Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gothamist)   How one crazy, old, unemployed Ph.D turned his rent stabilized Manhattan hovel into $17 million   (gothamist.com) divider line 158
    More: Hero, Ph.D., Manhattan, Herb Sukenik, Central Park West, Mayflower Hotel, Central Park South, MRIs, Mayflower  
•       •       •

26854 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Mar 2014 at 9:22 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



158 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-03-02 06:49:44 PM  
And to think, they could have had it  for the additional cost of 2 meals a week, maybe $200 extra.
 
2014-03-02 07:19:52 PM  
UP did it better.
 
2014-03-02 07:53:03 PM  
Developer boohoo "this old guy is too smart for his own good"

Old guy:

img.fark.net
 
2014-03-02 08:54:44 PM  
And who says rent control doesn't help the people who need it?
 
2014-03-02 08:56:52 PM  

InterruptingQuirk: Developer boohoo "this old guy is too smart for his own good"

Old guy:

[img.fark.net image 345x203]


No kidding.  It sounds like he was exactly smart enough for his own good.
 
2014-03-02 09:30:39 PM  
In the old days this jamoke would have just been found face-down in a crossword puzzle one morning.
 
2014-03-02 09:30:49 PM  
So being a bitter old douchebag with a good memory can get you millions of dollars?

I can't wait to grow old!
 
2014-03-02 09:32:44 PM  
A hit man would have been cheaper
 
2014-03-02 09:34:33 PM  
Well this has some real humanistic components and emotional touch points that can be appreciated by roughly 0% of the populace.

He went on to confirm that he did now want money - even though he had no use for it, no kids, no charitable impulse, and didn't want to leave it to his brother.

Who can't relate to this?
 
2014-03-02 09:36:10 PM  
And the winner is.....the lawyers!!!
 
2014-03-02 09:37:57 PM  
So is he some opportunistic NIMBY blocking development or is he a champion of the people for shaking down some housing developer?

I can't identify any good guys here.
 
2014-03-02 09:39:58 PM  
Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?
 
2014-03-02 09:42:02 PM  

KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?


It always make me happy to see a little grifter fark a big grifter.
 
2014-03-02 09:42:34 PM  
Also: Gothamist excerpted (read: copied) most of the article from the NYPost:

http://nypost.com/2014/03/02/hotel-hermit-got-17m-to-make-way-for-15 -c entral-park-west/

Don't be like Gawker, Gothamist. Nobody likes a Gawker.
 
2014-03-02 09:43:45 PM  
I don't think we are to look at him as a hero.   He's a millionaire, and I believe here on fark that millionaires are bad and to be vilified.

Tear this person down and sick the tax man on him.
 
2014-03-02 09:44:01 PM  
I'd bet good money this gets turned into a movie soon.


KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?


It's not extortion, it's capitalism. Why do you hate America?
 
2014-03-02 09:44:27 PM  

super_grass: Also: Gothamist excerpted (read: copied) most of the article from the NYPost:

http://nypost.com/2014/03/02/hotel-hermit-got-17m-to-make-way-for-15 -c entral-park-west/

Don't be like Gawker, Gothamist. Nobody likes a Gawker.


The New York post is owned by Murdoch.  Gothamist did to the Post, what this crazy coot did do the developers.  Fark the both of them.
 
2014-03-02 09:44:41 PM  

KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?


So how does this developer getting the apartment building help you?  Extortion?  No, business.

So people should be required to help businesses just because?
 
2014-03-02 09:45:18 PM  

toadist: I don't think we are to look at him as a hero.   He's a millionaire, and I believe here on fark that millionaires are bad and to be vilified.

Tear this person down and sick the tax man on him.


His estate will likely go to the state since he's a freaking hermit with no family or friends.
 
2014-03-02 09:45:35 PM  

fusillade762: I'd bet good money this gets turned into a movie soon.


KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?

It's not extortion, it's capitalism. Why do you hate America?


It's only capitalism when the big guy farks the little guy.  The other way around is called a felony.
 
2014-03-02 09:50:00 PM  
I thought rent control was a way to have affordable housing for poor mugs. It doesn't sound like the tenant deserved to be in rent control housing to start with.
 
2014-03-02 09:50:42 PM  
How one crazy, old, unemployed Ph.D turned his rent stabilized Manhattan hovel into $17 million


Step 1: Live in 15 Central Park West, the city's most exclusive building. Everyone else is shiat outta luck.
 
2014-03-02 09:51:18 PM  
ilarge.listal.com
 
2014-03-02 09:52:40 PM  

BigNumber12: How one crazy, old, unemployed Ph.D turned his rent stabilized Manhattan hovel into $17 million


Step 1: Live in 15 Central Park West, the city's most exclusive building. Everyone else is shiat outta luck.


He won housing musical chairs fair and square, the rest of y'all can giiiit out.
 
2014-03-02 09:53:19 PM  

grumpyoldmann: I thought rent control was a way to have affordable housing for poor mugs. It doesn't sound like the tenant deserved to be in rent control housing to start with.


I don't think he was covered under rent control, it was rent stabilization, very different rules that superseded rent control.  There are very few apartments in NYC still covered under the old rent control laws.
 
2014-03-02 09:53:42 PM  
He'll die in three weeks and the developers will be all "AWW DAMN IT".
 
2014-03-02 09:56:32 PM  

Mentat: InterruptingQuirk: Developer boohoo "this old guy is too smart for his own good"

Old guy:

[img.fark.net image 345x203]

No kidding.  It sounds like he was exactly smart enough for his own good.


Actually, from the sound of things, it had nothing to do with what was good for him.  He had plenty of money already, no family to give the new money to, and nothing really to do with it.  He toyed with the developers because he was bored and pissed off that he didn't get free dinner.  That's it.  The developers had the really bad luck to be the only entertainment in a bored, angry, clever dude's life.
 
2014-03-02 10:02:32 PM  
In the movie version John Malkovitch will play the crusty hermit. But we'll need a young Hispanic maid with a tragic back story who softens his rough edges and makes him see the beauty in life. Somebody get Demi Lovato on the phone.
 
2014-03-02 10:03:31 PM  
New York City rental control laws are beyond stupid.  At one time, Santa Monica (California) came close, but I don't think anyone can ever match the NYC stupidity.
 
2014-03-02 10:06:00 PM  
Rent-stabilized tenants in the outer boroughs are increasingly facing malign neglect from greedy landlords

Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.

Santa Monica, CA has rent control. All the buildings are run down ugly crapholes. Nearby Westwood has no rent control, and all the apartment buildings are new and beautiful, some with giant gyms and other awesome amenities. You get what you freaking pay for.

Want to see crappy apartments? Go to a rent controlled city.
 
2014-03-02 10:06:16 PM  

KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?


All you ever hear about rent-control laws are the 90-year-old weirdos living in broom closets in trillion-dollar buildings and paying 38¢ a week. The abuses go as much in the other direction as with any other law, which is to say that the people who can buy and sell entire blocks of Midtown generally do a little better than the people who signed leases in the 1940s.

So the short answer as to why they don't make "common-sense" adjustments to rent-control laws (and I agree your idea is perfectly sensible) is that we don't really live in a common-sense world, especially where Manhattan real estate is concerned. Probably any attempt to reform the law would end it completely.
 
2014-03-02 10:07:14 PM  

Emposter: Mentat: InterruptingQuirk: Developer boohoo "this old guy is too smart for his own good"

Old guy:

[img.fark.net image 345x203]

No kidding.  It sounds like he was exactly smart enough for his own good.

Actually, from the sound of things, it had nothing to do with what was good for him.  He had plenty of money already, no family to give the new money to, and nothing really to do with it.  He toyed with the developers because he was bored and pissed off that he didn't get free dinner.  That's it.  The developers had the really bad luck to be the only entertainment in a bored, angry, clever dude's life.


In my mind(I know), it seems that this guy just didn't want to move and came up with increasingly more ridiculous requests just so they would leave him alone. The money was the only thing that they cared about and so it was the only way to make them feel anything about this situation.
 
2014-03-02 10:07:44 PM  
Someone who has no delusions whatsoever must seem crazy to most people (obviously Subby).
 
2014-03-02 10:10:07 PM  
Old man with a lot of money?

4.bp.blogspot.com

He can get a gold-digging wife for a few years, catch up on what he missed, for all its worth.
 
2014-03-02 10:11:50 PM  

nytmare: He'll die in three weeks and the developers will be all "AWW DAMN IT".


He made it seven years.
 
2014-03-02 10:13:08 PM  

Equilibrist: And to think, they could have had it  for the additional cost of 2 meals a week, maybe $200 extra.


I'm pretty sure that it wasn't the cost, but that the high-end restaurant didn't want to be continually inhabited by a foul-smelling curmudgeon.
 
2014-03-02 10:13:49 PM  

semiotix: KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?

All you ever hear about rent-control laws are the 90-year-old weirdos living in broom closets in trillion-dollar buildings and paying 38¢ a week. The abuses go as much in the other direction as with any other law, which is to say that the people who can buy and sell entire blocks of Midtown generally do a little better than the people who signed leases in the 1940s.

So the short answer as to why they don't make "common-sense" adjustments to rent-control laws (and I agree your idea is perfectly sensible) is that we don't really live in a common-sense world, especially where Manhattan real estate is concerned. Probably any attempt to reform the law would end it completely.


I explained it in a post above.  The original rent control laws the Tea-Party derp-o-sphere loves to bring up as the norm in NYC were superseded by rent stabilization laws decades ago.   There are very few people living in apartments under the old rent control rules because, as you've pointed out,  those people have a median age of 107.  They find some geezer or biddy living in an apartment they leased in 1937 on which they are paying $47 a month in rent the Teahadists go ape-shiat about the injustice of it all.  Meanwhile, down on Wall St, the recent trillion dollar swindle is help up as an example of shrewd business.
 
2014-03-02 10:16:39 PM  

Emposter: Mentat: InterruptingQuirk: Developer boohoo "this old guy is too smart for his own good"

Old guy:

[img.fark.net image 345x203]

No kidding.  It sounds like he was exactly smart enough for his own good.

Actually, from the sound of things, it had nothing to do with what was good for him.  He had plenty of money already, no family to give the new money to, and nothing really to do with it.  He toyed with the developers because he was bored and pissed off that he didn't get free dinner.  That's it.  The developers had the really bad luck to be the only entertainment in a bored, angry, clever dude's life.


His motives weren't the issue, it was whether he was too smart for his own good.  That usually implies outsmarting yourself, which he clearly didn't do.
 
2014-03-02 10:18:00 PM  

Manfred J. Hattan: nytmare: He'll die in three weeks and the developers will be all "AWW DAMN IT".

He made it seven years.


Wow, he really was a pioneer in life...
 
2014-03-02 10:22:50 PM  
I don't see why there should be any hate for this guy at all.  He played the game like a master and got a nice little payday from some douche bag Manhattan real estate developers who will just pass the cost along to their ultra rich clients who won't even notice.
 
2014-03-02 10:22:55 PM  

StanTheMan: Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.


How many do you own?  Are you speaking from first hand experience?
The common tactic in these areas is for landlords to do anything they can to drive residents out.  So leaving the building as craphole as possible becomes a mark of pride for them.
 
2014-03-02 10:23:04 PM  
In other news, you can oink up 17,000,000.00 for a small apartment and still make a profit off of people who want to live in an ant farm.
 
2014-03-02 10:24:08 PM  

KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?


It renews my faith in capitalism.
 
2014-03-02 10:24:36 PM  

KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?


You say that like it's a bad thing. Strange. God helps those who help themselves, so sayeth my mother. Though she never helped herself to seconds.
 
2014-03-02 10:25:48 PM  

Starshines: I don't see why there should be any hate for this guy at all.  He played the game like a master and got a nice little payday from some douche bag Manhattan real estate developers who will just pass the cost along to their ultra rich clients who won't even notice already sold the building for $88

million.

ftfy.  I don't feel bad for them one iota.  I have an entire field of no-farks planted.
 
2014-03-02 10:27:50 PM  

Starshines: I don't see why there should be any hate for this guy at all.  He played the game like a master and got a nice little payday from some douche bag Manhattan real estate developers who will just pass the cost along to their ultra rich clients who won't even notice.


yes, but if you want to go all circle of life the client's money came from some Russian plutocrat who made a mint selling gas to the Europeans through the Ukraine, for which said client was bribing the Ukrainian government and well....look at the news headlines.
 
2014-03-02 10:30:24 PM  

bunner: In other news, you can oink up 17,000,000.00 for a small apartment and still make a profit off of people who want to live in an ant farm.


What a $65 MM ant farm may look like.
 
2014-03-02 10:30:42 PM  
I live in a historic town filled with NYC commuters, so I just came in here to say fark developers to hell.
 
2014-03-02 10:32:30 PM  
... using this one old, weird tip?
 
2014-03-02 10:32:50 PM  

Mentat: Emposter: Mentat: InterruptingQuirk: Developer boohoo "this old guy is too smart for his own good"

Old guy:

[img.fark.net image 345x203]

No kidding.  It sounds like he was exactly smart enough for his own good.

Actually, from the sound of things, it had nothing to do with what was good for him.  He had plenty of money already, no family to give the new money to, and nothing really to do with it.  He toyed with the developers because he was bored and pissed off that he didn't get free dinner.  That's it.  The developers had the really bad luck to be the only entertainment in a bored, angry, clever dude's life.

His motives weren't the issue, it was whether he was too smart for his own good.  That usually implies outsmarting yourself, which he clearly didn't do.


Except, as I pointed out, he didn't need or even really want the money.  So he wasted between one and two years of the last 9 years of his life living it a construction zone because he was too smart to accept the earlier offer, and held out for an even larger amount that he apparently didn't want or need.  That sounds too smart for his own good to me.
 
2014-03-02 10:33:31 PM  
this is an example of how every marriage and government program should have a mandatory 7 year self destruction aspect.
 
2014-03-02 10:34:09 PM  

organizmx: I live in a historic town filled with NYC commuters, so I just came in here to say fark developers to hell.


A developer built what you currently live in.
 
2014-03-02 10:34:11 PM  

Manfred J. Hattan: bunner: In other news, you can oink up 17,000,000.00 for a small apartment and still make a profit off of people who want to live in an ant farm.

What a $65 MM ant farm may look like.


Now with ugly assed ceiling lights and hot and cold running elitism!
 
2014-03-02 10:35:53 PM  
FTA :

Will Zeckendorf describes Sukenik as "a nightmare. Hugely intelligent, a Ph.D., unmarried, embittered, a loner, disconnected from society, and too smart for his own good. "

What was his FARK handle?
 
2014-03-02 10:39:43 PM  

strangeluck: So being a bitter old douchebag with a good memory can get you millions of dollars?

I can't wait to grow old!


... are those new slacks?
 
2014-03-02 10:43:19 PM  

fusillade762: In the movie version John Malkovitch will play the crusty hermit. But we'll need a young Hispanic maid with a tragic back story who softens his rough edges and makes him see the beauty in life. Somebody get Demi Lovato on the phone.


Yeah, because everybody wants to see Demi Lovato's tits and John Malkovitch's O-face in the same scene.
 
2014-03-02 10:43:32 PM  

bunner: Manfred J. Hattan: bunner: In other news, you can oink up 17,000,000.00 for a small apartment and still make a profit off of people who want to live in an ant farm.

What a $65 MM ant farm may look like.

Now with ugly assed ceiling lights and hot and cold running elitism!


Because real Muricans, live in vinyl clad freedom masions, out in Particle Board Estates.
 
2014-03-02 10:44:38 PM  
Good for him.
 
2014-03-02 10:46:00 PM  

Emposter: Except, as I pointed out, he didn't need or even really want the money. So he wasted between one and two years of the last 9 years of his life living it a construction zone because he was too smart to accept the earlier offer, and held out for an even larger amount that he apparently didn't want or need. That sounds too smart for his own good to me.


Then you don't know what the phrase means.  And yes, he obviously did want it, otherwise he would have simply taken the earlier offer and went on with his life.

I would spend a year in a "construction zone" to gain a profit of $17 million.  This is not self-defeating, crazy, "too smart for you own good", or even unreasonable.  It was a smart move in the long run.  Now he can live anywhere he wants.
 
2014-03-02 10:46:09 PM  

KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?


Yeah it sucks when people can't just take your shiat whenever they want.
 
2014-03-02 10:46:15 PM  

mutterfark: [ilarge.listal.com image 685x385]


Beautiful. I don't know that I've seen a reference to that on Fark before.
 
2014-03-02 10:49:10 PM  

ReverendJasen: Starshines: I don't see why there should be any hate for this guy at all.  He played the game like a master and got a nice little payday from some douche bag Manhattan real estate developers who will just pass the cost along to their ultra rich clients who won't even notice already sold the building one of the apartments in the building for $88 million.

ftfy.  I don't feel bad for them one iota.  I have an entire field of no-farks planted.


FTFBoY
 
2014-03-02 10:49:59 PM  
Hero? This was asshole vs. assholes.
 
2014-03-02 10:52:35 PM  
Only in socialist paradise NY can someone with no ownership of private property dictate its use.

/rent stabbers can die in hell
 
2014-03-02 10:53:03 PM  
He's not a hero, he's a dick. He needlessly antagonized these guys until they gave in to his outrageous demands.
 
2014-03-02 10:53:52 PM  

oldtaku: Hero? This was asshole vs. assholes.


Little asshole vs great big assholes.  Little asshole won for a change.
 
2014-03-02 10:55:10 PM  

InterruptingQuirk: FTFBoY


Farking Christ on moped.  My field of no farks to give just blossomed into a continent of them.  In fact, these rich assholes owe me some farks now for even having had to hear their story.
 
2014-03-02 10:57:33 PM  

StanTheMan: Rent-stabilized tenants in the outer boroughs are increasingly facing malign neglect from greedy landlords

Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.

Santa Monica, CA has rent control. All the buildings are run down ugly crapholes. Nearby Westwood has no rent control, and all the apartment buildings are new and beautiful, some with giant gyms and other awesome amenities. You get what you freaking pay for.

Want to see crappy apartments? Go to a rent controlled city.




I know, have you the hell hole Manhattan has become? SOHO? Greenwich Village? Park Slopes? He'll holes, pure hell holes.

/you forgot to mention the tax abatement the developer received.
 
2014-03-02 11:00:09 PM  

Make More Hinjews: ... using this one old, weird tip?


Just the tip.
 
2014-03-02 11:07:57 PM  

a particular individual: Make More Hinjews: ... using this one old, weird tip?

Just the tip.


Or think of it as a fit test
 
2014-03-02 11:09:06 PM  
I couldn't have come up with a world where owners of buildings can't charge whatever they want for use of their buildings. These little glimpses of places like New York are like windows into alternate realities for me. It seems so incredibly... wrong and counterintuitive to say "So, you OWN this, but you can't use it however you want."
 
2014-03-02 11:11:48 PM  
Lemme guess: did he use this one weird trick the real estate companies don't want you to know about?

/discovered by a mom
//yes, I realize I'm late to the party
///suck it
////suck it long and hard
 
2014-03-02 11:13:35 PM  

OgreMagi: organizmx: I live in a historic town filled with NYC commuters, so I just came in here to say fark developers to hell.

A developer built what you currently live in.




Yeah, in 1890, as rentals actually, but he did it without knocking down existing buildings, and they were built with a ton of care and attention to architectural detail. They're still striking and in fashion 120 years later.

Developers today buy homes like mine, bulldoze them, and put up cheap condos which blight otherwise beautiful historic neighborhoods.
 
2014-03-02 11:15:08 PM  

fusillade762: I'd bet good money this gets turned into a movie soon.


KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?

It's not extortion, it's capitalism. Why do you hate America?


Not really capitalism, this was more like rent-seeking by the little guy. The rent laws make it really farking difficult for a landlord to kick out deadbeat tenants and next to impossible to kick out one that's paying rent on time.

Stories like this will pop up from time to time.
http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2013/04/30/old_mars_bar_building_tenan ts _finally_get_10_apartments.php
 
2014-03-02 11:16:03 PM  

a particular individual: Make More Hinjews: ... using this one old, weird tip?

Just the tip.


ArcadianRefugee: Lemme guess: did he use this one weird trick the real estate companies don't want you to know about?

/discovered by a mom
//yes, I realize I'm late to the party
///suck it
////suck it long and hard


I'm kind of honored I could help you guys meet!  It appears you have some catching up to do, eh, wink wink, nudge nudge, he said with a knowing smile.
 
2014-03-02 11:18:23 PM  

ReverendJasen: StanTheMan: Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.

How many do you own?  Are you speaking from first hand experience?
The common tactic in these areas is for landlords to do anything they can to drive residents out.  So leaving the building as craphole as possible becomes a mark of pride for them.


There's plenty of economic reality that rent control has issues with. It costs money, quite a bit of it, to keep up a building. Try owning your own home some time for a reasonable length (like 10+ years). See the amount you have to spend to keep the place in good shape. It isn't cheap (it's very worth it, but not cheap). Those costs go up more or less all the time, since we tend to have steady, low, inflation in the US. So every year, things cost a little more. Also some things go up more due to new and better safety or environmental regulations. Like, say, an A/C, which now need to be R-410 (which is higher pressure so less efficient) and 13 SEER minimum, both which necessitate a larger heat exchanger, and thus more cost. So though you get better equipment, the minimum upfront cost is more.

Then add on things like property taxes and all those other expenses.  Property tax in particular goes up as the valuation of your place goes up.

Well, if you've places that are rent controlled at a certain level, they'll start to be unprofitable, and then just get more and more unprofitable. If a given space costs you $500/month in maintenance, taxes, and so on but you can only charge $200/month for it, well then you have a problem long term. Cutting maintenance makes sense in every way. You want the person out so you can charge more, you save money, and thus lose less while they are there, and it keep the value lower to keep taxes lower.

Seriously: Have a look at property costs some time. If you want a good breakdown of all kinds of things, find a friend who's on the board of a condo association and have a look at what they have to pay for everything. Keeping property up is expensive, particularly if you want it done well. That money has to come from somewhere. Then have a look at the books 10 years ago, see the cost growth.
 
2014-03-02 11:21:23 PM  

ignacio: He's not a hero, he's a dick. He needlessly antagonized these guys until they gave in to his outrageous demands.


I don't think they were outrageous. Why hate on the guy just because you don't like how he spends his free time?
 
2014-03-02 11:21:35 PM  
Now that was a story you'd normally read only in fiction books. I might have to buy a copy of that book.

They should have sprung for the twice weekly free meals. I don't think he could have wolfed down enough of even the most expensive food to top even two million. Though, wines in those places can go for hundreds a glass, so he just might have been able to drink close to that amount.

Read 'The Hermits of New York'. It's about the Collier Brothers and is fascinating. Around mid life they bought a building and cut themselves off from nearly everyone, then went slowly crazy.
 
2014-03-02 11:27:14 PM  

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: StanTheMan: Rent-stabilized tenants in the outer boroughs are increasingly facing malign neglect from greedy landlords

Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.

Santa Monica, CA has rent control. All the buildings are run down ugly crapholes. Nearby Westwood has no rent control, and all the apartment buildings are new and beautiful, some with giant gyms and other awesome amenities. You get what you freaking pay for.

Want to see crappy apartments? Go to a rent controlled city.

I know, have you the hell hole Manhattan has become? SOHO? Greenwich Village? Park Slopes? He'll holes, pure hell holes.

/you forgot to mention the tax abatement the developer received.


Sure if you wanna judge a place by amenities, how nice it looks, and the general level of civilization, but do they have freedumb?  Huh?  Do they?  Because this is what freedum looks like, and it's the most beautiful place in the world.

photos1.blogger.com
 
2014-03-02 11:30:12 PM  

Fissile: TedCruz'sCrazyDad: StanTheMan: Rent-stabilized tenants in the outer boroughs are increasingly facing malign neglect from greedy landlords

Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.

Santa Monica, CA has rent control. All the buildings are run down ugly crapholes. Nearby Westwood has no rent control, and all the apartment buildings are new and beautiful, some with giant gyms and other awesome amenities. You get what you freaking pay for.

Want to see crappy apartments? Go to a rent controlled city.

I know, have you the hell hole Manhattan has become? SOHO? Greenwich Village? Park Slopes? He'll holes, pure hell holes.

/you forgot to mention the tax abatement the developer received.

Sure if you wanna judge a place by amenities, how nice it looks, and the general level of civilization, but do they have freedumb?  Huh?  Do they?  Because this is what freedum looks like, and it's the most beautiful place in the world.

[photos1.blogger.com image 505x380]


Look how nice my gilded cage is!
 
2014-03-02 11:31:51 PM  
Eh, fark this dude, they should have just paid some dudes to burn down the building with him in it.

/sorta not really serious.
 
2014-03-02 11:33:02 PM  

Fish in a Barrel: Equilibrist: And to think, they could have had it  for the additional cost of 2 meals a week, maybe $200 extra.

I'm pretty sure that it wasn't the cost, but that the high-end restaurant didn't want to be continually inhabited by a foul-smelling curmudgeon.


THIS!

/No one wants pee-stained hobos taking up their booths
 
2014-03-02 11:35:43 PM  

Emposter: Except, as I pointed out, he didn't need or even really want the money. So he wasted between one and two years of the last 9 years of his life living it a construction zone because he was too smart to accept the earlier offer, and held out for an even larger amount that he apparently didn't want or need. That sounds too smart for his own good to me.


How?  He walked away with $17 million.  Who cares if he needed it or not?  I'm still not seeing how he outsmarted himself.  He may be a dick for screwing with the developers out of spite, but he still walked away with a better deal.  Outsmarting himself would have been holding out for a better deal only to have the eviction case against him succeed.
 
2014-03-02 11:38:11 PM  
So a scumbag extorted millions of dollars from even bigger scumbags.
Good. I suppose.
 
2014-03-02 11:40:14 PM  
christ doesn't even have a lawn.
 
2014-03-02 11:47:21 PM  

Mantour: Old man with a lot of money?

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x637]

He can get a gold-digging wife for a few years, catch up on what he missed, for all its worth.


They should replace that bulb.
 
2014-03-02 11:50:43 PM  

StanTheMan: Rent-stabilized tenants in the outer boroughs are increasingly facing malign neglect from greedy landlords

Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.

Santa Monica, CA has rent control. All the buildings are run down ugly crapholes. Nearby Westwood has no rent control, and all the apartment buildings are new and beautiful, some with giant gyms and other awesome amenities. You get what you freaking pay for.

Want to see crappy apartments? Go to a rent controlled city.


The non-rent controlled apartments may be nicer, but for someone who can't afford the rent in one of them, but can in the rent-controlled place, it doesn't really matter.

Rent control exists to keep people from being priced out of their own homes.  Yes, they don't actually own the property, but for places like Manhattan where only the 1% could actually afford to own the property, renters need certain protections.  It's in the city's best interests to foster a sense of investment in the community, and long term residents with a stake in the neighborhood are one of the best ways to do that.  If you know that you can easily be priced out of the place you're living the next year, it doesn't give you much incentive to be involved in the community or to try to make it a better place.
 
2014-03-02 11:51:14 PM  

mutterfark: [ilarge.listal.com image 685x385]


I love that movie! :D
 
2014-03-02 11:54:26 PM  
What, no One Simple Trick?
 
2014-03-02 11:55:46 PM  

Mentat: Emposter: Except, as I pointed out, he didn't need or even really want the money. So he wasted between one and two years of the last 9 years of his life living it a construction zone because he was too smart to accept the earlier offer, and held out for an even larger amount that he apparently didn't want or need. That sounds too smart for his own good to me.

How?  He walked away with $17 million.  Who cares if he needed it or not?  I'm still not seeing how he outsmarted himself.  He may be a dick for screwing with the developers out of spite, but he still walked away with a better deal.  Outsmarting himself would have been holding out for a better deal only to have the eviction case against him succeed.



And if I read that correctly, it was the developer saying he had no intentions of leaving his wealth to charity or anyone else. It turned out not to be true:

He died aged 80 living inside his new luxurious $1 a month apartment and left his fortune to his brother.
 
2014-03-03 12:00:11 AM  

Mentat: Emposter: Except, as I pointed out, he didn't need or even really want the money. So he wasted between one and two years of the last 9 years of his life living it a construction zone because he was too smart to accept the earlier offer, and held out for an even larger amount that he apparently didn't want or need. That sounds too smart for his own good to me.

How?  He walked away with $17 million.  Who cares if he needed it or not?  I'm still not seeing how he outsmarted himself.  He may be a dick for screwing with the developers out of spite, but he still walked away with a better deal.  Outsmarting himself would have been holding out for a better deal only to have the eviction case against him succeed.


He did it because it was more interesting than the crossword.

He was a troll. Epic troll.
 
2014-03-03 12:02:22 AM  

That Guy Jeff: I couldn't have come up with a world where owners of buildings can't charge whatever they want for use of their buildings. These little glimpses of places like New York are like windows into alternate realities for me. It seems so incredibly... wrong and counterintuitive to say "So, you OWN this, but you can't use it however you want."


Yeah, it must really suck to live in a place where there are regulations to protect the average Joe from being completely shiat on by the plutocrats.
 
2014-03-03 12:06:09 AM  

organizmx: OgreMagi: organizmx: I live in a historic town filled with NYC commuters, so I just came in here to say fark developers to hell.

A developer built what you currently live in.

Yeah, in 1890, as rentals actually, but he did it without knocking down existing buildings, and they were built with a ton of care and attention to architectural detail. They're still striking and in fashion 120 years later.

Developers today buy homes like mine, bulldoze them, and put up cheap condos which blight otherwise beautiful historic neighborhoods.


A lot of those old buildings are ugly, have no real historic value (being old isn't enough) and cost too much to keep up.  For cities like New York, the only way to build something new is to knock down something old since their is no place empty to build.  Out where I live, you can pay way too much for a shiatty apartment in San Francisco, $2000+ for a crappy studio is common, or you can have a long commute.  I chose the long commute and live in a very nice modern 2b2b apartment.  To afford a house, your commute time gets crazy - but that's where the undeveloped land is located.
 
2014-03-03 12:06:19 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: StanTheMan: Rent-stabilized tenants in the outer boroughs are increasingly facing malign neglect from greedy landlords

Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.

Santa Monica, CA has rent control. All the buildings are run down ugly crapholes. Nearby Westwood has no rent control, and all the apartment buildings are new and beautiful, some with giant gyms and other awesome amenities. You get what you freaking pay for.

Want to see crappy apartments? Go to a rent controlled city.

The non-rent controlled apartments may be nicer, but for someone who can't afford the rent in one of them, but can in the rent-controlled place, it doesn't really matter.

Rent control exists to keep people from being priced out of their own homes.  Yes, they don't actually own the property, but for places like Manhattan where only the 1% could actually afford to own the property, renters need certain protections.  It's in the city's best interests to foster a sense of investment in the community, and long term residents with a stake in the neighborhood are one of the best ways to do that.  If you know that you can easily be priced out of the place you're living the next year, it doesn't give you much incentive to be involved in the community or to try to make it a better place.

Because nothing builds community like run down housing.

Want to make more cheap housing? Ease building and zoning laws.  Sure, some rich dudes are getting new luxury apartments, but they're moving out of older stock, leaving them vacant for upper middle class to move into who in turn leave cheaper housing and so on until the market clears and everyone has a place to live.  When you restrict the crap out of the market for housing it drives up prices and makes moving to improve ones life way more difficult than it should be.
 
2014-03-03 12:09:27 AM  

ReverendJasen: Starshines: I don't see why there should be any hate for this guy at all.  He played the game like a master and got a nice little payday from some douche bag Manhattan real estate developers who will just pass the cost along to their ultra rich clients who won't even notice already sold the building for $88 million.

ftfy.  I don't feel bad for them one iota.  I have an entire field of no-farks planted.


That was beautiful. As someone who cherishes the level of apathy he operates under, who also happens to have an affinity for horticulture, I will be getting so much mileage out of that phrase.
 
2014-03-03 12:10:21 AM  

super_grass: toadist: I don't think we are to look at him as a hero.   He's a millionaire, and I believe here on fark that millionaires are bad and to be vilified.

Tear this person down and sick the tax man on him.

His estate will likely go to the state since he's a freaking hermit with no family or friends.


Not if he spends it all on hookers and blow first.
 
2014-03-03 12:11:14 AM  

ricbach229: TuteTibiImperes: StanTheMan: Rent-stabilized tenants in the outer boroughs are increasingly facing malign neglect from greedy landlords

Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.

Santa Monica, CA has rent control. All the buildings are run down ugly crapholes. Nearby Westwood has no rent control, and all the apartment buildings are new and beautiful, some with giant gyms and other awesome amenities. You get what you freaking pay for.

Want to see crappy apartments? Go to a rent controlled city.

The non-rent controlled apartments may be nicer, but for someone who can't afford the rent in one of them, but can in the rent-controlled place, it doesn't really matter.

Rent control exists to keep people from being priced out of their own homes.  Yes, they don't actually own the property, but for places like Manhattan where only the 1% could actually afford to own the property, renters need certain protections.  It's in the city's best interests to foster a sense of investment in the community, and long term residents with a stake in the neighborhood are one of the best ways to do that.  If you know that you can easily be priced out of the place you're living the next year, it doesn't give you much incentive to be involved in the community or to try to make it a better place.
Because nothing builds community like run down housing.

Want to make more cheap housing? Ease building and zoning laws.  Sure, some rich dudes are getting new luxury apartments, but they're moving out of older stock, leaving them vacant for upper middle class to move into who in turn leave cheaper housing and so on until the market clears and everyone has a place to live.  When you restrict the crap out of the market for housing it drives up prices and makes moving to improve ones life way more difficult than it should be.


That works in places you can build, but NYC, outside of the edges of the outer boroughs, isn't one of those places.  In Manhattan in particular the only place left to build is up.  So, you either end up driving residents further out geographically in search of affordable housing, or you have to allow the destruction of historic older buildings to make room for higher density housing, neither of those are good things.
 
2014-03-03 12:13:35 AM  

Goimir: Mentat: Emposter: Except, as I pointed out, he didn't need or even really want the money. So he wasted between one and two years of the last 9 years of his life living it a construction zone because he was too smart to accept the earlier offer, and held out for an even larger amount that he apparently didn't want or need. That sounds too smart for his own good to me.

How?  He walked away with $17 million.  Who cares if he needed it or not?  I'm still not seeing how he outsmarted himself.  He may be a dick for screwing with the developers out of spite, but he still walked away with a better deal.  Outsmarting himself would have been holding out for a better deal only to have the eviction case against him succeed.

He did it because it was more interesting than the crossword.

He was a troll. Epic troll.


Maybe.  Certainly possible.  But the article indicates that he might have done it just because he figured out partway through how much his property was really worth.

Sukenik knew the precise acreage of his block and how much the Zeckendorfs had paid. He'd calculated the taxes, insurance and carrying costs of the empty properties and recited them all to Grabow. And he wouldn't begin negotiations until his three fellow tenants were gone. "He knew the last man standing was very valuable."

He was already independently wealthy, according to the article.  His dad left him loads of money, and he never worked a day in his life after that.  Yet, according to the article he spent his days cooped up in an apartment doing crosswords.  He didn't use the fortune he had already...what would he use more money for?

If he did it for entertainment, then, to him, it might have been worth it.  But the article indicated that he did it simply because he didn't want to be ripped off.  If he ended up wasting 1-2 of the last few years of his life bargaining for money he didn't want or need, simply because his intellect wouldn't let him sell for less than it was worth, that's the definition of too smart for his own good.
 
2014-03-03 12:13:55 AM  

Goimir: He did it because it was more interesting than the crossword.

He was a troll. Epic troll.


He got forced out of his living space by a couple of tools with dollar signs in their eyes. I don't think he's the troll.
 
2014-03-03 12:15:15 AM  

JungleBoogie: Goimir: He did it because it was more interesting than the crossword.

He was a troll. Epic troll.

He got forced out of his living space by a couple of tools with dollar signs in their eyes. I don't think he's the troll.


One does not preclude the other.  The described circumstances certainly provide for the possibility that he was an epic troll, though there isn't confirmation.
 
2014-03-03 12:17:07 AM  

Emposter: Goimir: Mentat: Emposter: Except, as I pointed out, he didn't need or even really want the money. So he wasted between one and two years of the last 9 years of his life living it a construction zone because he was too smart to accept the earlier offer, and held out for an even larger amount that he apparently didn't want or need. That sounds too smart for his own good to me.

How?  He walked away with $17 million.  Who cares if he needed it or not?  I'm still not seeing how he outsmarted himself.  He may be a dick for screwing with the developers out of spite, but he still walked away with a better deal.  Outsmarting himself would have been holding out for a better deal only to have the eviction case against him succeed.

He did it because it was more interesting than the crossword.

He was a troll. Epic troll.

Maybe.  Certainly possible.  But the article indicates that he might have done it just because he figured out partway through how much his property was really worth.

Sukenik knew the precise acreage of his block and how much the Zeckendorfs had paid. He'd calculated the taxes, insurance and carrying costs of the empty properties and recited them all to Grabow. And he wouldn't begin negotiations until his three fellow tenants were gone. "He knew the last man standing was very valuable."

He was already independently wealthy, according to the article.  His dad left him loads of money, and he never worked a day in his life after that.  Yet, according to the article he spent his days cooped up in an apartment doing crosswords.  He didn't use the fortune he had already...what would he use more money for?

If he did it for entertainment, then, to him, it might have been worth it.  But the article indicated that he did it simply because he didn't want to be ripped off.  If he ended up wasting 1-2 of the last few years of his life bargaining for money he didn't want or need, simply because his intellect wouldn't let him sell for less than it was worth, that's the d ...



The article gave you a lot of information from the developer's words. It might not be entirely accurate. For instance, the developer said that he didn't want to leave anything to his brother or anyone else....... and in the end he left everything to his brother.
 
2014-03-03 12:17:32 AM  

Emposter: Goimir: Mentat: Emposter: Except, as I pointed out, he didn't need or even really want the money. So he wasted between one and two years of the last 9 years of his life living it a construction zone because he was too smart to accept the earlier offer, and held out for an even larger amount that he apparently didn't want or need. That sounds too smart for his own good to me.

How?  He walked away with $17 million.  Who cares if he needed it or not?  I'm still not seeing how he outsmarted himself.  He may be a dick for screwing with the developers out of spite, but he still walked away with a better deal.  Outsmarting himself would have been holding out for a better deal only to have the eviction case against him succeed.

He did it because it was more interesting than the crossword.

He was a troll. Epic troll.

Maybe.  Certainly possible.  But the article indicates that he might have done it just because he figured out partway through how much his property was really worth.

Sukenik knew the precise acreage of his block and how much the Zeckendorfs had paid. He'd calculated the taxes, insurance and carrying costs of the empty properties and recited them all to Grabow. And he wouldn't begin negotiations until his three fellow tenants were gone. "He knew the last man standing was very valuable."

He was already independently wealthy, according to the article.  His dad left him loads of money, and he never worked a day in his life after that.  Yet, according to the article he spent his days cooped up in an apartment doing crosswords.  He didn't use the fortune he had already...what would he use more money for?

If he did it for entertainment, then, to him, it might have been worth it.  But the article indicated that he did it simply because he didn't want to be ripped off.  If he ended up wasting 1-2 of the last few years of his life bargaining for money he didn't want or need, simply because his intellect wouldn't let him sell for less than it was worth, that's the d ...


If he'd spent his life holed up in his apartment doing crosswords maybe the entertainment value alone was worth it to him, and the money was just a bonus.

One thing living in FL has taught me has been to never underestimate the capability of bored old people to be enormous pains the ass.
 
2014-03-03 12:17:35 AM  

Emposter: If he did it for entertainment, then, to him, it might have been worth it. But the article indicated that he did it simply because he didn't want to be ripped off. If he ended up wasting 1-2 of the last few years of his life bargaining for money he didn't want or need, simply because his intellect wouldn't let him sell for less than it was worth, that's the definition of too smart for his own good.


He was wasting his life anyway.  It's not as if that two years took anything away from him.  I only wish I could outsmart myself into $17 million.
 
2014-03-03 12:24:52 AM  

Mentat: Emposter: If he did it for entertainment, then, to him, it might have been worth it. But the article indicated that he did it simply because he didn't want to be ripped off. If he ended up wasting 1-2 of the last few years of his life bargaining for money he didn't want or need, simply because his intellect wouldn't let him sell for less than it was worth, that's the definition of too smart for his own good.

He was wasting his life anyway.  It's not as if that two years took anything away from him.  I only wish I could outsmart myself into $17 million.


Don't get me wrong.  I'd give up a year or so for $17 million in a heartbeat.  But this guy already had a fortune, and did nothing with it.  He lived a hermit life in a tiny decrepit appartment by choice.  He clearly cared about different things than you or I.  I suspect he valued his solitude and peace and quiet more than the money.
 
2014-03-03 12:26:47 AM  

ricbach229: Want to make more cheap housing? Ease building and zoning laws.


"Want to lower hospital costs? Cap malpractice suits."

"Want to decrease unemployment? Lower taxes for the wealthy."

"Want to increase sex? Make AIDS illegal."

/okay, I made the last one up

In reality, I believe in changes to some building/zoning laws in my area, and in other areas. That won't "make more" cheap housing, and if it does, it will not be the kind of housing people should want.
For reference, I live in an area that legally allows for establishments to rent out probably a dozen trailer lots for long-term living, and the rent to park a f*cking trailer is as much as a crappy studio apartment with a community bathroom on each floor. DERELICT pieces of property, disgusting in some ways. And when I say trailer, I mean the old trailer homes, not the modern "manufactured" homes that are delivered with trucks. That kind of property should rent for, at most, a buck fifty a month.
 
2014-03-03 12:47:02 AM  
Heh. Good on him. I once worked with an older woman who lived in a rent-controlled apartment in Manhattan. She was paying about $150 a month in rent for a pre-war apartment that would have gone for ten times that easily.
 
2014-03-03 01:03:35 AM  

ignacio: He's not a hero, he's a dick. He needlessly antagonized these guys until they gave in to his outrageous demands.


Apparent'y the developers didn't think it was outrageous, They must have thought it was worth it.
 
2014-03-03 01:04:47 AM  
And don't feel too bad for the unimaginably rich Zeckendorf brothers-that $17 million was chump change for them. 15 Central Park West is now home to the most expensive apartment in NYC, which was sold to a Russian plutocrat for $88 million last year.

It will be pretty hilarious when the US almost inevitably seizes the assets of the Russian plutocrat in question as retaliation for the invasion of Ukraine.
 
2014-03-03 01:10:03 AM  
Leaves behind his brother Richard (Nancy) and many cousins. -

WAT?
images.wikia.com
 
2014-03-03 01:10:13 AM  

toadist: I don't think we are to look at him as a hero.   He's a millionaire, and I believe here on fark that millionaires are bad and to be vilified.

Tear this person down and sick the tax man on him.


Well, paying him off is passed on to the consumers.
 
2014-03-03 01:22:01 AM  

super_grass: His estate will likely go to the state since he's a freaking hermit with no family or friends.


He had a brother.  Who inherited his estate when he died.
 
2014-03-03 01:33:57 AM  

Marcintosh: Leaves behind his brother Richard (Nancy) and many cousins. -

WAT?
[images.wikia.com image 550x392]


It's not that complicated. His brother Richard had a wife called Nancy.

Actually, belay that. It's not complicated at all.
 
2014-03-03 01:41:25 AM  
He's an opportunistic, self-pitying old brat who had enough money to start with, so I can't say that I'm really getting the sticking-it-to-the-man vibe here.
 
2014-03-03 02:03:09 AM  

organizmx: OgreMagi: organizmx: I live in a historic town filled with NYC commuters, so I just came in here to say fark developers to hell.

A developer built what you currently live in.

Yeah, in 1890, as rentals actually, but he did it without knocking down existing buildings, and they were built with a ton of care and attention to architectural detail. They're still striking and in fashion 120 years later.

Developers today buy homes like mine, bulldoze them, and put up cheap condos which blight otherwise beautiful historic neighborhoods.


The problem is your city's Dept of Planning and Development or its equivalent and your neighbors, not the developers.  If you and your neighbors cared enough you would stop it.  We got our neighborhood designated a historical district and had it downzoned to stop that crap.  Can't really blame people for wanting to live here, I want to live here, but we can keep them from tearing down historical buildings to do it.
 
2014-03-03 02:39:17 AM  
You wouldn't have to pay me to leave a building where Lloyd Blankfein lived.  OTOH, if I lived there as they constructed Lloyd's unit, I would have made it my mission to find ways into the place for some way overdue payback and monkeywrenching.  Starting with upperdecking all his toilets, then moving on to providing e.coli surface wipes in his master bath...
 
2014-03-03 03:05:31 AM  

dywed88: ignacio: He's not a hero, he's a dick. He needlessly antagonized these guys until they gave in to his outrageous demands.

Apparent'y the developers didn't think it was outrageous, They must have thought it was worth it.


Considering the last paragraph of the article, it looks like they did. If you can afford to build high end real estate at a prime location, it's worth a fortune.
 
2014-03-03 05:11:08 AM  

Emposter: Don't get me wrong.  I'd give up a year or so for $17 million in a heartbeat.  But this guy already had a fortune, and did nothing with it.  He lived a hermit life in a tiny decrepit appartment by choice.  He clearly cared about different things than you or I.  I suspect he valued his solitude and peace and quiet more than the money.


Or he was just a miser. There are some people who, for whatever reason, just want to get as much money as they can and do nothing with it. They aren't like the plutocrats that want more money to have more toys/bling, rather they want more money just to have more money. They'll go out of their way to be cheap, to the point it hurts their lifestyle, for no particular discernible reason. I dunno what causes it, but it is strange. Like Hetty Green who was worth billions in today's dollars, yet wouldn't pay for medical care she badly needed, wouldn't use hot water, etc, etc. She sought the acquisition (very successfully) of more and more wealth, but used none of it to make her life good, or even comfortable.

Heck a friend had a great aunt somewhat like that. She was old and in failing health, badly in need of full time hospice care. She had plenty of money for it, but refused to spend it, sticking in her apartment because it was rent controlled and thus cheap. They finally had her declared incompetent and forcibly moved to a managed care facility. She was delighted, because she took that to mean (and they didn't bother correcting her) that the government was paying for all of it.

So I could see this dude being similar. He wanted to keep living in his place because it was cheap, because cheap is good in his world. He wanted tons of money for it not because he needed it, or had any use at all for it, but because he wanted to have more money because that is an end to itself for him.

It is a strange condition. Worked out kinda shiatty for him, as it always does for misers. Good for his brother though I guess.
 
2014-03-03 06:38:50 AM  
FTFA: "The Mayflower's last holdout was short and balding with a wild fringe of gray hair and the "old-man smell" of someone who "didn't shower much," [relocation lawyer Michael] Grabow says. "He was clearly brilliant."

"I wasted my life," the embittered Sukenik told Grabow. His father had died while he was finishing his medical degree and left him enough money that he didn't have to work. "I could have been at the heart of research into CAT scans and MRIs," Sukenik said.

"Instead, I've been up here 30 years doing crossword puzzles."


Just for grins, I looked him up in the ProQuest Dissertations database, and there he is:

Subject: Nuclear physics
Title: NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN LITHIUM - MAGNESIUM ALLOYS
Author: Sukenik, Herbert John
Publication year: 1959
Degree date: 1959
University/institution: University of California, Berkeley
Degree: Ph.D.
Dissertation/thesis number: 02111050

On a daily basis, I get to interact in an academic department with some brilliant people who are ... quirky, shall we say, and yet they are highly successful in their fields. If he was brilliant and yet never worked, my guesses are that he suffered major depression and couldn't work, or just had such an unpleasant personality that the level of his genius/promise of academic/industrial glory couldn't overcome people's dislike of him.
 
2014-03-03 06:48:43 AM  
"hero" tag finally says "enough"! can no longer deal with all the idiot subbies idea of what an actual "hero" is. or try to slide it by as irony, because they can afford $5.00 a month and they are more clever then you. puts 12 ga. in mouth and pulls trigger.
 
2014-03-03 07:03:45 AM  
He (only) moved into the building the year I graduated high school, I've lived in the same rent controlled building in San Francisco for 20 years was offered 30K to move out a few years ago told them to piss off maybe 10 more years I'll be rich....

/there's people in this building that have lived here since the 50's
//when I moved in it was the 30's but they're dead now
 
2014-03-03 07:04:26 AM  

KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?


How exactly is refusing to sell something to someone until they meet your price extortion?
 
2014-03-03 07:05:23 AM  

WhoGAS: They should replace that bulb.


Nice catch.
 
2014-03-03 07:06:29 AM  

Manfred J. Hattan: bunner: In other news, you can oink up 17,000,000.00 for a small apartment and still make a profit off of people who want to live in an ant farm.

What a $65 MM ant farm may look like.


So there's people living above below and next to you in this dump? Some kids banging on the ceiling will keep me up all night?

Keep your overpriced ant farms.
 
2014-03-03 07:15:55 AM  

Heron: KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?

How exactly is refusing to sell something to someone until they meet your price extortion?


In many states they just take your property with eminent domain and then give it to the developers. Happened in Kansas when a used car dealer refused to sell his property to a new luxury car dealer.
 
2014-03-03 07:25:05 AM  

toadist: I don't think we are to look at him as a hero.   He's a millionaire, and I believe here on fark that millionaires are bad and to be vilified.

Tear this person down and sick the tax man on him.


That these two men could drop 15 mil like it was nothing, turn around, then make from a single tenant 88 Million, but still biatched and moaned and had to be dragged to it as if that money was a big deal, should be all the evidence anybody needs to see that the extreme concentration of wealth in the US is not only irrational, but makes those who hold it irrational as well. To give you some perspective here; Guy 1 makes $88 bet with Guy 2 that he can make Guy 3 do a thing. Guy 3 refuses unless paid 15 dollars. Guy 1 biatches, moans, threatens suit, then threatens destruction of property and eviction to Guy 3; wastes months on this. Guy 3 is unmoved; insists on 15 dollars. Guy 1 finally overcomes irrational attachment to having money and pays 15 dollars; makes 73 dollars profit. You see how stupid Guy 1 sounds there? The only reason you don't respond the same way to these developers is because you, like them, foolishly believe that 15 million dollars has an objective value beyond what it can get you. In this real world instance, that 15 mil was no more valuable than the 15 bucks in the scenario above.

And -stooping to the twisted logic of money-men like these- the pair also screwed themselves out of all the money they could have made off the interest from/use of that 73 million over the time they didn't have it. Even by their own psychopathic lights, they were rubes.
 
2014-03-03 07:31:25 AM  

simkatu: Heron: KAVORKA: Come on, there ought to be a rule where they can give him 10 years in a rent-free, comparable apartment.  Or something like that.  He basically extorted them, how does this help anybody except him?

How exactly is refusing to sell something to someone until they meet your price extortion?

In many states they just take your property with eminent domain and then give it to the developers. Happened in Kansas when a used car dealer refused to sell his property to a new luxury car dealer.


Yeah, I know :/ There was a Supreme Court case about the same happening in Virginia ~ a decade ago when Pfizer wanted to build a parking lot for one of their sites where a neighborhood was, but the homeowners didn't want to sell. I realize that, according to current US "Wealth gets what it wants, all the time" moral logic him holding out would be considered rude, but I meant the question in a more comparative and definitional sense.

Blackmail is when you've got something on somebody and you use fear of its revelation to force certain behavior from them; this was a guy who legally "owned" a thing somebody else wanted and refused to sell it. Not really a textbook case of extortion, to my eyes.
 
2014-03-03 07:54:14 AM  
"Hero"?

This miserable asshole stood in the way if progress by exploiting an extraordinarily flawed law. I'm glad he had such a miserable, lonesome life.

Rent control is a ridiculously farked up law. We can't just do away with it all at once because that would provide a huge windfall to new owners (who bought their properties after rent control reduced their value) but this is just more evidence of how farked up it was to enact these laws in the first place.
 
2014-03-03 08:00:38 AM  
Too smart for his own good? Sounds like he's too smart for your own good, douchey real estate guy.
 
2014-03-03 08:20:23 AM  

ricbach229: Sure, some rich dudes are getting new luxury apartments, but they're moving out of older stock, leaving them vacant for upper middle class to move into who in turn leave cheaper housing and so on until the market clears and everyone has a place to live.


The only way that could possibly work is if the number of people in each economic class is equal.  Do you believe that there's as many multimillionaires as there are people on foodstamps?
 
2014-03-03 08:21:59 AM  

strangeluck: So being a bitter old douchebag with a good memory can get you millions of dollars?

I can't wait to grow old!


I must have missed a few steps along the way. I only got the bitter, old, douchebag and good memory parts. Missed out on the millions.
 
2014-03-03 08:35:50 AM  

Coming on a Bicycle: He's an opportunistic, self-pitying old brat who had enough money to start with, so I can't say that I'm really getting the sticking-it-to-the-man vibe here.


It is also worth pointing out that (according to the article anyway) he went out of his way to make life miserable for people who had to deal with him, such as the cleaning staff and the building manager. There's no excuse for that.

/ The older I get, the more I am convinced happiness, a good nature and being a person comfortable to live with is largely a matter of biochemistry.
// Born happy.
/// Die laughing.
 
2014-03-03 08:43:32 AM  

jst3p: ignacio: He's not a hero, he's a dick. He needlessly antagonized these guys until they gave in to his outrageous demands.

I don't think they were outrageous. Why hate on the guy just because you don't like how he spends his free time?


It was 17 million dollars to move out of his crappy apartment. It's outrageous.
 
2014-03-03 08:45:44 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: StanTheMan: Rent-stabilized tenants in the outer boroughs are increasingly facing malign neglect from greedy landlords

Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.

Santa Monica, CA has rent control. All the buildings are run down ugly crapholes. Nearby Westwood has no rent control, and all the apartment buildings are new and beautiful, some with giant gyms and other awesome amenities. You get what you freaking pay for.

Want to see crappy apartments? Go to a rent controlled city.

The non-rent controlled apartments may be nicer, but for someone who can't afford the rent in one of them, but can in the rent-controlled place, it doesn't really matter.

Rent control exists to keep people from being priced out of their own homes.  Yes, they don't actually own the property, but for places like Manhattan where only the 1% could actually afford to own the property, renters need certain protections.  It's in the city's best interests to foster a sense of investment in the community, and long term residents with a stake in the neighborhood are one of the best ways to do that.  If you know that you can easily be priced out of the place you're living the next year, it doesn't give you much incentive to be involved in the community or to try to make it a better place.


The reason only 1% can actually afford to own property is because rent control artificially inflates apartment, and therefor house, prices.
 
2014-03-03 08:54:32 AM  

sycraft: Emposter: Don't get me wrong.  I'd give up a year or so for $17 million in a heartbeat.  But this guy already had a fortune, and did nothing with it.  He lived a hermit life in a tiny decrepit appartment by choice.  He clearly cared about different things than you or I.  I suspect he valued his solitude and peace and quiet more than the money.

Or he was just a miser. There are some people who, for whatever reason, just want to get as much money as they can and do nothing with it. They aren't like the plutocrats that want more money to have more toys/bling, rather they want more money just to have more money. They'll go out of their way to be cheap, to the point it hurts their lifestyle, for no particular discernible reason. I dunno what causes it, but it is strange. Like Hetty Green who was worth billions in today's dollars, yet wouldn't pay for medical care she badly needed, wouldn't use hot water, etc, etc. She sought the acquisition (very successfully) of more and more wealth, but used none of it to make her life good, or even comfortable.

Heck a friend had a great aunt somewhat like that. She was old and in failing health, badly in need of full time hospice care. She had plenty of money for it, but refused to spend it, sticking in her apartment because it was rent controlled and thus cheap. They finally had her declared incompetent and forcibly moved to a managed care facility. She was delighted, because she took that to mean (and they didn't bother correcting her) that the government was paying for all of it.

So I could see this dude being similar. He wanted to keep living in his place because it was cheap, because cheap is good in his world. He wanted tons of money for it not because he needed it, or had any use at all for it, but because he wanted to have more money because that is an end to itself for him.

It is a strange condition. Worked out kinda shiatty for him, as it always does for misers. Good for his brother though I guess.


A well-reasoned theory. It could also have been brainwashing from the wealthy father that warped his mind permanently.

And from all accounts he did seem to be bent.
 
2014-03-03 08:54:51 AM  
Nothing beats asshole death match in a bell jar.
 
2014-03-03 08:56:29 AM  

ignacio: jst3p: ignacio: He's not a hero, he's a dick. He needlessly antagonized these guys until they gave in to his outrageous demands.

I don't think they were outrageous. Why hate on the guy just because you don't like how he spends his free time?

It was 17 million dollars to move out of his crappy apartment. It's outrageous.


It's lewd, lascivious, salacious, outrageous!
 
2014-03-03 08:59:54 AM  
Trustafarian asshole who lives off government largesse (rent control).  fark everything about this guy.
 
2014-03-03 09:00:49 AM  

Emposter: Mentat: Emposter: Mentat: InterruptingQuirk: Developer boohoo "this old guy is too smart for his own good"

Old guy:

[img.fark.net image 345x203]

No kidding.  It sounds like he was exactly smart enough for his own good.

Actually, from the sound of things, it had nothing to do with what was good for him.  He had plenty of money already, no family to give the new money to, and nothing really to do with it.  He toyed with the developers because he was bored and pissed off that he didn't get free dinner.  That's it.  The developers had the really bad luck to be the only entertainment in a bored, angry, clever dude's life.

His motives weren't the issue, it was whether he was too smart for his own good.  That usually implies outsmarting yourself, which he clearly didn't do.

Except, as I pointed out, he didn't need or even really want the money.  So he wasted between one and two years of the last 9 years of his life living it a construction zone because he was too smart to accept the earlier offer, and held out for an even larger amount that he apparently didn't want or need.  That sounds too smart for his own good to me.


I wonder what his fark handle is?
 
2014-03-03 10:18:29 AM  

super_grass: His estate will likely go to the state since he's a freaking hermit with no family or friends.


Farking wills. How do they work?
 
2014-03-03 10:19:15 AM  

ignacio: jst3p: ignacio: He's not a hero, he's a dick. He needlessly antagonized these guys until they gave in to his outrageous demands.

I don't think they were outrageous. Why hate on the guy just because you don't like how he spends his free time?

It was 17 million dollars to move out of his crappy apartment. It's outrageous.


If the developer is putting up multi-million dollar apartments, then even a cess pool is worth millions.
 
2014-03-03 10:55:40 AM  

Emposter: Mentat: Emposter: If he did it for entertainment, then, to him, it might have been worth it. But the article indicated that he did it simply because he didn't want to be ripped off. If he ended up wasting 1-2 of the last few years of his life bargaining for money he didn't want or need, simply because his intellect wouldn't let him sell for less than it was worth, that's the definition of too smart for his own good.

He was wasting his life anyway.  It's not as if that two years took anything away from him.  I only wish I could outsmart myself into $17 million.

Don't get me wrong.  I'd give up a year or so for $17 million in a heartbeat.  But this guy already had a fortune, and did nothing with it.  He lived a hermit life in a tiny decrepit appartment by choice.  He clearly cared about different things than you or I.  I suspect he valued his solitude and peace and quiet more than the money.


I think you're going to have a hard time convincing people he'd be better off without the $17M.

Boxcutta: super_grass: His estate will likely go to the state since he's a freaking hermit with no family or friends.

Farking wills. How do they work?


I doubt he had a will, so farking probate, how does it work? (Hint: not with the money going to the government).
 
2014-03-03 10:57:12 AM  

sycraft: ReverendJasen: StanTheMan: Uh, no, malign neglect comes from landlords who can't earn a return on investment because of rent control, so they don't improve their buildings.

How many do you own?  Are you speaking from first hand experience?
The common tactic in these areas is for landlords to do anything they can to drive residents out.  So leaving the building as craphole as possible becomes a mark of pride for them.

There's plenty of economic reality that rent control has issues with. It costs money, quite a bit of it, to keep up a building. Try owning your own home some time for a reasonable length (like 10+ years). See the amount you have to spend to keep the place in good shape. It isn't cheap (it's very worth it, but not cheap). Those costs go up more or less all the time, since we tend to have steady, low, inflation in the US. So every year, things cost a little more. Also some things go up more due to new and better safety or environmental regulations. Like, say, an A/C, which now need to be R-410 (which is higher pressure so less efficient) and 13 SEER minimum, both which necessitate a larger heat exchanger, and thus more cost. So though you get better equipment, the minimum upfront cost is more.

Then add on things like property taxes and all those other expenses.  Property tax in particular goes up as the valuation of your place goes up.

Well, if you've places that are rent controlled at a certain level, they'll start to be unprofitable, and then just get more and more unprofitable. If a given space costs you $500/month in maintenance, taxes, and so on but you can only charge $200/month for it, well then you have a problem long term. Cutting maintenance makes sense in every way. You want the person out so you can charge more, you save money, and thus lose less while they are there, and it keep the value lower to keep taxes lower.

Seriously: Have a look at property costs some time. If you want a good breakdown of all kinds of things, find a friend who's ...


In my province, we have rent control.  Every year the rent control board decides on some percentage, usually 1 or 2 percent that owners can raise the rent, HOWEVER, if they do any major renovations, they can just apply for a higher raise, based on the amount they spent.  They have to show them the paperwork, and the numbers get sent to all of the tenants.  This, I believe is a fair system, as it gives an incentive to the landlords to keep the building in good working order.  However, it can get skewed.  I was living in an apt that was bought by another company.  They came in, changed the windows and the cupboards and did a couple of other minor things, and then managed to get the rent almost doubled.  This was due to the amount that they claimed to have spent, which was to be paid for by increases in rent based on recouping that cost over 1 year.  Of course, at the end of the year, the rent doesn't go down, so that's when they make their profit....IF anyone chooses to keep paying the new rental price.  I did not and moved into a much better place.
 
2014-03-03 10:59:06 AM  

Komplex: The rent laws make it really farking difficult for a landlord to kick out deadbeat tenants and next to impossible to kick out one that's paying rent on time.


Yeah, it should be way easier to kick someone out of their home. So what if they're paying on time as agreed? fark them for not owning it.
 
2014-03-03 11:12:06 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: Emposter: Goimir: Mentat: Emposter: Except, as I pointed out, he didn't need or even really want the money. So he wasted between one and two years of the last 9 years of his life living it a construction zone because he was too smart to accept the earlier offer, and held out for an even larger amount that he apparently didn't want or need. That sounds too smart for his own good to me.

How?  He walked away with $17 million.  Who cares if he needed it or not?  I'm still not seeing how he outsmarted himself.  He may be a dick for screwing with the developers out of spite, but he still walked away with a better deal.  Outsmarting himself would have been holding out for a better deal only to have the eviction case against him succeed.

He did it because it was more interesting than the crossword.

He was a troll. Epic troll.

Maybe.  Certainly possible.  But the article indicates that he might have done it just because he figured out partway through how much his property was really worth.

Sukenik knew the precise acreage of his block and how much the Zeckendorfs had paid. He'd calculated the taxes, insurance and carrying costs of the empty properties and recited them all to Grabow. And he wouldn't begin negotiations until his three fellow tenants were gone. "He knew the last man standing was very valuable."

He was already independently wealthy, according to the article.  His dad left him loads of money, and he never worked a day in his life after that.  Yet, according to the article he spent his days cooped up in an apartment doing crosswords.  He didn't use the fortune he had already...what would he use more money for?

If he did it for entertainment, then, to him, it might have been worth it.  But the article indicated that he did it simply because he didn't want to be ripped off.  If he ended up wasting 1-2 of the last few years of his life bargaining for money he didn't want or need, simply because his intellect wouldn't let him sell for less than it was worth, that's the d ...

If he'd spent his life holed up in his apartment doing crosswords maybe the entertainment value alone was worth it to him, and the money was just a bonus.

One thing living in FL has taught me has been to never underestimate the capability of bored old people to be enormous pains the ass.


Ain't DAT da trufe!
One thing living in FL has taught me is, don't BE a bored old person/ pain in the ass. Lots of negative models around here.

/can't wait 'til the snowbirds leave
/already old
 
2014-03-03 01:15:14 PM  

simkatu: Manfred J. Hattan: bunner: In other news, you can oink up 17,000,000.00 for a small apartment and still make a profit off of people who want to live in an ant farm.

What a $65 MM ant farm may look like.

So there's people living above below and next to you in this dump? Some kids banging on the ceiling will keep me up all night?

Keep your overpriced ant farms.


You've got it all wrong. That isn't the typical building full of poors that you or I would live in. A building like that has a foot or two of concrete in between each floor. Your upstairs neighbor could set off a small bomb and you'd never know it.

That's the reason I will never live in a garden style apartment again. I lived in a high rise for a while, and now I work with a bunch of them, and the difference in quiet and solitude is stark. In most high-rises you won't hear jack squat coming from your neighbors EVER. You go from your covered parking, to the elevator, to your floor and in to your apartment. Most days when I was coming and going I wouldn't even see a single human being until I got out on to the road. And that apartment probably has a private elevator. It's almost certainly quieter and more private than even living in a suburban home. If his neighbors are up all night having a screaming match he'd never even know.
 
2014-03-03 02:41:15 PM  
How didn't he end up dead of "natural causes" is beyond me.
 
2014-03-03 03:54:56 PM  

gweilo8888: Marcintosh: Leaves behind his brother Richard (Nancy) and many cousins. -

WAT?
[images.wikia.com image 550x392]

It's not that complicated. His brother Richard had a wife called Nancy.

Actually, belay that. It's not complicated at all.


Well ya never know in this day and age. It could be he had a brother called Richard who's now known as Nancy.

Debeo Summa Credo: This miserable asshole stood in the way if progress by exploiting an extraordinarily flawed law. I'm glad he had such a miserable, lonesome life.


Yeah, damn him for knowing the value of what he had and wanting fair value for it. How dare he not accept his beads and cheap whiskey.
 
2014-03-03 04:35:10 PM  
FTFA: Will Zeckendorf describes Sukenik as "a nightmare. Hugely intelligent, a Ph.D., unmarried, embittered, a loner, disconnected from society, and too smart for his own good. "


Sounds like he was just smart enough, doucheveloper.
 
2014-03-03 04:41:42 PM  

MechaPyx: gweilo8888: Marcintosh: Leaves behind his brother Richard (Nancy) and many cousins. -

WAT?
[images.wikia.com image 550x392]

It's not that complicated. His brother Richard had a wife called Nancy.

Actually, belay that. It's not complicated at all.

Well ya never know in this day and age. It could be he had a brother called Richard who's now known as Nancy.

Debeo Summa Credo: This miserable asshole stood in the way if progress by exploiting an extraordinarily flawed law. I'm glad he had such a miserable, lonesome life.

Yeah, damn him for knowing the value of what he had and wanting fair value for it. How dare he not accept his beads and cheap whiskey.


Right. Damn him. Even if you actually believe in rent control I don't know how assholes like him don't fall into the "you're not helping" category.
 
2014-03-03 04:43:00 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: doucheveloper.


DOUCHEVELOPER!  Oh man, I'm so gonna steal that.
 
2014-03-03 04:50:59 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: MechaPyx: gweilo8888: Marcintosh: Leaves behind his brother Richard (Nancy) and many cousins. -

WAT?
[images.wikia.com image 550x392]

It's not that complicated. His brother Richard had a wife called Nancy.

Actually, belay that. It's not complicated at all.

Well ya never know in this day and age. It could be he had a brother called Richard who's now known as Nancy.

Debeo Summa Credo: This miserable asshole stood in the way if progress by exploiting an extraordinarily flawed law. I'm glad he had such a miserable, lonesome life.

Yeah, damn him for knowing the value of what he had and wanting fair value for it. How dare he not accept his beads and cheap whiskey.

Right. Damn him. Even if you actually believe in rent control I don't know how assholes like him don't fall into the "you're not helping" category.


He's under no obligation to be charitable or help out anyone else, let alone a rich developer who wants to move him out of his home.
 
2014-03-03 05:12:27 PM  

MechaPyx: Debeo Summa Credo: MechaPyx: gweilo8888: Marcintosh: Leaves behind his brother Richard (Nancy) and many cousins. -

WAT?
[images.wikia.com image 550x392]

It's not that complicated. His brother Richard had a wife called Nancy.

Actually, belay that. It's not complicated at all.

Well ya never know in this day and age. It could be he had a brother called Richard who's now known as Nancy.

Debeo Summa Credo: This miserable asshole stood in the way if progress by exploiting an extraordinarily flawed law. I'm glad he had such a miserable, lonesome life.

Yeah, damn him for knowing the value of what he had and wanting fair value for it. How dare he not accept his beads and cheap whiskey.

Right. Damn him. Even if you actually believe in rent control I don't know how assholes like him don't fall into the "you're not helping" category.

He's under no obligation to be charitable or help out anyone else, let alone a rich developer who wants to move him out of his home.


And in doing so he drives up the cost of development, reducing the supply of housing therefore driving up housing prices for everyone.

There was an old building in my old neighborhood on the upper east side that sat nearly vacant for years. The owner non-renewed leases on both the market rent apartments and on te businesses on the ground floor and waited/negotiated with the few remaining rent controlled tenants. The entire time that place was lost as a source of housing and business space (they were going to build a larger place with many more apts than the old building).

Now, I'm against rent control in the first place. There's no justifiable reason that the city came in and told landlords that they couldn't raise rents on the farking buildings that they owned.

But even if you are in favor of rent control, these holdouts act in direct contradiction to the primary purpose of such laws to react to housing shortages. Shouldn't there be a law that tenants can be moved if the landlord offers them enough to rent a similar apartment for life, plus moving costs and hassle fee? It's inexcusable that these douchebags can hold progress hostage like this.
 
2014-03-03 05:18:59 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: And in doing so he drives up the cost of development, reducing the supply of housing therefore driving up housing prices for everyone.



oh please. You know what drives up the cost of development? Developers who build giant palaces in the sky for ultra rich people.

The assholes who bought this guy out aren't building "affordable" housing for regular plebes. They're building shiat only CEOs and movie stars and Saudis and wealthy Russians can afford.

I wonder how many apartments for people who make firefighter and teacher money could fit into the building now. Or any of the buildings full of gigantic apartments going for millions of dollars.

But sure, progress demands we have more giant places for rich people to live in NYC. They have so few options now.
 
2014-03-03 05:27:27 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Debeo Summa Credo: And in doing so he drives up the cost of development, reducing the supply of housing therefore driving up housing prices for everyone.


oh please. You know what drives up the cost of development? Developers who build giant palaces in the sky for ultra rich people.

The assholes who bought this guy out aren't building "affordable" housing for regular plebes. They're building shiat only CEOs and movie stars and Saudis and wealthy Russians can afford.

I wonder how many apartments for people who make firefighter and teacher money could fit into the building now. Or any of the buildings full of gigantic apartments going for millions of dollars.

But sure, progress demands we have more giant places for rich people to live in NYC. They have so few options now.


Not all new apartments are ultra high end. And due to other silly NYC tax abatement in exchange for affordability laws many apartments in new buildings are set aside as "affordable housing".

But in any case, people who move into these apartments need to vacate somewhere else, freeing those apartments up for others who are less rich, who relocate there from their places, freeing them up for others, etc etc. Supply and demand - you knock down a building with 20
apartments and put one up with 120, its going to lower prices.

Make no mistake about it, if you pay market rent, rent control farks you.
 
2014-03-03 05:35:38 PM  
All I know is that, per right-wing logic, this guy must've created a ton of jobs if he made that kind of money.

Exploiting legislation is fair game in the Bootstrap Job Creator arena, just ask the oil companies.
 
2014-03-03 06:16:35 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Smelly Pirate Hooker: Debeo Summa Credo: And in doing so he drives up the cost of development, reducing the supply of housing therefore driving up housing prices for everyone.


oh please. You know what drives up the cost of development? Developers who build giant palaces in the sky for ultra rich people.

The assholes who bought this guy out aren't building "affordable" housing for regular plebes. They're building shiat only CEOs and movie stars and Saudis and wealthy Russians can afford.

I wonder how many apartments for people who make firefighter and teacher money could fit into the building now. Or any of the buildings full of gigantic apartments going for millions of dollars.

But sure, progress demands we have more giant places for rich people to live in NYC. They have so few options now.

Not all new apartments are ultra high end. And due to other silly NYC tax abatement in exchange for affordability laws many apartments in new buildings are set aside as "affordable housing".

But in any case, people who move into these apartments need to vacate somewhere else, freeing those apartments up for others who are less rich, who relocate there from their places, freeing them up for others, etc etc. Supply and demand - you knock down a building with 20
apartments and put one up with 120, its going to lower prices.

Make no mistake about it, if you pay market rent, rent control farks you.


I'm betting all new apartments adjacent to Central Park are ultra high end.

I'm not a fan of rent control or stabilization or whatever the fark it's called (i live in the Dallas area). Just sayin'. This one guy isn't responsible for NYC's dearth of housing. He hit the farked up NYC real estate lottery. Why shouldn't he? Other people have. If it's that terrible, change the law.

I don't hear rich people whining about how they can't find a place to live in NYC. They might not like paying the prices, but they don't seem to have much trouble finding something. And if Manhattan has become a place only the wealthy can afford to live, oh well, I guess that's how NYC likes it. This cranky old bastard didn't create the conditions. He just benefited from them. I'm not sure why I should get all verklempt because somebody besides the rich people who buy apartments and the rich people who sell them got some money out of NYC real estate.
 
2014-03-03 07:59:32 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Debeo Summa Credo: Smelly Pirate Hooker: Debeo Summa Credo: And in doing so he drives up the cost of development, reducing the supply of housing therefore driving up housing prices for everyone.


oh please. You know what drives up the cost of development? Developers who build giant palaces in the sky for ultra rich people.

The assholes who bought this guy out aren't building "affordable" housing for regular plebes. They're building shiat only CEOs and movie stars and Saudis and wealthy Russians can afford.

I wonder how many apartments for people who make firefighter and teacher money could fit into the building now. Or any of the buildings full of gigantic apartments going for millions of dollars.

But sure, progress demands we have more giant places for rich people to live in NYC. They have so few options now.

Not all new apartments are ultra high end. And due to other silly NYC tax abatement in exchange for affordability laws many apartments in new buildings are set aside as "affordable housing".

But in any case, people who move into these apartments need to vacate somewhere else, freeing those apartments up for others who are less rich, who relocate there from their places, freeing them up for others, etc etc. Supply and demand - you knock down a building with 20
apartments and put one up with 120, its going to lower prices.

Make no mistake about it, if you pay market rent, rent control farks you.

I'm betting all new apartments adjacent to Central Park are ultra high end.

I'm not a fan of rent control or stabilization or whatever the fark it's called (i live in the Dallas area). Just sayin'. This one guy isn't responsible for NYC's dearth of housing. He hit the farked up NYC real estate lottery. Why shouldn't he? Other people have. If it's that terrible, change the law.

I don't hear rich people whining about how they can't find a place to live in NYC. They might not like paying the prices, but they don't seem to have much trouble finding something. And if Manhattan has become a place only the wealthy can afford to live, oh well, I guess that's how NYC likes it. This cranky old bastard didn't create the conditions. He just benefited from them. I'm not sure why I should get all verklempt because somebody besides the rich people who buy apartments and the rich people who sell them got some money out of NYC real estate.


Okay, fine . Lets change the law.

This guy took advantage of the system to make himself a mint. It'd be hard for anyone to resist this temptation. But his story is further evidence of the absurdity of rent control.
 
2014-03-04 12:52:41 AM  

bunner: In other news, you can oink up 17,000,000.00 for a small apartment and still make a profit off of people who want to live in an ant farm.


rare form, as usual
 
Displayed 158 of 158 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report