboise 5y ago
Supply is supply. Unless they are tearing down older units, new expensive apartments should make the older, less trendy units cheaper.
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y agoYou mean the ones they knock down, to make room for the highrises? Supply is supply, and there's only so much real estate in NYC.
- otterley 5y agoThere are still a whole lot of brownstones waiting to be bulldozed!
- Dylan16807 5y agoIf you knock down 300 units to make 800, that's still going to improve things.
- HarryHirsch 5y agoFor investors from China, yes. For locals, not so much.
- Dylan16807 5y agoOkay, if the units get used then it's good.
- PHGamer 5y agoand thats the problem. if you watch any of Louis Rossmans videos on NYC real estate he explains the Issue. Buisness dump invested money into expensive building. If no one rents then it stays vacant. Why vacant, isnt the landlord going to lose money? well yes but if he rents a lower amount then his valuation goes down and he is suddenly upside down on his loan. So he is compelled to not rent versus renting it. Add to this governments make more tax yearly if its valued hire and now there is no incentive to fix this.
- novok 5y agoYou'd think a speculation & vacancy tax would solve this, but doesn't seem to as seen in BC, Canada :( More about the tax: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/speculation-vacancy-tax https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/speculation-vacancy... https://vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/three-years-in-has-b-c-s-speculation-and-vacancy-tax-made-a-difference https://vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/three-years-in...
- Dylan16807 5y agoThat tax appears to be .5% or 2%? That's not very much for someone that's already giving up rental money. Let's try 8%.