How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town • Hacker News Board

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#121

Post by notatcomputer68 » Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 7:27 PM UTC

neuromantik8086 wrote: post #77

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And, this feels like an issue that will naturally fix itself over time, as landlords realize what they're asking for isn't reasonable.

> And, this feels like an issue that will naturally fix itself over time, as landlords realize what they're asking for isn't reasonable. Except it won't, exactly because landlords are rational actors. Let's say the upkeep for a space is $400/mo, and the rental for that same space is 3000/mo. A storefront could be vacant for 2 years and a landlord would still turn a hefty profit if they were able to get someone to sig…

But what about the landlords mortgage?

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#122

Post by dbattaglia » Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 7:29 PM UTC

ascagnel_ wrote: post #108

jotjotzzz wrote: post #90

I've lived and grew up in NYC for almost 30 years and I agree with the author. Manhattan has become an unaffordable ghost town. Walk down West Village, Union Sq, Flatiron, etc.., you see rows of closed stores that have gone vacant for a very long time now. In contrast, I was in London recently and that city was thriving compared to Manhattan, it was lively and beautiful. In addition, NYC Subway and transportation is…

The thing I find craziest about Union Square is the number of drugstores. Just along the south end of the square, you've got Walgreen's (a national brand) and Duane Reade (which used to be independent, but is now a local brand for Walgreen's) 600ft. or so apart from each other. How in any way is that sustainable?

Across the street from my apartment on 14th and 1st there is a Duane Reade and CVS literally attached to each other. It’s pretty crazy. The CVS is old and grungy, Duane Reade newer and larger (3 floors). I suspect those differences, plus possibly prople’s dependence on a certain pharmacy brand (thanks to their health insurance) is what allows them both to stay open.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#123

Post by bpicolo » Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 7:33 PM UTC

addicted wrote: post #44

blindwatchmaker wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The turnaround of restaurants and bars here is amazingly fast. When one fails, another one springs up. The same street will have very different storefronts each year. Is that supposed to be a positive thing? Sounds pretty unstable and a terrible detriment to developing an actual neighbourhood.

Not generally. The good stuff will stick around. The stuff that isn’t as good wont. Most cities are about change, and while nostalgia is great, cities that look the same as they did 20 years previously usually are not successful cities. The reason is simple. Cities tend to attract younger folks. As the generation of people they attract changes, the tastes they need to cater to also changes.

> The stuff that isn’t as good wont

Tons of good stuff closes in Manhattan.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#124

Post by lazerpants » Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 7:38 PM UTC

da02 wrote: post #83

aboodman wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived there for years and loved it. It makes for an incredibly vibrant neighborhood feel. Everytime you go for a walk there's someplace new to stop. Yes, lots of places don't make it, but lots of places do make it and stick around for awhile.

What are some stores, companies, or brands that seem to survive and thrive?

Depends on neighborhood, but generally: Duane Reade, CVS, Chase Bank, Starbucks, Kennedy Fried Chicken, Dunkin Donuts.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#125

Post by whack » Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 7:44 PM UTC

Let's recap the author's main points:

- Retail revenues are not rising as fast as rent

- Hence, shopping/merchandise stores are being replaced by bars/restaurants/coffee-shops etc

Ie, businesses that sell stuff are being replaced by businesses that sell experiences.

Great!

Consumerism and materialism is a black hole for your soul. What I really care about are vibrant experiences. Interesting bars/restaurants where my friends and I can hang out. Great live theater where I can watch the arts. And yes, even stimulating coffee shops where I can spend the day reading and writing.

Want to go shopping for goods? Go online where you can shop to your heart's content. I'm glad the city's valuable real estate is being taken over by businesses that are more focused on human interactions.

For the record, I've lived in Manhattan for many years in recent times, and it has never once felt like a ghost town. I've heard many complaints about the city, but I've literally never heard anyone else complain about it feeling like a ghost town, or anything even similar. Living in suburbia though...

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#126

Post by effingwewt » Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 7:46 PM UTC

pontifier wrote: post #105

Paying rent is for suckers.

Or, you know, for people who can't afford to buy.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#127

Post by JamesBarney » Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 7:57 PM UTC

jannotti wrote: post #6

roenxi wrote: post #3

Is there some legal issue at play here that the article isn't drawing attention to? Why is it a better idea to leave a property vacant than to have a short-term tenant?

I thought the problem was almost the opposite of what the article discussed. I thought that commercial real estate almost always used long term leases and that owners are reluctant to sign them in a fast rising market. If your building is vacant, there is the possibility of selling to a developer with plans for a big development in the short term. That would argue for being pretty happy about short-term leases, since…

It's hard to do short term commerical leases.

One the build out costs lots of money and if the owner doesn't renew you've lost $60,000.

Two if you end up with a successful coffee shop/bar/etc the owner can squeeze you out of every dime of profit because it's disastrous to most of these establishments to move.

It means that there's just not a lot of demand for short term commerical leases. Exceptions are seasonal stores like a Halloween or Christmas store who are happy to sign a short term lease, usually at a discount.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#128

Post by jessaustin » Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 8:19 PM UTC

djrogers wrote: post #33

Itaxpica wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Landlords can take tax write-offs for empty properties, so they’re incentivized to sit on empty storefronts until the perfect long-term lease comes along rather than rent to a less ideal shorter-term tenant.

A tax write off is going to be worth, at best, ~35% of the value gained from actually leasing the property. That makes it considerably worse to hold on to.

Tenants are a pain in the ass. Buildout (for which tenants often expect you to pay) is expensive. Unless you're leveraged to the hilt, you can afford a few quarters of loan payments on an already-built building. That being the case, signing up a marginal tenant is throwing good money after bad.

If the market has changed in permanent ways, and you're never going to see another good tenant, you want to learn that as soon as you can, and then get out. This is why our great leader always structured his deals so the company could declare bankruptcy and he could skate away with the previous profits.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#129

Post by kenmicklas » Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 8:25 PM UTC

naravara wrote: post #86

neuromantik8086 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And, this feels like an issue that will naturally fix itself over time, as landlords realize what they're asking for isn't reasonable. Except it won't, exactly because landlords are rational actors. Let's say the upkeep for a space is $400/mo, and the rental for that same space is 3000/mo. A storefront could be vacant for 2 years and a landlord would still turn a hefty profit if they were able to get someone to sig…

This is why property and land taxes are good. Land is, as they say, the only thing they're not making any more of. If you're owning it and not putting it towards any productive use you ought to pay back into the commons for the lost utility.

In this case property tax (the non-land component of it) only exacerbates the problem though.

Re: How Manhattan Became a Rich Ghost Town

#130

Post by asauce » Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 8:26 PM UTC

sarabande wrote: post #2

It seems to me like in big cities, as this article describes what eventually will happen is the rich will buy up the property because nobody else can afford it, service workers won't be able to actually live within a reasonable distance in order to work there, and the city will exist mainly for 1) wealthy professionals, 2) people who use real estate to park their money, and 3) tourists. Regular working-class folk dis…

This is exactly what is happening in Vancouver. The rich have parked their money in downtown real estate, so the working class is being pushed further and further out of the downtown district.