Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 640 posts

Re: San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

#311

Post by almost_usual »

borroka wrote: post #299
Kalium wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not as true as it's talked up to be, but there is definitely an "Eww, techies " sentiment found among a non-trivial chunk of those that identify as "natives". You run into it a few times and you learn to spot some of the early warning signs.

It depends how good looking the techie is

Might be true for dating in the short term but not the long term. Once you start meeting family and lifelong friends there’s a good chance peer pressure causes the relationship to splinter.

There’s a “you’ll never be one of us” sentiment.

Re: San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

#312

Post by colinmhayes »

ahoy wrote: post #67
cft wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there was no rent control, prices would drop even more. Firstly landlords are afraid to permanently lock down at a lower price, offering free months of rent instead. Secondly rent controlled tenants are afraid to lose their apartments, that are still below the market rates.

If there were no landlords prices would drop further still!

If there were no landlords there would be no price because there would be no rentals.

Re: San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

#313

Post by issa »

gfxgirl wrote: post #139
issa wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would counter that proximity to work is a huge influence on where people decide to live. There are (or will be) bars and restaurants everywhere, which means if you can work from home, there is significantly less incentive to live in a small, overpriced apartment.

The bars are restaurants available in most cities in the USA do not compare to the bars and restaurants in cities like SF, Los Angeles, NYC, Tokyo, Paris, etc..... I mean places like Flagstaff Arizona, or Temecula California, etc.... In the cities listed in the first paragraph there are, unique bars (not sure what word to use) and interesting restaurants. In most cites there are just places like AppleBess and the loc…

I don't think it makes you a snob to say that there is better food in certain cities. If you have any special requirements, like being vegan, you aren't going to find anywhere near the same options in smaller cities. But I think for most people, access to quality restaurants is fairly low on the list. Certainly far below proximity to work. Put another way, would you pay an extra $2k a month to be able to eat at certain restaurants? You might! But most people wouldn't.

Re: San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

#314

Post by nradov »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #173
dylan604 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been a few articles lately about the number of west coast people moving to Texas to the point that Texas will be considered a purple state after the upcoming election. I'm from Texas, moved to CA for a number of years, and have since returned to TX. Things like no state income tax and lower sales tax are major attractions, add to that the dirt cheap prices of property in comparison to CA. There are other thin…

> There are other things that are cheaper that just make day-to-day life easier. Not having any protections or laws supporting laborers help make things cheaper too. No parental/sick leave, no per day overtime maximums, no mandatory break times, no non compete ban, lower minimum wages, etc. Not that it’s the only reason, but I notice it to be a trend in “low cost” states. The exception seems to be WA, which has decen…

More labor protections also tend to cause higher unemployment rates. The unemployment rate in Texas is currently about half the rate in California. No one wants to see desperate workers exploited by employers, but if we increase worker protections too much then we end up hurting the people we meant to help.

Re: San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

#315

Post by colinmhayes »

lqet wrote: post #185

There is currently an article (in German) in the Frankfurter Allgemeine called "The Demise of San Francisco" [0] in which the possible reasons for this are discussed. One reason given (which I cannot verify as I don't live there) is: people are fleeing the city because it has become a terrible place to live: Quote from the article, Google translation: > Jayson Hill recently stopped by his old apartment. He didn't fee…

Do people actually care about seeing drug deals? what's the problem?

Re: San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

#316

Post by JamesBarney »

jojo2333 wrote: post #241
JamesBarney wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in oil and gas, by no means the epicenter of innovation and many of these companies are talking about a moving to a mostly remote work force to save on real estate expenses.

I don't buy the "cost savings" narrative. By a long shot, the largest expense for large companies in employee salaries - rent, by comparison, is a drop in the bucket. What follows is that companies should be most concerned about employee and team productivity rather then office expenses.

It's very difficult for a corporation to measure changes in employee or team productivity in many white collar professions ..specifically software development.

I personally don't know of any large corporations that track it well enough on a corporation wide level to be able to tell you if any change significantly affected developer productivity.

But the check they write every month for rent is very easily measured and reduced.

Also I was specifically told by the VP who was in charge of making the decision for his division why he was doing it, and it was costs savings.

Re: San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

#317

Post by seanmcdirmid »

disown wrote: post #310
zamalek wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seattle's reckoning/correction is coming. The city is doing everything in its power to chase money away, Amazon is trying to move to Bellevue as an example. People are growing tired of the messy streets, needles are tents are spreading as the city ignores the problem. On the plus side, our landlord is doing everything in his power to keep us happy, for the first time.

> Seattle's reckoning/correction is coming. The city is doing everything in its power to chase money away And yet the skyscrapers and office buildings are still going up. The construction boom hasn't mitigated. Seattle isn't doing a good job at chasing money away. > People are growing tired of the messy streets, needles are tents are spreading as the city ignores the problem. It's just a handful of streets. It's cert…

I just moved to Ballard, and we have a few homeless encampments (the closest one to me is at Ballard park). I'm really surprised in how bad it isn't here: the residents are mostly well behaved and don't leave needles or anything like that hanging around (and they don't poop on the streets since the city installed a bunch of portable toilets). It is still kind of a bummer, but it is far from a deal breaking nuisance.

Re: San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

#318

Post by TMWNN »

sidibe wrote: post #217

Doesn't look like landlords are expecting this is a long term thing. Monthly rents are more expensive for 12 month leases than 6 month leases right now

This is not unusual regardless of circumstances. Most landlords nowadays use software that generates prices based on lease terms. A lease for six months is less desirable than for 12 months because there is always a gap in tenancy, necessity for renovation between tenants, etc.

This causes weird outcomes depending on the lease length, like 13 months being significantly cheaper per month than 12, or one month (if you needed some extra time before your next place opens up) being three times the cost per month as compared to a standard lease.

Re: San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

#319

Post by Kalium »

whimsicalism wrote: post #297
Kalium wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not as true as it's talked up to be, but there is definitely an "Eww, techies " sentiment found among a non-trivial chunk of those that identify as "natives". You run into it a few times and you learn to spot some of the early warning signs.

I find that building solidarity around the distortionary/gentrifying effects of the tech boom, to at least show that you are cognizant of the problems people are facing goes a long, long way.

I stopped trying that after it was turned into a series of direct and personal accusations of how I am the evil techie gentrifier. My experience has been the opposite of yours - showing awareness comes with the expectation that you accept blame.

Your mileage may vary.

Re: San Francisco Apartment Rents Crater Up to 31%, Most in U.S.

#320

Post by andorxor »

jeffbee wrote: post #205
refurb wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

80% off is historic norms? That would bring the price down to what it was in the 80’s and inflation alone has doubled that.

The Case-Shiller index is adjusted for inflation, and it has quadrupled in 30 years. So, 75% off then?

Actually, the Case-Shiller index itself is not adjusted for inflation, unless the graph you're looking at explicitly mentions that.
Post reply on HN