« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7

Author Topic: Yin Hu Tower 84th & 37ave  (Read 27845 times)

Offline francis

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 752
    • View Profile
Re: Vin Chu Tower--apt. building at 84th and 37th
« Reply #45 on: February 08, 2014, 05:37:35 PM »
I for one am not crazy about the building being a condo. It suggest that investors can come in, buy an apartment and then rent it out to whomever. I would hope that the people who buy there care for the neighborhood. Coop owners and homeowners generally have a more vested interest in the neighborhood. Although  I haven't seen any of the apartments, the square footage and pricing suggest that you can get something much nicer and with more character in a pre-war just around the corner.
Logged

Offline dssjh

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 5314
    • View Profile
Re: Vin Chu Tower--apt. building at 84th and 37th
« Reply #46 on: February 08, 2014, 06:39:18 PM »
agree with all of francis and jack's comments. thankfully, there's not a lot of room for 'investors' to tinker in the area, other than buying up a block of 37th or (far less likely) northern to raze retail for similar cookie cutter places.
Logged

Offline rhydewithdis

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 384
    • View Profile
Re: Vin Chu Tower--apt. building at 84th and 37th
« Reply #47 on: February 10, 2014, 10:26:36 AM »
Quote from: francis on February 08, 2014, 05:37:35 PM
It suggest that investors can come in, buy an apartment and then rent it out to whomever.

The price points here make it unlikely these will attract many "investors" who rent them out because it will be impossible to be cash-flow positive if purchased at or near the asking prices. What you may see is owner occupied units hit the rental market several years down the line as rent prices increase enough to support the monthly mortgages + carrying charges + taxes.
Logged

Offline JIF

  • Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
Re: Vin Chu Tower--apt. building at 84th and 37th
« Reply #48 on: February 10, 2014, 11:00:32 AM »
A question...aren't there all these tax breaks/deductibles when an investor makes a loss on his/her apartment investment?  So it is always a win/win situation for the investor?
Logged

Offline rhydewithdis

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 384
    • View Profile
Re: Vin Chu Tower--apt. building at 84th and 37th
« Reply #49 on: February 10, 2014, 02:22:20 PM »
Quote from: JIF on February 10, 2014, 11:00:32 AM
A question...aren't there all these tax breaks/deductibles when an investor makes a loss on his/her apartment investment?  So it is always a win/win situation for the investor?

Not an easy answer so I will say it depends. If you buy a place and just let it sit empty and try to say you operated at a "loss" - that won't fly with the IRS.
If you have a deadbeat tenant and can demonstrate you took reasonable steps to collect on the bad debt, you could deduct the loss as a bad business debt. Of course you need business income to deduct it from.

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc414.html

This comes up often here where a lot of folks think that landlords with empty storefronts are not losing money because "there all these tax breaks/deductibles when an investor makes a loss..." but I would venture to guess that is usually not the case.
Logged

Offline lalochezia

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 819
    • View Profile
Re: Vin Chu Tower--apt. building at 84th and 37th
« Reply #50 on: February 10, 2014, 02:25:01 PM »


This comes up often here where a lot of folks think that landlords with empty storefronts are not losing money because "there all these tax breaks/deductibles when an investor makes a loss..." but I would venture to guess that is usually not the case.


So, what IS keeping all these storefronts empty? Why would a landlord turn down , say $8k a month in hand rather than the $12k that they are asking  for, and let it sit for months or years?
Logged

Offline Ed

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 656
    • View Profile
Re: Vin Chu Tower--apt. building at 84th and 37th
« Reply #51 on: February 10, 2014, 04:09:47 PM »
Quote from: rhydewithdis on February 10, 2014, 02:22:20 PM
Not an easy answer so I will say it depends. If you buy a place and just let it sit empty and try to say you operated at a "loss" - that won't fly with the IRS.
If you have a deadbeat tenant and can demonstrate you took reasonable steps to collect on the bad debt, you could deduct the loss as a bad business debt. Of course you need business income to deduct it from.

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc414.html

This comes up often here where a lot of folks think that landlords with empty storefronts are not losing money because "there all these tax breaks/deductibles when an investor makes a loss..." but I would venture to guess that is usually not the case.

You don't have to be a "business" to rent residential property, the tax topic you linked to is aimed primarily at private persons who will show an income stream from renting residential property, rather than a business entity (like a property management company or real estate corporation) with an income stream renting residential property. But, sure, an individual can't buy a place, let it sit empty and deduct a non existent "lost rent" amount from their income.
Logged

Offline rhydewithdis

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 384
    • View Profile
Re: Vin Chu Tower--apt. building at 84th and 37th
« Reply #52 on: February 10, 2014, 05:18:18 PM »
Quote from: lalochezia on February 10, 2014, 02:25:01 PM


This comes up often here where a lot of folks think that landlords with empty storefronts are not losing money because "there all these tax breaks/deductibles when an investor makes a loss..." but I would venture to guess that is usually not the case.


So, what IS keeping all these storefronts empty? Why would a landlord turn down , say $8k a month in hand rather than the $12k that they are asking  for, and let it sit for months or years?

Often times, commercial property owners need to spend significant sums between tenants to properly accommodate the new tenants (i.e. if a restaurant moves out and a day care wants to move in, the place needs to be modified). Who pays for what becomes a negotiation. That takes time.

The property owner may also have a portfolio of properties and limited capital to invest. If they own the property outright (free of any loans), then their monthly costs are minimal (property taxes mainly). So you can imagine they would rather focus and prioritize their efforts on other property where they would get the most bang for the buck.

Another consideration is that the owner is in talks with a bigger developer who wants to come along and buy their property and others in the immediate area to building something more lucrative. That's a tangle-web of complexities and takes time. If you look in LIC, you can see many cases of owned properties sitting vacant for years and the owners finally making serious money on them by selling to developers. If they had tenants with long-term leases in place, they would have been stuck and dealing with legal issues for years. If they were altruistic and lent their property to artists to use for years, they would have those same artists turn around and sue them because they now felt entitled to the space (Four Pointz?). Definitely not always a win-win for the landlord.
Logged

Offline jeanette

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 1091
    • View Profile
Re: Vin Chu Tower--apt. building at 84th and 37th
« Reply #53 on: February 10, 2014, 10:27:08 PM »
Quote from: rhydewithdis on February 10, 2014, 05:18:18 PM
Quote from: lalochezia on February 10, 2014, 02:25:01 PM


This comes up often here where a lot of folks think that landlords with empty storefronts are not losing money because "there all these tax breaks/deductibles when an investor makes a loss..." but I would venture to guess that is usually not the case.


So, what IS keeping all these storefronts empty? Why would a landlord turn down , say $8k a month in hand rather than the $12k that they are asking  for, and let it sit for months or years?

Often times, commercial property owners need to spend significant sums between tenants to properly accommodate the new tenants (i.e. if a restaurant moves out and a day care wants to move in, the place needs to be modified). Who pays for what becomes a negotiation. That takes time.

The property owner may also have a portfolio of properties and limited capital to invest. If they own the property outright (free of any loans), then their monthly costs are minimal (property taxes mainly). So you can imagine they would rather focus and prioritize their efforts on other property where they would get the most bang for the buck.

Another consideration is that the owner is in talks with a bigger developer who wants to come along and buy their property and others in the immediate area to building something more lucrative. That's a tangle-web of complexities and takes time. If you look in LIC, you can see many cases of owned properties sitting vacant for years and the owners finally making serious money on them by selling to developers. If they had tenants with long-term leases in place, they would have been stuck and dealing with legal issues for years. If they were altruistic and lent their property to artists to use for years, they would have those same artists turn around and sue them because they now felt entitled to the space (Four Pointz?). Definitely not always a win-win for the landlord.

I'M SPEECHLESS.
Logged

Offline hfm

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 572
    • View Profile
Re: Vin Chu Tower--apt. building at 84th and 37th
« Reply #54 on: February 11, 2014, 11:27:04 AM »
Huh.. we bought our pre-war 2br/1ba 930 sqft condo for much less..  I should take a peek at the open house or whatever just to see if it's worth a ridiculous price hike for another bed and bathroom and 60 odd sqft essentially.. not sure what "just under 1000" is exactly..

The thing that's got me scratching my head is a 3br/2ba unit at under 1000 sqft.. those bedrooms must be TINY... our master bedroom is huge and the 2nd bedroom is just big enough for a double bed and some light furniture (or a fantastic sized office..) I look at the layout of our apt and I can't fathom how 3br and 2ba fit into 1000sqft comfortably without being extremely tiny. And around 600K for tiny bedrooms? No thanks... I suppose it probably has a doorman and some other amenities? I would imagine W/D in unit (which we don't have...) but still.. add space for in-unit W/D and 1000 sqft for 3/2 seems even LESS appealing.. where's the closet space? I need to see these things.. :)
Logged

Offline ente

  • Resident
  • ***
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
Yin Hu Tower 84th & 37ave
« Reply #55 on: April 26, 2014, 06:23:19 PM »
Open house today and with a lot of visitors.  All apartments on the second floor were open today for public inspection.  My impression; small rooms, few closets, low ceilings, kitchens in every living room, too many bathrooms, stone tiled living room floors, horribly placed over sized circuit breaker boxes, thin plasterboard walls, tacky public area light fixtures, zero charm.  Old world from the outside, thoughtless construction on the inside.  I'll pass. 
Logged

Offline dssjh

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 5314
    • View Profile
Re: Yin Hu Tower 84th & 37ave
« Reply #56 on: April 26, 2014, 06:57:12 PM »
Nine months to section 8, like the 'Luxury'  building on top of the 7
Logged

Offline madalyn

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 1076
    • View Profile
Re: Yin Hu Tower 84th & 37ave
« Reply #57 on: April 27, 2014, 01:02:41 PM »
Quote from: dssjh on April 26, 2014, 06:57:12 PM
Nine months to section 8, like the 'Luxury'  building on top of the 7

It's my impression that they hope the buyers will be people from China who have money to invest in some U.S. real estate.

The man in charge of information yesterday barely spoke English.  When a neighbor asked for information as to the prices of the apartments of condos, he didn't understand her, even after she repeated the question several times.

Anybody who knows anything about NYC will not be willing to pay those prices for a place  in that building.  They are simply not worth it and, for the money, much nicer places can be had.
Logged

Offline A Queens Girl

  • Tourist
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: Yin Hu Tower 84th & 37ave
« Reply #58 on: April 27, 2014, 03:39:32 PM »
Very disappointing. Cheap construction and finishes. No architectural features. Set up sheets in Chinese, agents barely speaking English. Prices over $610 a square foot. No idea if there are any amenities. But they will probably sell.
Logged

Offline theplanesland

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 620
    • View Profile
Re: Yin Hu Tower 84th & 37ave
« Reply #59 on: April 27, 2014, 05:10:08 PM »
Quote from: madalyn on April 27, 2014, 01:02:41 PM
Quote from: dssjh on April 26, 2014, 06:57:12 PM
Nine months to section 8, like the 'Luxury'  building on top of the 7

It's my impression that they hope the buyers will be people from China who have money to invest in some U.S. real estate.

Absentee owners are such a scourge in our city right now. Not just a Queens problem, either - they're really driving the luxury rental market in Manhattan. Big towers full of pied-a-terres that are either empty 11 months a year or are used for Russian oligarchs' 23-year-old mistresses. Is there any regulation which could slow the city from being used as a parking lot for global capital which takes up physical space, but doesn't contribute in terms of places for actual New Yorkers to live?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7
« previous next »