The End of Billionaire's Row?

While I have written most months about specific new developments, I felt that some overview

may be in order, in the midst of dynamic change.

A panel I sat in last week gave me thoughts, and some pause, too.

“The Future of New York City Real Estate New Development.” A heady headline, with some thoughtful headliners:

Leslie Wilson, an executive who was a successful developer at Related for a decade or more; my old friend Tim Crowley, who crossed the Rubicon last year from developer Flank and is at CORE, overseeing New Development; Orest Tomaselli, who advises condo developers across the US from the perch of National Condo Advisors.

All moderated by the head of my firm’s New Development division, Stephen Kliegerman.

What were the big takeaways?

While Leslie claimed that she was “cautiously bullish,” she also flatly stated that all of the easy money had been made, referring to the success of new development in the run-up from 2010 to today.

She also looked backward to claim that the pace of price increases in new development was bound to be unsustainable.

Yes, yes, that looks obvious in hindsight.

But the idea that sellers are putting nearly any “made up numbers” prices on their properties landed with a lot of nods.

Sellers haven’t been moored to reality, and we’re facing, if not a reckoning, certainly a recalibration.

Tim Crowley mentioned developers building “8-figure properties in 6-figure locations.”

While this is nothing new – trying to create new neighborhoods or push boundaries – are the current levels simply too high for buyers?

The market seems to indicate that the best locations and views will bear out.

And overpriced development is losing.

Wilson’s most interesting comment was the notion of the strong correlation between the S&P and the number of contracts signed in new development.

Is psychology playing such an outsized role?

Do people really buy apartments because the stock market is up for a week or two?

Pretty interesting to consider.

Others are looking at the bigger picture on a global scale.

Since the UK imposed a higher tax on purchases at the high end of their market, those sales have dried up, to a large degree.

Tim Crowley suggested that the stamp tax is pushing buyers to NYC. At the same time,he pulled a few laughs reminding us that while perhaps 25-30% of buyers are foreign, the vast majority are not well-known, just very successful businesspeople, like the “Mattress King from Tulsa.”

A

distinction he made, another layer of worthy consideration, is the difference between the foreign buyer and the first time foreign buyer.

As foreign buyers become more sophisticated, they are searching out more distinctions in the marketplace beyond blue chip purchases, while first time buyers are sticking to a well-worn script.

The bigger argument he supports is that investing in New York City real estate is nothing more than a flight to safety of capital from across the US and the world.

To that end, New York City seems reasonable for parking money.

It will be interesting to see who gets better return on capital: those playing it safe, or those searching for slightly riskier investments in and around NYC.

Tim Crowley, in his typical dry manner, got a few laughs when discussing the death of 57th Street.

After a light thought experiment about how many billionaires there are in the world, how many want to buy in Manhattan, and how many want to own on 57th Street without a massive Central Park View, the argument definitely could be made that not every $50mm apartment along 57th Street will find a buyer.

To Tim, the successes of 220 Central Park South start to look more like aberrations than

indications of strength along 57th Street.

As I see it, quality projects remain obvious to buyers.

Robert Stern’s name, attached to projects like 15 CPW, and now 220 Central Park South, has drawn buyers, while other projects have not yet inspired the same loyalty.

And so the gorgeous projects like 53 West 53rd, 111 West 57th Street seem to be moving forward, while some

like the Park Lane Hotel, 550 Madison, and others probably are not.

We hear about the challenges of Extell projects these days in getting financing, others struggling to gain traction in the marketplace, or having cautious or gun-shy investors.

I have big concerns that there are simply too many properties for too few buyers.

The recalibration at the high end will be more significant, but likely disconnected to the rest of the market.

Perhaps it will result in some really lovely office space.

As 432 Park Avenue closings take place, in a few months’ time, we’ll see what happens with the residential inventory that remains.