Home Loan Bank of

Home Page Company Info Events/Calendar Financial Information Careers Newsroom Washington Update Publications Resources Benefits Eligibilty Becoming a Member Capital Plan Member Profiles Member Directory FAQ Credit Products MPF Program Securities Services Grant Programs Credit Products Initiatives Applications Procedures Monthly Semiannual History FAQ Disclosure Search    Welcome to the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco Cost of Funds Index October 20053.074% Announced November 30, 2005 Login Username Password Online Security Success Stories Cedars Bank Enjoys Flexibility of CFI Program Provident Finds MPF Program to Be Viable Secondary Market Option United Labor Bank Creates Customer Loyalty A WISH Fulfilled Highlights AHAC Members Announced D. Tad Lowrey To Join Board 2005 Director Election Results Bank Reports Third Quarter Results Bank Announces $20.2 Million in 2005 AHP Round B The Bank awarded $20.2 million in Affordable Housing Program (AHP) grants in 2005 Round B. The funds will support 53 projects, generating 2,938 affordable housing units in Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, and Texas. Read More... Homeownership Program Workshops Coming In January The Bank will host six workshops about our homeownership programs, the Individual Development and Empowerment Account (IDEA) and Workforce Initiative Subsidy for Homeownership (WISH) programs. Read More... MPF Program Orientations Set For 2006 Want to learn more about the MPF Program? The Bank will host "Getting Started with the MPF Program" on three dates: January 19 in Los Angeles, June 15 in San Francisco, and November 9 in Phoenix. Read More... Temporary Suspension of Income Limits for Affordable Housing to Aid Hurricane Evacuees In response to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the Federal Housing Finance Board has approved a temporary suspension of income limits to allow vacant AHP-assisted rental units to be rented to households, regardless of income, who were displaced as a result of the storm. Read More... Third Quarter 2005 Report Now Available On November 14, 2005, the Bank filed its third quarter 2005 financial report on Form 10-Q with the SEC. The Bank also declared a dividend for the third quarter of 2005 at an annualized rate of 4.58%. Bank Reports Third Quarter Results On November 4, 2005, the Bank announced selected financial results (PDF) for the third quarter of 2005. Bank Announces Projected Dividend Rate On September 27, 2005, the Bank announced its projected dividend rate for the third quarter of 2005. Read More... © 2000-2005 Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco

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

Denver Real Estate Denver

Denver Colorado Real Estate, Denver Home Search Aspen Aurora Boulder Cheyenne Flagstaff Phoenix Salt Lake City Sioux City Sioux Falls Las Vegas Lakewood HelloMetro.Com: 450 Local City Guides Denver, CO Apartments Home Security Home Loans Home Insurance Equity Line of Credit Banking More Categories New ! With our HelloMetro toolbar you can access your city's information with one click. Includes a free pop-up blocker and Local Search . 100% Free Download - More Info. Denver Real Estate Denver Homes, Commercial Properties and other Real Estate Featured Sites Denver Realtors Web Site Search homes for sale on Denver realtors Website. Free buyers assistance and free metro Denver schools book and more. No cost or obligation to be represented. Denver, Colorado Professional Realtor Search for the home of your dreams at The Realty Corporation. We offer professional and reliable real estate services in Denver, Colorado. Visit our site for more information. Jeff Boyce - Denver's Real Estate Agent We specialize in helping Denver area renters/move-up buyers and sellers. Free buying/selling tips, $0 down loan specials and more. Read why we sell more homes. Unlock Fantastic Unadvertised Specials Sign up for a free homecard (buying or selling). Specials are e-mailed. Use this homecard to search the entire Denver Metro MLS. Sean Patrick Reilly - RE/MAX - 12+ years experience. Realtor Denver Get $40 for every $10000 in home value when you buy or sell. Planning to Sell or Buy a Home? Let Realtors® in Denver compete for your business. Use Homegain's free service to compare local Realtors® by commission, experience and more. Get the facts before you choose. Denver Realtor: Automated Homefinder Denver realtor - search from over 30,000 Colorado homes for sale and receive daily updates whenever something that meets your specific needs comes up for sale. Realtors Serving Denver, Colorado Welcome to the home of the West's top realtors serving Denver, Colorado and surrounding areas. Denver Realtor MLS search with online residential real estate listings, virtual home tours, community and school information, and email updates of new properties. Sign up for a free relocation package. Denver CO Homes-Free MLS Search Our free, confidential web site in Denver CO. Find MLS access, listings, homes, condos, properties and real estate for sale. Offer by Carl Dawson realtor. View now. Denver, CO - Homes For Sale View online listings of homes that meet your specific requirements, take VIP home tours, and sign up for e-mail updates of new listings. Free home buyer reports. Selling a Home? Free REALTOR® Search Find the right REALTOR® for you in Denver. Get competing proposals from local realtors. Compare commission, sales history and more before you choose. Free nationwide service. Affiliate. Denver, Colorado Real Estate Buying or selling a home in Denver? This is your real estate connection to selling and finding your dream home. Find homes for sale in the Denver, Colorado area. Denver Realtor We live here, we work here. Experience and knowledge count; work with a team of realtors focused in central Denver. Bandy Homes: Realtor Friendly, professional real estate services for buyers and sellers in the Denver, CO metro area. Search all homes for sale in the Denver MLS. Get a free market analysis of your home's value. Denver Colorado Real Estate Let an e-Agent help you buy, sell or relocate in Denver, Colorado. Fill out the buyers form to gain access to all local listings. Selling a Home? Find Real Estate Agents Planning to sell a home in the next few months? Get competing proposals from top, local real estate agents before you choose. Compare commissions, sales history, experience, and more. Aff. Metro Denver Colorado Real Estate Free - Search the MLS for homes and condos in Denver, Colorado. Save your searches and favorite properties, and receive email alerts for new listings matching your criteria. Denver, CO Real Estate Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage helps you search for homes online in Denver, CO. View thousands of listings. Multiple photos and virtual tours. Denver Realtors Fill out one simple form and gain access to homes in your immediate area. Receive proposals from local real estate agents and save thousands. RealEstateReviewed.com - Find Real Estate Agents by City Denver Realtors Home Page Denver Attractions Denver Jobs Denver News Denver History Denver Restaurants Denver Colorado Weather Denver Real Estate Denver CO Map Denver Sports Denver Events Wi-Fi Hotspots Denver Yellow Pages Denver Art Denver Music Denver Colorado Census Advertise in Denver CO © HelloMetro New! With our HelloMetro toolbar you can access your city's information with just one click. Includes a free pop-up blocker. 100% Free Download - More Info.

Real Estate Broker NEW

CBS News | Be Your Own Real Estate Broker | May 21, 2004 22:03:39 CBSNews.com The Web Home | U.S. | World | Politics | SciTech | Health | Entertainment | Business | Opinion | NEW --Strange News | Sports | Public Eye | Interactives | FREE CBS News Video The Early Show | CBS Evening News | 48 Hours | 60 Minutes The Saturday Early Show -- | CBS Sunday Morning | Face The Nation | Up To The Minute | Build Your Own Newscast Main Page Living HealthWatch Leisure Series The Saturday Early Show Chef On A Shoestring Second Cup Caf Ask Mike Up Next Program Facts Bios Contact Info Inside Scoop Contributors Bios Special Report Money Matters Early Show financial adviser Ray Martin offers tips to keep your financial house in order. Interactive U.S. Markets History of trading and definitions of key terms RELATED STORIES & LINKS Let The House Hunting Begin Tips For Those Diving Into The Real Estate Market This Spring Taking A Home Equity Loan? Be Careful What You Use The Money For Home Mortgage Rates Up A Bit Both 30 and 15-Year Rates Up, Ending A Three Week Stretch Of Drops Inflation Isn't A Problem Consumer Prices Dip 0.2 Percent In November, After Flat October Be Your Own Real Estate Broker NEW YORK, May 22, 2004 (CBS) The housing market is hot. In fact, homes are in such high demand that many sellers are wondering if they even need to hire a real estate agent to broker the deal. Financial adviser Ray Martin gave some tips on The Saturday Early Show for owners who want to sell a home themselves. Home values are up, mortgage rates are low and properties in hot markets are selling in days. The only fly in the ointment for many sellers is the traditional six percent commission paid to real estate brokers who make the deal. As home values continue to skyrocket, the broker commission skyrockets as well. Meanwhile, it seems as though these brokers are doing nothing more than watching the home sell and then collecting a large commission. The thought of having to pay brokers $10,000 or more to sell a home that fetches a buyer in less than week is causing many sellers to stop and think: "Do I really need to spend that money?" FSBO (For Sale By Owner) can be a good option for some people, Martin says. If your home is in a hot location, at a price that is affordable to many potential buyers, and similar homes are in short supply, this can be a good strategy. But, Martins says, FSBO is not for everyone. The following are three potential pitfalls of being your own broker: Setting A Price: The housing market is constantly changing and you really need to have a good feel for the market in order to set a reasonable price. You don't want to lose money by naming a price that's too low, but your don't want to frighten buyers away by over-charging. Getting the Word Out: Putting a "For Sale" sign in your yard is probably not going to sell your house. Most buyers don't have time to cruise around neighborhoods, searching for signs. When you list your home with a broker, they place your information in the area's MLS (Multiple Listing Service). This alerts all real estate agents in the area that your home is for sale -- making it easy for them to pinpoint potential buyers and bring them by for a visit. You can't do this alone. Becoming Emotionally Involved: Selling a home is the second-most emotional transaction you'll ever make, Martin says, second only to buying a home. Mixing emotion and business is not a good thing. If a buyer comes through the door and immediately points out your home's flaws instead of the beautifully restored floors or lovingly painted walls, it's going to hurt. You may be tempted to turn down this buyer's offer, even if it's fair. This is where a realtor can help. It's not a home to them, it's a business deal -- one they want to close quickly and collect on. Despite these pitfalls, Martin says he is not trying to steer everyone away from selling their homes themselves. He says you need to be aware of the pitfalls and if you think you can tackle them, give it a try -- particularly if you're in a hot market. You can try FSBO for a set amount of time, and if you're not successful, you can turn to a broker. If nothing else, use the knowledge that you could be your own broker to negotiate a commission with your broker. That storied six percent is a result of tradition, not law; nowhere does it say that you have to pay brokers six percent. There are conflicting numbers on how many homeowners are selling their homes themselves. About 14 percent of sellers went solo in 2003, according to the National Association of Realtors. The Boston Globe newspaper reviewed sales in its area and found that closer to 25 percent of sales were FSBO. There's no question that there are a lot of services targeted to sellers looking to go FSBO. If you are looking for an alternative to a traditional real estate agent, here are some popular options: Flat Fee Brokers: There seem to be two major players here -- Help-U-Sell and Assist-2-Sell . Both companies are franchises that connect you with local licensed real estate agents. You show your home yourself, and these agents perform all other duties of a traditional broker. The best part, Martin says, is that you pay them one flat fee that varies based on home's value and location. If you pay them a little more, the realtors from these companies will show your house too. An example: a Help-U-Sell customer in Chicago was selling his home for $345,000. The six percent commission would have totaled $21,000. Instead, he paid Help-U-Sell $4,950 to sell his home. If the agent lists your home on the MLS, and another broker brings you a buyer, you will have to pay that broker their two or three percent commission. FSBO Marketing: Other companies such as FSBO.com and ForSaleByOwner.com offer you a variety of marketing options at different price points. You can choose to have your home listed on the companies' Web sites. You can pay more and have yard signs and color brochures designed for your home. Pay even more and have a virtual tour included in your home's listing. Each company is different and offers different packages. Martin says the ultimate packages, which costs $500 or more, allow you to list your home on the MLS -- the same place real estate agents list houses. Again, there's a catch here: if a buyer is brought to your home by an agent who saw the listing on MLS, you do have to pay that broker's two or three percent commission. Negotiated Broker Commission: Again, Martin says you don't have to pay a six percent commission. So don't! In fact, commissions now average a bit over five percent, according to a survey by Real Trends publishers. If your home is on the expensive side and in a hot market, have a serious conversation with your potential broker. Remind him or her that if you list with them, they will get paid. But if you strike out on your own, they get nothing. Isn't one or two percent better than nothing? MMIV, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. INSIDE Saturday Early Show Feliz Navidad From Jon Secada Latin Star Sings Songs Of Christmas • Celebrate Christmas Eve With Fish • Last Christmas Together • Safe Cooking: A Quiz • More TOP STORIES Conditions Ripe For More Fires Forecasters Predict Return Of Hazardous Conditions; 5 Killed In Texas, Okla. • West Coast Braces For More Floods • Israeli Checkpoint Stops Bomber • Existing Home Sales Decline • More Back To Top Advertisement TOP VIDEOS Iraqi Election Turmoil | E-Mail West: Rain, Snow & Mudslides | E-Mail Crawling While Intoxicated? | E-Mail Teen Amputee's New Life | E-Mail Saturday Early Show VIDEOS The First Lady On Camp David | E-Mail More Video ADVERTISING LINKS | What's This? E-Mail Sign-Up: Breaking News | Today On CBS News | 60 Minutes | 48 Hours | The Early Show | CBS Sunday Morning | News Summaries Recommended Sites: CBS.com | CBS SportsLine | UPN.com | CBS Store | CBS Careers | CBS Cares Site Map | Help | Advertise | Contact Us | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | CBS Bios | Internships CBSNews.com The Web MMV, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Home Equity Fraud How

Don’t Lose Your Home. Home Equity Fraud Home Equity Fraud Consumers Union West Coast Regional Office Don’t Lose Your Home. Home Equity Fraud How To Protect Yourself From Home Equity Lending Fraud DO Get free pre-loan counseling before you sign on the dotted line. Shop around for the best home equity loan for your financial situation. Read every word on any loan document before you sign. Avoid loans with one large "balloon payment" at the end. Protect your friends and neighbors by reporting home equity fraud immediately. DON’T Don’t fall for a loan from a door-to-door salesman or home improvement contractor who comes to your home. Don’t decide whether you can afford a loan by the monthly payments alone. Don’t sign anything that has blank spaces. Don’t take out a loan on your property for anyone else unless you can afford to lose that money forever. What Is Home Equity Fraud? Sometimes, taking out a loan against your home’s equity can be a good idea. Home equity borrowing should not be a problem as long as the loan is a fair one and you have the ability to repay the loan. Home equity lending fraud is different: Lenders seek you out and trick you into taking out a loan against your home which you cannot afford to repay. Most times, these loans have very high interest rates and steep fees. When you fall behind on your payments, the lender can take your home and all your equity through a legal process called foreclosure. The lender then owns your home. Once the damage is done, it is very hard to undo. Most people never get their homes back again. Why Should I Care? Nationally, home repair and home equity fraud have stripped the value from the homes of an estimated 100,000 people in 29 states. In the entire country, the San Francisco Bay Area is one of the areas hardest hit by home equity fraud. Real people, many of them senior citizens, have lost ownership of their homes and all their equity, with no hope of ever getting any of it back. Anyone with equity in a home is a potential target. You could be next. Your home equity is just like money. Protect it! If you are a homeowner or know someone who is, you should learn about home equity lending fraud. Knowing what to look for and how to protect yourself can keep you or a loved one from losing a home. Here’s How To Protect Yourself From The Most Common Types Of Home Equity Fraud: Don’t take out a loan from an uninvited door-to-door contractor who appears at your home. Instead: Many local government agencies have special programs to make it easy to repair housing. See if you qualify for one of these programs available in your area. See the Home Improvement Resource List, a separate Consumers Union publication. Find your own contractor; don’t wait for one to come to you. Shop for your own financing. You’ll probably get a better deal. Steer clear of door-to-door salespersons who want to fix your home after a disaster such as an earthquake or flood. Instead: Call the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) at 1(800)462-9029 for information about repairing and financing repairs to your home after a disaster. If you are in foreclosure because you couldn’t pay your mortgage, someone you never heard of will offer you a new loan. Watch out. Instead: Think about selling your home and keeping your equity rather than taking out another loan. See a credit counselor to talk about all of your alternatives. Don’t put your other debts "on the house" through a bill consolidation plan. When you consolidate credit card debt or your car loan, for example, into a home equity loan, you put your home on the line for that debt. Once you put that debt "on your house," you can lose your home if you don’t make those payments. Instead: Talk to a credit counselor. You can get help to work with your creditors to make payments more manageable, possibly without putting debt "on your house." Look Out For These Danger Signs "No Credit? No Job? No Problem!" "Don’t worry, you have plenty of equity in your home to qualify for a loan." Walk away from anyone who says any of these things to you. You may be dealing with someone who will treat you unfairly. They don’t care if you can pay the loan. They know they can legally take your house through foreclosure if you don’t pay. In their eyes, the one thing that "qualifies" you for a loan is your inability to pay it. Before you borrow against your home, ask yourself these two questions: Can I afford this loan? Just because a lender says you "qualify" doesn’t mean you are getting an affordable or fair loan. If you cannot afford the loan, you will lose your home. What will I do if I lose my home? Most people have nowhere to go after they lose their homes. Remember that it is easier to learn how to protect your home now than it is to pick up the pieces after it’s gone. Take advantage of free, local loan counseling. See the Resources section at the end of this pamphlet. Don’t Let Anyone Steal Your Home! Here’s How: DO Get the "big picture" on a loan. Look at more than the monthly payments. Make sure that a loan’s interest rate and fees are competitive and fair. Shop around with different lenders to compare. Hang-up on unsolicited telephone callers. Toss-out mailers you receive from companies offering to arrange a home loan for you. Steer clear of high-pressure sales tactics, such as claims that an offer is good only for a limited time. Seek help from a trusted family member or friend who understands financial matters and can help you get free loan counseling. Avoid loans that are set up as "interest only, non-amortizing or partially amortizing loans." With this type of loan, you still owe the money you borrowed after you make all the payments. You must make one large, final payment, known as a balloon payment. If you can’t make this payment, you may lose your home through foreclosure. You should avoid these loans at all cost. Beware of lenders or contractors who try to trick you into signing away your home. Make sure that a "Contract for Home Improvement Services" is only that. Don’t give your house away by signing a "Deed of Trust" or a "Quitclaim Deed." Think twice about taking out a loan against your home to give money to anyone,even a friend or family member. Consider such a request only if you can afford lose that money forever. Otherwise, you may lose your house if the other person doesn’t repay you in time. Act fast if you were pressured into signing for a loan you didn’t really want or cannot afford. Federal law gives you three days to get out of a loan contract whenever your home is used as security for a home equity loan. You may cancel the loan for any reason, but only if you do it in writing within 3 days. This is known as the right of rescission. Contact an attorney immediately if you have any questions about whether your lender violated the law. DON’T Don’t sign anything related to a home loan without first obtaining independent, free advice from a nonprofit counseling agency. Check the Resources list below. Don’t take the first loan offer that lands in your lap. Shop around! Some lenders charge more than others do. Don’t trust door-to-door loan sellers. If you really need or want a home loan, you should make the first contact and carefully investigate all the possibilities before considering a loan. Don’t take out a loan that is made solely on the value of your home, not on your ability to repay it. Your home equity alone does not give you the income you need to make the monthly payments. Don’t borrow more money than you need. The bigger the loan, the more stake your lender will have in your home equity. Don’t sign a form with incorrect information about yourself on it. Don’t sign anything to do with your home that contains blank spaces. Once your signature is on a form, anyone can fill in those blank spaces with obligations that may be very different than the ones you have agreed to. Don’t sign any forms written in a language you do not understand. You may be signing away your home without even realizing it! It’s okay to say "I don’t understand and I will not sign this." Remember: if the offer is good today, it should be good tomorrow If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Resources Before you take out a home equity loan, get pre-loan counseling for free: San Francisco Bar Association of San Francisco Equity Fraud Hotline and lawyer referral (415) 782-8903 Consumer Credit Counseling Service (415) 788-0288 or (800) 777-7526 Consumer Action (415) 777-9635 Alameda County ECHO Housing (510) 271-7931 Contra Costa County ECHO Housing (925) 679-8023 San Mateo County Consumer Credit Counseling Service (800) 200-6444 Legal Aid Society of San Mateo (650) 377-0158 East Palo Alto Law Collective (650) 853-1600 Santa Clara County Consumer Credit Counseling Service (800) 969-7526 If you feel you are the victim of home equity lending fraud, call one of the local agencies above. Then call the National Fraud Information Center. File a written complaint against the lender with the appropriate local law enforcement and state regulatory agencies. National Fraud Information Center (800) 876-7060 Fraud reports from consumers are sent within minutes to the appropriate law enforcement agency. Law Enforcement: San Francisco Office of the District Attorney: (415) 553-1814 Alameda County Office of the District Attorney: (510) 569-9281 Contra Costa County Office of the District Attorney: (925) 646-4500 San Mateo County Office of the District Attorney: (650) 363-4677 Santa Clara County Office of the District Attorney, Real Estate Fraud Division (408) 792-2880 State Regulatory Agencies: Call each agency to see if the lender you are complaining about is licensed by that agency. Sometimes lenders are licensed by both agencies. California Department of Real Estate 185 Berry Street, Room 3400 San Francisco, CA 94107 (415) 904-5925 California Department of Corporations 3700 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90010 (800) 347-6995 (toll free) [ Health ] [ Finance ] [ Food ] [ Product ] [ Other ] [ About CU ] [ News ] [ Tips ] [ Home ] Please contact us at: http://www.consunion.org/contact.htm All information ©1998 Consumers Union