Colorado Real Estate Center
Centers of Excellence Search Leeds Site CU Web Site CU People Burridge Center for Securities Analysis and Valuation Business and Society Business Research Division Center for Business Integration Center for Sustainable Tourism Deming Center for Entrepreneurship Real Estate Center Undergraduate Program MBA Degree Options Full Time MBA Evening MBA MS in Accounting Ph.D. Program Executive Development News & Events Alumni Network Career Lifelong Learning Supporting Leeds Contact Us Faculty Directory Faculty Profiles Research Centers Research Highlights Business Library Academic Departments Conferences About Employers Undergraduate Graduate Alumni Hire a Leeds Graduate Executive Development Consulting & Research Supporting Leeds Leeds Commitments Course Directory Resources Clubs & Organizations Events Degree Requirements Leeds In Boulder Why Leeds? Leeds Programs Admissions Diversity Centers of Excellence Business & Society Directions/Visit Spotlight CU Real Estate Council 2006 Annual Conference on March 1, 2006 - CU Real Estate Council 2006 Annual Conference on March 1, 2006 Leeds MBA Students Win $50,000 in National Design Competition - A five-student UC team, including three Leeds MBA students, won $50,000 in a national urban design competition held in Salt Lake City on April 1. The CU team defeated 71 student teams from universities throughout North America, including Harvard, Columbia and the University of Texas at Austin. 2006 Smart Growth Conference, January 26-28, 2006 - A national, multi-disciplinary smart growth conference presented by the Local Government Commission (LGC) and The Pennsylvania State University. Real Estate Center Welcomes New Assistant Professor, Liang Peng - Real Estate Center Upcoming Events No Upcoming Events View All Events Burridge Center for Securities Analysis and Valuation Business and Society Business Research Division Center for Business Integration Center for Sustainable Tourism Deming Center for Entrepreneurship Real Estate Center Learn More About the Center Student Resources General Resources Publications Real Estate Center CU Real Estate Center The University of Colorado Real Estate Center is a high-caliber academic real estate program for graduate and undergraduate students attending the Leeds School of Business. With the active participation of the CU Real Estate Council, the program offers coursework, internships, networking and job placement assistance. The program began with the development of the CU Real Estate Council in 1990. This group of industry professionals (many of whom are CU alumni) desired a stronger relationship with CU. In 1996, the CU Real Estate Center was formed with the assistance of the Council, University of Colorado Leeds School of Business, and the University of Colorado Foundation. The Center is involved in many activities that impact the University and the community at large. Recent Center activities include: Creation of an endowed chair in Global Real Estate Capital Markets Formation of the Growth Management Alliance, serving to educate and involve Council members in critical growth management issues affecting Colorado Involvement in campus and external University real estate issues Involvement in community land use issues, providing research, advice and facilitation to private and public organizations Working with ULI, NAIOP, CREW, and other industry organizations to provide opportunities for our students and to educate and inform Coloradans about current real estate issues Learn More About the Center Mission Statement Location Conferences and Events Board of Governors Real Estate Council Growth Management Alliance Student Resources MBA Curriculum Undergraduate Curriculum Internship and Job Opportunities General Resources Real Estate Web Links Publications Tracks Newsletter Contact Information CU Real Estate Center Leeds School of Business, Room 251 Phone: (303) 492-3643 Fax: (303) 492-5507 Mailing Address: CU Real Estate Center Leeds School of Business University of Colorado at Boulder 419 UCB Boulder, Colorado 80309-0419 >> Directions to the Center Hours of Operation Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Centers of Excellence >> Real Estate Center Home | Contact Us | Apply | About Leeds | Search | Press Room | Employment | Site Map | Internal Resources Leeds School of Business, Bldg #4, UCB 419, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0419 © 2004 Regents of the University of Colorado.
sell houses and finds
Amazon.co.uk: Selling Houses: How to Sell Your House as Quickly as You Can for as Much Money as You Can: Books BOOK SEARCH BROWSE CATEGORIES SPECIAL OFFERS TOP SELLERS AUDIO BOOKS Paperbacks 3 for £12 NEW & USED TEXTBOOKS HARRY POTTER SELL YOUR BOOKS All Products -Books -Used Books -Collectable Books All Subjects -Art, Architecture & Photography -Audio Cassettes -Audio CDs -Biography -Business, Finance & Law -Children's Books -Comics & Graphic Novels -Computers & Internet -Crime, Thrillers & Mystery -Fiction -Food & Drink -Gay & Lesbian -Health, Family & Lifestyle -History -Home & Garden -Horror -Humour -Mind, Body & Spirit -Music, Stage & Screen -Poetry, Drama & Criticism -Reference & Languages -Religion & Spirituality -Romance -Science & Nature -Science Fiction & Fantasy -Scientific, Technical & Medical -Society, Politics & Philosophy -Sports, Hobbies & Games -Travel & Holiday -Young Adult All Subjects Art, Architecture & Photography Audio Cassettes Audio CDs Biography Business, Finance & Law Children's Books Comics & Graphic Novels Computers & Internet Crime, Thrillers & Mystery Education & Languages Fiction Food & Drink Gay & Lesbian Health, Family & Lifestyle History Home & Garden Horror Humour Mind, Body & Spirit Music, Stage & Screen Poetry, Drama & Criticism Reference Religion & Spirituality Romance Science & Nature Science Fiction & Fantasy Scientific, Technical & Medical Society, Politics & Philosophy Sports, Hobbies & Games Travel & Holiday Young Adult BOOKS INFO At A Glance Reviews Customer Reviews See more by these authors: Anthea Masey Andrew Winter E-mail a Friend About This Item Recommendations If you already own this, rate it and improve your recommendations , Not Rated Visit the Music shop Confessions on a Dance Floor ~ Madonna Find a huge selection of books at 30% off Become an Associate Join our Associates Programme and make money from your website! Selling Houses: How to Sell Your House as Quickly as You Can for as Much Money as You Can Anthea Masey , Andrew Winter Publisher: learn how customers can search inside this book. List Price: £12.99 Our Price: £9.09 & eligible for Free UK delivery on orders over £15 with Super Saver Delivery. See details & conditions . You Save: £3.90 (30%) Availability: usually dispatched within 4 to 6 days. 21 Used & New from £4.95 See larger photo Edition: Paperback More Product Details Perfect Partner Buy Selling Houses: How to Sell Your House as Quickly as You Can... with "House Doctor" Quick Fixes: Top 100 Ways... today! Buy Together Today: £25.08 Customers who bought this item also bought: House Doctor: How to Add Pounds to the Value of Your Home ;Hardcover~Ann Maurice Location Location Location: The Complete Guide to Buying and Selling your Home ;Paperback~Kirstie Allsopp (Foreword), Fanny Blake The Property Book ;Hardcover~Ann Maurice Fiona Fullerton's Guide to Buying, Selling and Moving House ;Paperback~Fiona Fullerton "House Doctor" Instant Makeovers ;Hardcover~Ann Maurice Explore similar items ... Product Details: Paperback 160 pages(March 1, 2004) Publisher: Headline Book Publishing Ltd Language: English ISBN: 0755312333 Category(ies): Home & Garden Other Editions: Hardcover Average Customer Review: | Write a review Amazon.co.uk Sales Rank: 23,383 (Publishers and authors: improve your sales ) sign in to turn on 1-Click™ ordering. 16 New from 4.95 5 used from 6.70 Have one to sell? (We'll set one up for you) View my Wish List . Customers interested in this title may also be interested in: What's this? ( What's this? ) Feedback Buy and Sell Property Online At UKHomeSalez.com, there are no agent fees or monthly fees and your property is advertised until sold. You can upload a photo, get worldwide exposure and be listed online in minutes. uk.homesalez.com Sell Your House Privately Reach over three million buyers a month. Experienced property sellers. Packages from 25 - 120. www.getterbetterhome.co.uk Sell Your Property to Us Quickly We buy London properties for cash and can exchange within seven days. Call us for a free, no-obligation valuation and take the hassle out of your property sale. www.mpginvestments.co.uk Reviews Book Description In the tradition of the successful 'House Doctor' books, a tie-in to Channel 4's top-rated property series 'Selling Houses'. Synopsis "Selling Houses" is the Channel 4 series in which estate agent Andrew Winter transforms apparently impossible-to-sell houses and finds a buyer for them within three weeks of the transformation. This practical and well-illustrated guide gives readers the know-how and estate agent's inside knowledge to help them turn their house into a buyer's dream. It takes them through the entire process from the basic principles of knowing the buyer, knowing the competition and making the best of their homes, through detailed room-by-room advice including projects for a range of budgets. Drawing on case studies from both series and around the country, it includes everything a vendor needs to get that stubborn For Sale sign down and the Sold sign up. See all reviews... Customer Reviews Avg. Customer Review: Write an online review and share your thoughts with other shoppers! You won't want to sell. , November 22, 2005 Reviewer: Mr. George Hudson from Worcester, Worcestersshire United Kingdom I didn't see the TVE series on which this book was base but I wanted a practical how to sell a house book. Splendidly, produced as it is the contents of the book are mainly about "tarting up" up your house to such a degree you will never want sell. Was this review helpful to you? 6 of 6 people found the following review helpful: some great tips , September 22, 2004 Reviewer: avearnshaw from Co.Cavan, Ireland As an avid viewer of this and many other TV series like this I had to buy this book. It is full of great tips for fixing up your house for sale. It doesn't go into great detail on the projects covered but gives more of a general guide on what they did to fix up each house. The TV series is way more useful but as companion books go it's pretty good and worth having if you are selling your house. Was this review helpful to you? 46 of 48 people found the following review helpful: A wonderful book whether or not you are selling your house , December 19, 2003 Reviewer: A reader from Glasgow I bought this book when I was contemplating selling my house, having seen part of one episode of the Channel 4 series. I was amazed by how much I enjoyed reading this book. It is beautifully laid out, with a chapter about how to tackle each room in your property in order to make your house more attractive to potential buyers. The advice is clear, simple and often inexpensive. The book is based around a number of real life homeowners who have had difficulty in selling their houses for the price they hoped for. Each chapter is illustrated with before and after photographs of real rooms which have been transformed. The photography is excellent and the 'after' pictures really inspiring. The final chapter gives an update on how the houses made over in the book fared once put back on the housing market. I won't spoil the ending for you but the results were impressive. Even if you are not planning on selling your property any time soon, this book is definitely a worthwhile read as it will inspire you with ideas for how to transform your home. I have read and re-read this lovely book many times and cannot recommend it highly enough. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title . Was this review helpful to you? Customers who bought books by Anthea Masey also bought books by these authors: Ann Maurice Sarah Beeny Fiona Fullerton Tony Booth Kirstie Allsopp Look for similar books by subject: Browse for Books in: Subjects > Home & Garden > Interior Design & Decoration > General Subjects > Home & Garden > Buying & Developing Property > Property Guides Search for books by subject: Home furnishing & decoration Household Management Housing & property for the individual i.e., each book must be in subject 1 AND subject 2 AND ... Comment on this title I have read this book and I want to review it. I am the author and I want to comment on my book. I am the publisher and I want to comment on this book. Correct errors and omissions in this listing. Where's My Stuff? • track your recent orders • view or change your orders in Your Account Delivery and Returns • see our delivery rates and policies • thinking of returning an item ? (See our Returns Policy ) Need Help? • forgot your password? Click here • redeem or buy a gift certificate • still have questions? Visit our Help Pages Search our shops All Products Books Used Books Collectable Books Electronics & Photo Popular Music Classical Music DVD Rental DVDs Video Software PC & Video Games Software & Games DIY & Tools Garden & Outdoors Kitchen & Home Personal Care Toys Auctions zShops for Text Only Top of Page : Selling Houses: How to Sell Your House as Quickly as You Can for as Much Money as You Can International Sites: United States | Germany | France | Japan | Canada | China Join Associates | Join our staff | About Amazon.co.uk | Help pages | Contact us Our Privacy Notice , Conditions of Use & Sale © 1996-2005, Amazon.com, Inc. and its affiliates
Sell house privately online.
Selling house. Sell house privately online Free - SELLERS Why Sell online? Advertise 150 sites For Sale Boards Advertise from FREE FREE eBook Online Guide Conveyancing Your Questions Testimonials Login LANDLORDS Why let online? Advertise 150 sites To Let Boards Advertise from FREE FREE eBook Online Guide Your Questions Testimonials Login BUYERS FREE eBook Homes For Sale Homes by Email Online Guide Mortgages Conveyancing Cheap Gas Cheap Electric Cheap Phone Fast Broadband TENANTS FREE eBook Homes To Let Homes by Email Online Guide Cheap Gas Cheap Electric Cheap Phone Fast Broadband Selling house. Sell house privately online. Selling house. Save £1000s, no commission. With the popularity of the internet increasing, more then 70% house seekers now search for house online. We have 1000's private sellers selling their house privately ranging from mobile homes to stately manors. Sell your house privately by placing your house on Houseladder for Free, saving you £1000s in commission. We have multiple services that range from just advertising your house on our site to being listed on the biggest house sites such as ..... and more Where the estate agents place their houses. Click here to place advert Now! Sell your house, Our Services If you wish to sell your house we can help. Our services start from FREE. If you wish to massively increase the chance of selling your house privately, get exposure to over 2.6 million house seekers starting from £49 on the biggest house sites such as ..... and more When you sell your house you do not owe us a penny. Click here to place advert Now! Sell house with a Board In addition to selling your house privately on our site we can also provide you with a For Sale board as per the pictures below. This will enable you to sell your house privately to local people. These are high quality boards as the estate agents use. Click here to place advert Now! Edit your house selling advert anytime. You have 100% control over your advert. You will have a dedicated account where you can logon 24 hours 7 days a Week. You can make any changes to your house specification such as the general description or even change your photos. These changes take immediate effect on Houseladder and will take 24hrs to be published to the other websites if you have selected one of the services that re-advertise selling your house privately. During the creation of your house selling advert YOU decide how you wish for buyers to contact you. Once you have an interested party you can then arrange a viewing with them directly, i.e. no middle man. Click here to place advert Now! Sell house, Frequently Asked Questions But I am already with an Estate Agent? This is a common question. If you are already with an estate agent to sell your house you will have a contract between yourself and the estate agent. There are 4 types as follows: 'Sole selling' means your estate agent is the only one with the right to sell your house. Even if you find a buyer yourself, you'll still have to pay the agent. 'Sole agency' also means the estate agent is the only one with the right to sell your house but if you find a buyer yourself, you won't have to pay the agent. 'Multi agency' means that you can choose several estate agents to sell your house but you will only have to pay commission to the one who sells it. 'Ready, willing and able purchaser' is a contract. If the estate agent finds you a buyer and you later withdraw from the sale, you'll still have to pay them. As we are not an estate agent and your contract is either 2,3 or 4 then you can still use our services and sell your properties privately. What does an estate agent do? Well they are basically the middle man as all legalities are done by your solicitor. Once you have a buyer you instruct your solicitor who will then do the following. Conveyancing (the legal process of selling your house) Draw up a contract for the transaction Answer any basic questions that the buyers solicitor may ask such as listing the items that are staying when you sell your house. After the buyers' solicitor has done all the required searches you are then both ready to sign, agree on a completion date and exchange the contracts. As you can see an estate agent has nothing to do during this whole selling house process. Click here to place advert Now! Sell or Let Faster! Professional boards, just like the agents use, with your own telephone number. Only £30 extra Instant Conveyancing Quote No completion no fee. UK Cheapest Gas Electric Save £100s on your gas and electricity every year. FREE Book Learn the secrets of the Professional. Request your copy Now! Sell or Let Faster! Save £1000s even with a Sole Agent! Advertise on the largest property sites reaching over 2.5 million including From £49 Compare 7000 mortgages online, Fast! Find the best mortgage for you
real estate prices in
MemeFirst: New York real-estate prices explained -- MemeFirst December 01, 2005 New York real-estate prices explained The 2.2 million jobs in Manhattan pay, on average, $2,025 per week . (You know that feeling you get when you find out you're below average? I've been having that for years.) Manhattan is 22 square miles, which means that the island of Manhattan pays, on average, $378 per square foot per year . And that includes Washington Heights. Posted by Felix at 02:54 PM GMT All proceeds go to MSF -- Comments #1 Pity we can't all work for Goldman Sachs. Posted by: Gherimiah on December 1, 2005 03:28 PM #2 I'll happily defer to someone with a firmer grasp of stats on this, but in the meantime, I wonder, does that average income number tell you very much? Given the massive disparity in Manhattan incomes, between, say, the dishwasher and the hedge-fund owner, which surely are among the widest in the country, wouldn't you also need to know the distribution of the data points? At a minium, wouldn't you want also to know the median income? Also, is this net or gross? Article talked about paychecks, which could probably mean either. Posted by: Matthew on December 1, 2005 04:36 PM #3 Oh, and also, Felix, presumably the 2.2 million people with jobs in Manhattan don't all live there, so your extrapolation doesn't wash. Posted by: Matthew on December 1, 2005 04:38 PM #4 Obvs mean incomemedian income, and I'd be surprised if more than 40% of Manhattanites made above average. Probably less. But even so. And actually, the fact that there are 2.2 million jobs to 1.5 million people in Manhattan actually only serves to exacerbate the demand-supply imbalance when it comes to real estate. Posted by: Felix on December 1, 2005 04:53 PM #5 I hate to be the one to break this to you, Felix, but nearly all residential housing in Manhattan consists of multi-story buildings. The salary range you describe explains real estate prices in Westchester County, NY and Bergen County, NJ to about the same degree as prices in Manhattan. Posted by: Sterling on December 1, 2005 07:05 PM #6 How delightful that the discussion of property prices one is sometimes unable to defuse at dinner parties just carries on here - almost as if taunting one with its dreary ineluctability. And how nice that Felix should bring along his no doubt expert appreciation of statistical lore. The one thing I am missing is the crucial evaluation of bedbug incidence as it affects property prices in Manhattan. In another thread, Betty has said this bedbug malarkey is all a plan of Bush's. For myself, I prefer to recall that bedbugs tend to originate in Belgium. Schtumm for now. More on this later. Posted by: Claude de Bigny on December 1, 2005 08:40 PM #7 Also, this seems to imply that everyone pays all of their income for housing, which is hopefully not the case. To be more realistic (ignoring the issues rightly brought up by the other commentators, including whether all of those people actually live in Manhattan and whether you can just take the sq ftge of Manhattan as the residential sq ftge), say people on average spend 40% of their income on housing. That gets your income for housing per sq ft to around $151. Posted by: Susan on December 1, 2005 09:14 PM #8 Susan and Sterling, you are embarassingly confused. What percentage of real estate in Manhattan is used for housing? According to this http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/landusefacts/landuse_tables.pdf (in case you are confused by the graph, the percents sum together veritcally and the land area sum horizontally). And even assuming that all "Mixed Residential and Commercial" was used for housing, less than 38% of the land in Manhattan is for housing. These data certainly allow for the idea that much of rent paid in Manhattan is for commercial use, and even then, a considerable percent is used for public space (Central Park alone is 10% of the area of Manhattan). Anyway, the amount people earn in a particular location is not directly related to the amount the people who live there earn, or the amount the people live there pay for rent. Look at this site: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/index.html The direct link is unavailable, but the Median household income for New York County was 43,573. Nassau County on the other hand is more than 71,000. In which place is it cheaper to rent by the foot? Posted by: Andrew on December 2, 2005 07:22 AM #9 I don't think I'm confused. My points are: a) there is actually quite a bit more than 22 square miles of residential floor space in Manhattan because of vertical construction b) a lot of upper-income Manhattan workers live outside Manhattan, and their buying power lifts prices in tony bedroom communities Posted by: Sterling on December 3, 2005 03:38 PM #10 OK, Sterling, let's do it your way. Assume that each of the 1.5 million residents of Manhattan has 400 square feet to call their own: that works out to 1200 square feet for the average family of three and 1600 square feet for the average family of four. Generous, I'd say. That comes out to 600 million square feet of residential real estate in Manhattan. Using that figure, my calculation actually comes out slightly higher : $386 per square foot per year, rather than $378. What makes you think that there's more than 22 square miles of residential floor space in Manhattan? As for your point b, I fail to see how it is in any way germane. Posted by: Felix on December 3, 2005 11:09 PM #11 OK, 22 square miles equals about 613,324,800 square feet. That would leave each of Manhattan's 1.5 million residents with 409 square feet of living space. But I don't believe that most Manhattan residents are actually so deprived, especially when you take into account common areas in apartment buildings such as laundry facilities, hallways, lobbies, etc. I'd be surprised if the average wasn't at least 600, and it's probably more than 800. And besides, that's not what you originally meant - you were dividing Manhattan's land footprint and not taking into account its vertical expansion. As for the second point, I suspect there's a strong tendency among $100,000 - $1,000,000 per annum Manhattan earners - which is well-off to wealthy-on-a-budget - to live in places like Valhalla and Ho-Ho-Kus, especially if they're married with kids. Family-flight in turn increases the average per-capita-square-footage of the Manhattan residential footprint through bleed-off of children. Posted by: Sterling on December 4, 2005 02:29 AM #12 Sterling jumped the shark so long ago it's probably not surprising, but for those of you keeping score at home, he really did just say that the average Manhattanite has 800 square feet of their own. So if you're an average person living with 2 roommates, that means you're in a 2400 square foot apartment. In Manhattan. Yeah. Oh, and that 350 square foot apartment you've got? It's not 350 square feet at all, it's probably more than 4000 square feet. You're just not including the lobby and all the hallways. Posted by: Felix on December 4, 2005 02:43 AM #13 My claim is that the amount of residential-zoned floor space in Manhattan probably works out to between 600 and 800 square feet per resident of Manhattan. You're not only challenging this, but asserting that my claim is absurd. Sure you wanna do that? Posted by: Sterling on December 4, 2005 02:59 AM #14 I've tried to find the statistic, but to no avail. It seems that while office space inventor is measured in square footage, residential space is simply measured, in all documents, by units. But we can work with that. So far I've learned that 82% of zoned lots in Manhattan are residential, making up about 280,000,000 square feet, which includes permanently undeveloped spaces like yards and gardens. If the average height of development across all that land is four stories, then, we're looking at about 750 square feet per person. I've also learned that in 1999 there were about 727,000 residential units in Manhattan , which means that the average unit houses two people. So those three-roomies crammed into one 800-square-foot-tenement-with-the-bathtub-in-the-kitchen examples are mostly fiction. Which is a shame because I get a tingle from the mental picture of Manhattan twenty- and thirty-somethings living in cramped, dingy conditions. If we divide the total residential land area by the total number of units, we get 385 square feet, which works out to 192.5 square feet per person, assuming no dwellings above one story in height and no unimproved/vacant land. If the average height is assumed to be four stories, in this scenario we get about 770 square feet per person. Here's a report from Prudential Douglas Elliman that details its 1Q 2005 sales. Units sold averaged 1,334 square feet, which divided by two yields 767 square feet per person. Breaking it down further we find co-ops averaging 1,197 square feet, condos at 1,496 square feet, luxury at 2,921 and loft at 2,145. So that's 598.5 square feet per person at the low end all the way up to 1,460.5 at the top. There's three separate analytical models for you Felix, all of which yield per-person square footage of 750 or better. I admit they're not all that fleshed out, but I'm stuck inside with a cold watching The Taking of Pelham One-Two-Three on DVD, and I'm disinclined to dig deeper. But you're welcome to. Posted by: Sterling on December 4, 2005 04:04 AM #15 Sterling: do your calculations include infrastructure or is the 280MM number a percentage of raw space? Building density is higher here than anywhere else in America, but 15% to circulation (in buildings and streets themeselves) would be an easily defended metric. Counting hallways in urban residential structures is like counting sidewalks as part of sf for suburban homes. As much Sterling does sound like a set designer for Friends, Felix, I gotta say, of the 25 or so apartments of people that I can definitely make an estimate of size, we average 500 sf easy. Most everyone is a half a standard tenement lot (25 x 25), with a couple of lofts and post-war, large-scale developments thrown in. This is skewed because many of them are single (I live in a 2bd alone) or have rent-controlled apartments from way back. Posted by: 99 on December 4, 2005 07:19 PM #16 Where does your 280m sq ft number come from? Your first two calculations are based on it, so I'd like to know. (They're also based on a multiplier of 4, which as far as I can tell came pretty much out of thin air.) As for apartment sales, in Manhattan individual condos and coops tend to be much larger than the apartments inside rental buildings. So if you look just at sold apartments as opposed to rented apartments, you're going to get a skewed figure. What's more, if a 3800-square-foot brownstone in Harlem, say, is sold and then the downstairs floor is rented out, that still counts as a 3800 square foot deal under these figures. Posted by: Felix on December 4, 2005 09:21 PM #17 The multiplier of 4 was back-of-envelope guess. The 280,000,000 number came from this PDF . Sorry, thought I'd linked to it initially. As for rental apartments being smaller than privately owned condos or co-ops...not sure I buy that. But even if it's true, how much smaller could they be? 10%? Doesn't really matter. You can apologize any time now. Posted by: Sterling on December 4, 2005 10:06 PM #18 if anyone is real curious why not pony up the $250 to get a list of every tax lot in the city? http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/bytes/applbyte.shtml in the meantime, simply because i am tired of having to read sterlings pontifications about things he knows anything about, i downloaded a list of all the residential tax lots from 14th street and below from propertyshark. only 14th street and below, because after 6000+ entries, i became bored. 14th street down is a good representative sample of the 99000+ residential tax lots in manhattan. it includes spacious luxury lofts of tribeca, tenements of the les, projects on the eastside, high rise high density battery park and half building condo conversions of downtown (note that a rental bldg with multiple units counts as a single tax lot with the number of units listed as a seperate data field). the average unit size works out to 1100sf with 590sf per person (based 2000 census population stats for 14th st & below). this includes all common space in a building as it is based on total building size for single tax lot (rental) buildings and counts common space tax lots for condo buildings (read lobbies, circ, etc.) multiplying back out by the 2000 census population numbers for manhattan of 1,537,195... we get 906,945,050sf of residential space in manhattan. let's call that an even 9Bsf since the city lists 3800 acres of lot area in manhattan (165,500,000sf), that gives a rough overbuild factor of 5.5. this will obviously skew higher with the ues & uws densities without actually affecting the sf/person. summary- -590sf of residential per person (inclusive of common areas). close to sterlings low estimate of 600, but nowhere near the 800sf -1100sf average size per unit (inclusive of common areas). again close to sterlings guess based on broker mumbojumbo, but still below the stated average. -9Bsf of residential space in manhattan sterling- close on your numbers, but not nearly close enough to be quite so pompously smug. stick to things you know about, like why bush is a foreign policy genius. felix- remind me what this related to? Posted by: geoff on December 5, 2005 12:34 AM #19 Geoff - The only reason I was pompously snug is because Felix had reacted to to my estimates with such comedic outrage. Also, I don't think 14th St. and below is a good representative sample. Newer and I suspect more spacious high-rises make up a much larger proportion of housing from the 30s up through the low 100s. So I'm sticking with 600+. I suspect the actual number is around 750, as stated above. As for your justification of your work - "simply because i am tired of having to read sterlings pontifications about things he knows anything about" - I'm not sure what it means. Perhaps you meant to write "nothing" instead of "anything"? I'm not claiming to be right all the time - I am not right all the time. I am, however, pretty much always right whenever Felix gets all worked up and tells me I have no idea what I'm talking about. Thanks for your small role in marking off another example for me to throw back at him at some future date. Posted by: Sterling on December 5, 2005 06:19 AM #20 Renter-occupied apartments are much smaller than owner-occupied apartments. And as the PDF you yourself linked to shows (see page 24), the vast majority of apartments in Manhattan are renter-occupied. Think about it: one needs maybe 350 sq ft per person to live in some reasonable comfort. Beyond that, you're shelling out extra cash for extra space. Owners are happy doing that because they have 100% equity in that space: everyone has heard the advice that they should buy the biggest apartment they can afford. Renters, on the other hand, are simply giving away thousands of dollars in rent every month, with nothing at all to show for it. So they tend to go not for the biggest apartment they can afford, but rather the cheapest apartment they find adequate. Put it this way: Manhattan is full of individuals spending an enormous proportion of their income on outsize mortgage payments. Almost everyone, when they move from renting to buying, sees their monthly housing costs rise substantially. If you move to Manhattan and have a relatively low income, then you might spend a crazy amount of it on rent, it's true. But if your income is average or higher (and remember that average is $2,025 per week), I very much doubt that your rent is making nearly as much of a dent in your paycheck as it would if you owned your own apartment. You reach a standard of living you're comfortable with, and you stop. Anything beyond that is money which you could otherwise spend on clothes, or travel, or restaurants. Whereas if you buy , you're not spending so much as investing. The only money which you're really spending is the interest on your mortgage -- and even that comes with a tax deduction. Or let's put it another way. That Elliman report you linked to has an average sales price of $1.21 million. A typical rental yield in Manhattan these days is 4%, so if rentals were functionally identical to owner-occupied apartments, which you seem to assume, then the average rent in Manhattan would be over $4,000 a month. In fact, of course, it's nowhere near that. Posted by: Felix on December 5, 2005 06:55 AM #21 There's the shark, and then there's the A train. Sterling's Manhattan clearly stops at 96th street. Sterling, dear, north of that bright white line, the housing stock is incredibly stable and consistent in terms of size and layout. Harlem is just now getting it's first 'luxury' apartment building in a half century. Any larger apartment complexes are housing projects, which have smaller units by definition, and, allowing for the dispersal of the towers in some International Style fantasy also insures that the density does not increase much. Posted by: 99 on December 5, 2005 04:03 PM #22 Felix, just because apartments are currently going for $1.21 million a pop doesn't mean that everyone who owns an apartment paid that much. Rent prices move in sympathy with real estate prices but are less prone to bubbles. What you're missing here, and you've missed the same thing when we've talked about the stock market in the past, is the difference between speculative investors and income investors. Speculators don't buy an apartment (or apartment building) primarily for the benefit of the rent; their main motivation is the hope of flipping the property at some later date for a larger sum than they paid for it. The current Manhattan real estate bubble is the product of speculators. Real estate income investors view rent collection as their goal - most apartment buildings in any town or city in the U.S. are owned by income investors. They get less press than speculators, but they also tend to go bankrupt less often. The market value of a rental property can be determined by the amount of rent it generates for the owner, not the other way around. Manhattan rents are high - probably even ludicrously high - but that is a function of large demand chasing relatively low supply, and is only weakly related to current real estate prices. I do acknowledge your point about space not being a priority for Manhattan renters, there is some truth in that. People who do see space as a necessity tend to wind up in rental units in Brooklyn, Queens or Hudson County. But that's not exclusively the case. Posted by: Sterling on December 5, 2005 04:59 PM #23 This thread is hilarious and sad, although a good example of how the same statistics can be applied to support any and all political positions. Posted by: sac on December 5, 2005 06:39 PM #24 Sterling, Manhattan is the one real-estate market in the US where there are, to all intents and purposes, zero speculators under your definition. No one buys Manhattan property in order to flip it. For one thing, co-op boards (and even condo boards, for that matter) hate flippers, and are likely to punish them. There's flip taxes, brokers' fees of 6% for the seller, and a luxury tax of 1% on any apartment over $1m for the buyer. Prices are so high that the carrying costs are enormous -- and you can't rent out the apartment in the meantime, because that makes it pretty much unsaleable. There are, of course, lots of buildings owned by income investors in New York. Most of the East Village, where I live, is comprised of such buildings: they normally have 20 or so apartments (say 5 floors, 4 apartments per floor), and they've been going up in price almost as much as individual apartments have -- the only reason they haven't gone up just as much is because many of the tenants are rent-controlled or rent-stabilised below market. These are typical New York apartments, from a renter's point of view -- but I can tell you, as someone who was apartment hunting in the East Village for almost a year, they're much less typical from an owner's point of view. Also, there's a strong incentive for for-sale apartments to be as large as possible: price per square foot is positively correlated with size. That's not the case in the rental market: it's easier to rent out a 650sqft apartment for $2500 than it is to rent out a 1300sqft apartment for $5000. Posted by: Felix on December 5, 2005 09:14 PM #25 "Manhattan is the one real-estate market in the US where there are, to all intents and purposes, zero speculators under your definition. No one buys Manhattan property in order to flip it." Felix, of course people speculate on property in Manhattan. Just because the barriers to entry are high doesn't mean some won't jump them. How else do you think a modest apartment winds up costing as much as a dozen Mercedes-Benz CL500s? Who do you imagine is providing demand at that level? You know banks are not issuing $1,000,000 mortgages to households with joint incomes of $200,000. It's trust fund kiddies - who are often divorced from fiscal reality - and speculators. As for your point about different-sized apartments being suitable for rent versus sale, I might agree with you except for the fact that every rental apartment IS OWNED by someone. It IS PART of the for sale market. I'd be surprised if fewer than half of the condos in Manhattan are rented out by their owners. Posted by: Sterling on December 6, 2005 01:51 AM #26 Sterling, I'm afraid the factors leading to high apartment prices are much more mundane than your feverish mind would like to imagine. Lots of global liquidity, driving down interest rates and banks' credit tests. Lots of demand, due to Manhattan's status as the center of the universe and high Wall Street bonuses. And very limited supply. The market for flippers is Miami, not NYC -- where a condo can be bought and sold three or four times before it is even built. As for your point about rental apartments being owned by someone, it sounds clever until you stop to think about what I've already said. Rental buildings are owned by landlords; the vast majority of condos and co-ops are owner-occupied. For one thing, co-ops vastly outnumber condos, and they're hard to rent. And as for condos, they generally get rented out when they're not the place their owner really wants to live. Given how valuable they are, few owners who don't want to live here would rather rent out their condos rather than simply sell them. Take my East Village condo building, for instance: when it went condo in 1983, only one owner lived here. Today, all the units bar one are owner-occupied. I haven't done my homework on this, but I'll happily accept your wager: I'll bet the standard bottle of vintage champagne that more than half the condos in Manhattan are owner-occupied. Deal? Posted by: Felix on December 6, 2005 02:43 AM #27 If you go double or nothing on the proposition that the amount of existing residential floor space in Manhattan divided by the number of residents of Manhattan is equal to or greater than 600 sq. ft., then it's a bet. How are we going to research this? FWIW, I am descended from a man who is reputed to be the first person to negotiate a real estate deal in New York: Wessel Wesselse (ten Broek). He may have been the man to offer 60 guilders (often misreported as $24) as the purchase price of Manhattan from the Canarsies. (Technically the Canarsies didn't own Manhattan Island - it's not for nothing that "Canarsie" is in Brooklyn. Also technically the Dutch West India Company didn't care which tribe owned it. It just needed some bunch of natives to smile and sign off on the deal to keep the English away.) This of course conveys no special knowledge upon me, but it certainly adds a humorous subtext to our disagreement. Posted by: Sterling on December 6, 2005 04:14 AM #28 I'm not sure about the terms of the wager: we seem to be betting on two different things at the same time. But spell it out, and I'll be amenable. I do want to ensure, of course, that hallways and elevator shafts and the like do not count as residential floor space. And please also ensure that if one of the propositions can be determined while the other one can't, then the other wager still stands. Posted by: Felix on December 6, 2005 05:55 AM #29 I'm not sure how we could specify the terms to exclude elevators if they are included in filings. However, it occurs to me that Manhattan Borough probably requires a statement of total dwelling space for its Certificate of Occupancy, so that would work for me. And no, I think double or nothing sounds good to me, especially since we will be attempting to falsify two of my estimations, rather than either of yours. Posted by: Sterling on December 6, 2005 06:20 AM #30 You've lost me, I'm afraid. When you say "double or nothing", are you proposing a 2BVC bet on the residential floor space, and no bet at all on the proportion of condos which are rented out? Or what? It makes no sense to me: "double or nothing" normally happens after A has lost a bet and B has won it. Then going double or nothing means that either B wins double the original amount, or he wins nothing. You essentially run the bet over again. Are you maybe trying to propose something whereby if I lose I lose 2BVCs, and if I win I win nothing? Posted by: Felix on December 6, 2005 07:44 AM #31 Are you trying to squirm out of it? Posted by: Sterling on December 6, 2005 06:03 PM #32 Sterling, will you propose your bet already? I've already said that I'm likely to accept. Just tell me the terms! Posted by: Felix on December 6, 2005 06:12 PM #33 I did! Posted by: Sterling on December 6, 2005 06:25 PM #34 OK, have a few moments now, I had to get someplace before 2pm and the roads are crap with snow and slush. Um, OK. My terms for the bet is those two things specified, avg. sq. footage = 600 and = 50% of condos. Either side has to get both right to collect. gotta run Posted by: Sterling on December 6, 2005 06:51 PM #35 So if one of us gets both right, he wins 1BVC or 2BVCs? And if one of the two turns out to be unverifiable, then it's a wash? Posted by: Felix on December 6, 2005 07:22 PM #36 Honestly, Felix, I doubt either number is verifiable. Like I wrote above, the city appears to track residential rental inventory by units, rather than by square footage. Also, most owners of condominium units who rent them out do so through agents - even the tenant may be only vaguely aware of the legal status of the unit. In NJ I don't think an individual condo owner even needs to report the unit as a rental property if it's in a building that's already inspected under multi-family housing regulations (or if it's a standalone unit or duplex). The rent revenue has to be reported as taxable income, naturallly, but not to any entity with housing oversight. So make it for one bottle and yes both figures have to be verifiable. That said, if either of us can show a grouping of not-completely-conclusive figures from multiple sources that seem reasonable and fall long or short of my guesses by ten percent or more, then I think we should accept them. (Of course, I have arguably already met this condition with my square footage prediction, and Geoff's calculations don't contradict it under the 10% rule I suggest.) Posted by: Sterling on December 6, 2005 10:05 PM #37 as i mentioned earlier, you can get the sf and unit count for every residential tax lot in the city from the cities web site... google 'bytes of the big apple' and look at the 'pluto' product. the license fee is $250 or you can get the info from propertyshark.com. there are 99000+ listings for manhattan. at 100 listings per page, thats a lot of cutting and pasting into excel. both of these will give you tax lot sizes (whole buildings/unit count or condo unit), which will be inclusive of common area. 10-15% is considered a fairly standard deduction for circulation. mechanical space is not included in the floor area count. happy dueling Posted by: geoff on December 6, 2005 10:29 PM Post a comment Name: Email Address: URL: Remember personal info? Yes No Anti-spam question: Share four cupcakes equally among four people. How many does each person get (in digits)? Comments: XML Atom RSS 2.0 RSS 1.0 Sources Eurof Felix Jame Michelle Mike Sage7 Stefan Sterling &c. Disclaimer Archive 12/05 11/05 10/05 09/05 08/05 07/05 06/05 05/05 04/05 03/05 02/05 01/05 12/04 11/04 10/04 09/04 08/04 07/04 06/04 05/04 04/04 03/04 02/04 01/04 12/03 11/03 10/03 09/03 Old site Recent posts 08/12: Not man enough (1) 08/12: Fare's fair (0) 07/12: Briddishisms (5) 06/12: The Trial of Saddam (5) 05/12: Leg deficiencies (4) 01/12: New York real-estate prices explained (37) 30/11: Bad vibe (22) 30/11: Thick-headed bouncers (0) 29/11: Argentina's sinister move (2) 28/11: Bedbugs and the city (8) 27/11: I've got a fast card (1) 22/11: Pedestrianize Broadway! (5) 19/11: Century 21 the next casualty at Ground Zero? (23) 19/11: Johnny Depp - sunshine traitor (4) 18/11: Gawker F***** by Yahoo! (7) Comments 06/12: geoff: as i mentioned earlier, you can get the sf and unit count for every residential tax lot in the ci 06/12: Sterling: Honestly, Felix, I doubt either number is verifiable. Like I wrote above, the city appears to tr 06/12: Felix: So if one of us gets both right, he wins 1BVC or 2BVCs? And if one of the two turns out to be unv 06/12: Sterling: OK, have a few moments now, I had to get someplace before 2pm and the roads are crap with snow an 06/12: Sterling: I did! 06/12: Felix: Sterling, will you propose your bet already? I've already said that I'm likely to accept. Just te 06/12: Sterling: Are you trying to squirm out of it? 06/12: Felix: You've lost me, I'm afraid. When you say "double or nothing", are you proposing a 2BVC bet on the 06/12: Sterling: I'm not sure how we could specify the terms to exclude elevators if they are included in filings. 06/12: Felix: I'm not sure about the terms of the wager: we seem to be betting on two different things at the s 06/12: Sterling: If you go double or nothing on the proposition that the amount of existing residential floor spac 06/12: Felix: Sterling, I'm afraid the factors leading to high apartment prices are much more mundane than your 06/12: Sterling: "Manhattan is the one real-estate market in the US where there are, to all intents and purposes, 05/12: Felix: Sterling, Manhattan is the one real-estate market in the US where there are, to all intents and p 05/12: sac: This thread is hilarious and sad, although a good example of how the same statistics can be appli 05/12: Sterling: Felix, just because apartments are currently going for $1.21 million a pop doesn't mean that ever 05/12: 99: There's the shark, and then there's the A train. Sterling's Manhattan clearly stops at 96th stree 05/12: Felix: Renter-occupied apartments are much smaller than owner-occupied apartments. And as the < 05/12: Sterling: Geoff - The only reason I was pompously snug is because Felix had reacted to to my estimates with 05/12: geoff: if anyone is real curious why not pony up the $250 to get a list of every tax lot in the city?<br 04/12: Sterling: The multiplier of 4 was back-of-envelope guess. The 280,000,000 number came from <a href 04/12: Felix: Where does your 280m sq ft number come from? Your first two calculations are based on it, so I'd 04/12: 99: Sterling: do your calculations include infrastructure or is the 280MM number a percentage of raw 04/12: Sterling: I've tried to find the statistic, but to no avail. It seems that while office space inventor is 04/12: Sterling: My claim is that the amount of residential-zoned floor space in Manhattan probably works out to b 04/12: Felix: Sterling jumped the shark so long ago it's probably not surprising, but for those of you keeping 04/12: Sterling: OK, 22 square miles equals about 613,324,800 square feet. That would leave each of Manhattan's 1 03/12: Felix: OK, Sterling, let's do it your way. Assume that each of the 1.5 million residents of Manhattan ha 03/12: Sterling: I don't think I'm confused. My points are: a) there is actually quite a bit more than 22 02/12: Andrew: Susan and Sterling, you are embarassingly confused. What percentage of real estate in Manhattan i Trackbacks
New Home
Science/AAAS | Scientific research, news and career information Jump to: Page Content , Section Navigation , Site Navigation , Site Search , Account Information , or Site Tools . You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better. Site Tools Site Search Site Area Science Magazine News STKE SAGE KE Science Careers All HighWire Journals Terms Advanced Account Information Guest Alerts | Access Rights | My Account | Sign In Site Navigation Readers Members Authors Librarians Advertisers Current Issue Special Video Presentation: Evolution in Action Podcast: The Runners-Up Complete Breakthrough Index Previous Issues Science Magazine Home Science Express: Advance of Print Stem Cell Controversy South Korean Cloning Researcher Resigns Building a Better Chemical Trap More Cloning Researcher: Work Flawed but Results Stand Putting the Fingers on Gene Repair More News Summaries Voltage-Gated Ca 2+ Channels and Calmodulin Calcium Signaling and Ion Channel Sites and More More Loose Chromosomes Sink Cells Harnessing Hormonal Signaling for Cardioprotection More Next Wave's Best of 2005 Evolution: Getting in on the Action More Articles Find a New Job Get Funding Attend a Career Fair Employers: Post a Job Explore by Subject Medicine/Diseases Geochemistry/Geophysics Neuroscience View All Subjects Explore Special Features NetWatch Essays on Science & Society Books et al. View All Collections Experience Science your way with our new research tools. Sign in to find out. User Name Password Forgot Password? Register Today AAASMember.org AAAS Bookstore Science Products For Readers For Authors & Contributors For Librarians For Advertisers Reprints & Permissions Order an Article/Issue Science Japanese Gateway Science Table of Contents in Japanese (from Tanabe Seiyaku) Science Chinese Gateway ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT To Advertise | Find Products Magazine | News | STKE | SAGE KE | Careers | Collections | Help | Site Map Subscribe | Feedback | Privacy / Legal | About Us | Advertise With Us | Contact Us © 2005 American Association for the Advancement of Science. All Rights Reserved . You have reached the bottom of the page. Back to top