Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need a high household income, or make your money mostly in cash, get a sublet and get your kids into one of those gifted programs or private schools on scholarship.

This is in fact probably the case, but anyone who is laying down 2.5+ million in cash for an apartment and discussing second homes, should not be qualifying for most private school scholarships since they're vastly FA based on need. The system is totally broken though so, maybe?

Did you two read the OP? No kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to pay cash for the apt. but co-ops also want to see a % of liquid assets, which varies. High though.

No sane rich person should buy a co-op.

To elaborate: A co-op is less than a condo, but that’s because you end up owning part of a corporation that owns a building. When you buy a co-op, you may benefit from being part of a gang that will look out for the solvency and value of the building, but you’re also buying a family full of crazy people to micro manage your life.

If you buy a condo, you might be end up with some drama. Co-op drama is like condo drama on steroids.

If you’re rich enough to buy a fancy Manhattan co-op, you can afford to buy a stand-alone one-family house in a nice area in Astoria, Hoboken, Jersey City or Brooklyn, or maybe even in some part of Manhattan. You could be as noisy as you want and do whatever you want with your floors.

If you absolutely have to live near Carnegie Hall and want to own something, you could get a condo and buy part-time drama.

If you buy a co-op, you’re buying full-time drama. If you have some money, why use it to give people the legal right to boss you around?

This drama bit thing is funny

I did okay with a 3,999 per month 880 square foot apartment in a nice new building on about 155k per year for a few years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to pay cash for the apt. but co-ops also want to see a % of liquid assets, which varies. High though.

No sane rich person should buy a co-op.

To elaborate: A co-op is less than a condo, but that’s because you end up owning part of a corporation that owns a building. When you buy a co-op, you may benefit from being part of a gang that will look out for the solvency and value of the building, but you’re also buying a family full of crazy people to micro manage your life.

If you buy a condo, you might be end up with some drama. Co-op drama is like condo drama on steroids.

If you’re rich enough to buy a fancy Manhattan co-op, you can afford to buy a stand-alone one-family house in a nice area in Astoria, Hoboken, Jersey City or Brooklyn, or maybe even in some part of Manhattan. You could be as noisy as you want and do whatever you want with your floors.

If you absolutely have to live near Carnegie Hall and want to own something, you could get a condo and buy part-time drama.

If you buy a co-op, you’re buying full-time drama. If you have some money, why use it to give people the legal right to boss you around?

Anonymous wrote:You need to pay cash for the apt. but co-ops also want to see a % of liquid assets, which varies. High though.

No sane rich person should buy a co-op.

Anonymous wrote:By comfortable, I mean around 1500 square feet, at least partial view of the city or park. Not necessarily luxurious lifestyle - some dinners out, some entertainment, but we’re not talking hamptons every summer or anything.

For Lower Manhattan, with a real lease, for someone with no connect: maybe $168,000?

I think you can get a nice one bedroom for about $3,500 per month without a lot of hassle. Four times that for a year would be $168,000. Note that the apartment might be more like 900 square feet than 1,500. I don’t think normal people in Lowe Manhattan have 1,500-square-foot apartments. That’s like moving to Chevy Chase and expecting to have your own tennis courts.

I think you can get rent down to $2,500 with aggressive apartment hunting and flexibility about considerations such as a view. If you can be happy in an apartment that rents for $2,500 per month and devote 30 percent of gross income to rent, maybe you could get by with $100,000 per year.

I think people in the fancy parts of Brooklyn might pay just a little less but get more space.

If you’re willing to live in a frowzy but fairly safe place outside of Lower Manhattan, you could probably get annual expenses down to $70,000, and you might actually end up with, say, $1,200 square feet and a balcony, roof access or a small backyard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By comfortable, I mean around 1500 square feet, at least partial view of the city or park. Not necessarily luxurious lifestyle - some dinners out, some entertainment, but we’re not talking hamptons every summer or anything.

A view of the city is very different than a view of the park!

Anyway, 1500 square feet in a decent building will run you at least 10k a month in rent.

Thanks. I’m thinking cash for the apartment, we can spend up to $2.5M. Just wondering about all other expenses, including condo fees.

OP, if you're actually serious about this, you would have to tell us what borough/neighborhood you're interested in. Also, the sq footage you described would be palatial -- far more than what most NYers would consider "comfortable." Most NYC apartments are much smaller. We have 2200 sq ft but we own a house in Brooklyn. We actually only live in 1800 (we rent out the top floor, which is a separate apartment). For $2.5M you could buy a house outside of Manhattan. Probably not with views of Manhattan or of Prospect Park, but maybe near the park. (A view of the city would imply you're in New Jersey. I'm guessing you meant of a skyline?))

A comfortable HHI in NYC (by my definition) would be $200K. We own a home, have two kids in public with significant extracurriculars, take a fly vacation or two yearly, can eat out once or twice a week, can save for retirement and college and add to sinking funds.

By your definition (huge space with park views), probably closer to $500K.

Anonymous wrote:You need to pay cash for the apt. but co-ops also want to see a % of liquid assets, which varies. High though.

Some co-ops also require that you have X months of maintenance fees in cash set aside.

Anonymous wrote:You need a high household income, or make your money mostly in cash, get a sublet and get your kids into one of those gifted programs or private schools on scholarship.

This is in fact probably the case, but anyone who is laying down 2.5+ million in cash for an apartment and discussing second homes, should not be qualifying for most private school scholarships since they're vastly FA based on need. The system is totally broken though so, maybe?

You need a high household income, or make your money mostly in cash, get a sublet and get your kids into one of those gifted programs or private schools on scholarship.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My friend just bought an 1800 sq foot place for $3.5m I'm assuming her DH makes 7 figures. They have a place in the Hampton too, as does everyone else I know who lives in the city.

Nice to hear from you, Ivanka!

No, it's Chelsea.

Anonymous wrote:My friend just bought an 1800 sq foot place for $3.5m I'm assuming her DH makes 7 figures. They have a place in the Hampton too, as does everyone else I know who lives in the city.

Nice to hear from you, Ivanka!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My friend just bought an 1800 sq foot place for $3.5m I'm assuming her DH makes 7 figures. They have a place in the Hampton too, as does everyone else I know who lives in the city.

I live in a building where the apartments range from 1.5-3.5 mm and not one person here has a place in the Hamptons. Lots of second homes, but more Hudson Valley and Martha’s Vineyard, of all places (too far for my taste). Even with the couple super-wealthy families I know, the parents have hamptons homes, but the kids opt not to. One sold his parents’ place when they died. My impression is that the Hamptons are slowly losing their place in the N.Y. social/vacation scene.

The point is that most people who own expensive apartments own a second home outside of the city.

But is irrelevant to the question asked.