Comment Policy

All comments to posts have to await approval. Please be aware that, depending on when I'm logged onto the internet, it may take me hours, even longer, to moderate comments, so if they don't turn up in a speedy fashion, they are still in the queue. Comments that cross a line I'm not comfortable with will not get approved. Please note: Posts that overdo their passion and veer into name-calling or that make serious accusations without proof are going to have a hard time getting through.

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Guterman Gets It Wrong



The above postcard from co-op advocates, Guterman-Westwood, which tenants have received or should be receiving in the mail, shows buildings that may look like Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village to the casual eye, but which certainly are not a real depiction of the complex. The photo looks to be a Photoshopped assembly of various New York images, worked on graphically for several layers. What is supposed to be ST/PCV may, in fact, be the Alfred E. Smith complex below Stuy Town. Who knows? But a major fail from whatever departments created and then approved this image (which is surprisingly ugly, too).

34 comments:

Anonymous said...

But this photo is not STUYTOWN OR PETER COOPER. ROFL

Anonymous said...

Gutter an should just go away. What a sleaze ball.

frustrated with haters said...

this is soooo funny...and i can't get over it...do you know how easy it would be for them to obtain an overhead photo of stuy town? yet they chose to try and fool everyone by compiling a bunch of different buildings? it's so obvious. first of all, the windows in the foreground look NOTHING like the stuy town windows. ours have green edges! hello?! second, what the heck is that school doing in the middle of the complex!! LOL...and finally, that building on the left which is beige color is DEFINITELY not part of anything around here...first order of business on monday morning at guterman, in my humble opinion, would be to give that graphic designer a good speaking to!

Stuy Town Reporter said...

It's not just the graphics department. Someone higher up must have okayed the visual, completely clueless about how Stuy Town looks. And these are the folks who are so serious about wanting to take over this place!

Anonymous said...

And these are the folks who are so serious about wanting to take over this place!>

God forbid!

Anonymous said...

It really doee appear that Gutterman is morphing into Gutter Man. I do detect a palpable sleeze factor with this guy.

Anonymous said...

It's easy to take cheap shots at this guy. The photo. His name. Etc.

I would do it myself but I sense that there is value in having some competition in this race to the pyrrhic victory so many here are seeking.

Anonymous said...

Competition is good. But why not wait until the place is put on the market, and then speak to reputable firms? Gutterman is not one of those, that's for sure.

Anonymous said...

Nothing is "for sure."

Anonymous said...

I think that if he is successful, Guterman will put a big mortgage on the place, secured by the co-op. He will suck out all of his money and then some while leaving the co-op and the rest of the tenants holding the bag for the mortage.

Anonymous said...

I think that if he is successful, Guterman will put a big mortgage on the place, secured by the co-op. He will suck out all of his money and then some while leaving the co-op and the rest of the tenants holding the bag for the mortage.>

It will be like Rob Speyer all over again. Haven't we been raped enough by this real estate slime? They're all the same in RE. Absolute slime.

Anonymous said...

From a recent NY Magzine article about what first time home buyers learned the hard way - http://nymag.com/realestate/features/first-time-buyers-2012-1/ -

That down payment you think is enough? It may not be enough.


Unlike condos, many cautious co-ops now require significantly more than the typical 20 percent plus a hefty cash reserve. “It changes [your] price point,” says psychologist Rebecca Gonzalez. “I had been looking at places that were $650,000 to $700,000, and in the end, we had to find something closer to $500,000.”

Anonymous said...

I disagree on competition being good for us. The more bidders , the higher the price.

Anonymous said...

There's a lot of complication to the situation. By law at least 15% of the tenants have to commit to buy. If the price is too high to get 15% the plan fails. If there were enough unity to control the buying, then more competition is good. Problem here is not enough unity.

Anonymous said...

"I disagree on competition being good for us. The more bidders , the higher the price."

You know, you are right and you are wrong.

In an auction, the more interest in the property bid upon, the higher the price. For us that could mean that someone other than the tenants end up owning the place at the end of the day. That could work for us or against us. No point in winning the bidding if you have to pay up.

On the other hand, if there are more parties courting the tenants for a conversion, we stand a better chance of getting a good deal as insiders.

It all depends on whether the place goes to the highest bidder or to the tenants with the best partner. Those two contests will likely go on simultaneously. I still think we are better off with more potential partners as suitors.

It's not going to change the fact that other people may compete with us for the highest price.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>There's a lot of complication to the situation. By law at least 15% of the tenants have to commit to buy. If the price is too high to get 15% the plan fails. If there were enough unity to control the buying, then more competition is good. Problem here is not enough unity.<<

I think 15% is very achievable here. Wish the the 15% percentage was higher. 15% of tenants deciding the fate of a complex is not a good thing.

Anonymous said...

IRONY:

Luxie's old site is a list of advertising. One of the ads is for Airbnb/stuy town.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know if Luxie still lives in Stuytown?

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know if Luxie still lives in Stuytown?

It's nobody's business whether he still lives here or not. And it ought to be obvious to all by now that for whatever reason(s), the guy just wants to be left alone.

MBaaar said...

Unless Brookfield decides to finance billions itself (doubtful), they won't shoot for 15%. They will want the buy-in rate to be higher. Maybe 30-40%. But you're right...the fewer may well decide for the many. Guterman's stated goal is 80% buyers. But if conversion moves ahead, both plans will need to be very carefully evaluated.
I've searched the internet carefully & have only found one complaint about Guterman having to do with some late leasing payments. Again...please provide any info or any link that proves Guterman is what you claim.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

It may be some glitch, but it appears that over at the TA Facebook a link to the Guterman ST/PCV co-op site, with accompanying comments, may have been taken down. If so, bad form.

Anonymous said...

as far as i can tell, none of the Guterman sites, including their website, their facebook or the Tweet feed are allowing public comments, let's not throw stones in glass houses.

here is a site for more unmoderated info about guterman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Guterman

Anonymous said...

It may be some glitch, but it appears that over at the TA Facebook a link to the Guterman ST/PCV co-op site, with accompanying comments, may have been taken down. If so, bad form.

Don't you know by now that the people who run the TA's Facebook are control freaks who claim Absolute Power? This is why I will have nothing whatsoever to do with anything that the TA is proposing. It's a restricted club.

Anonymous said...

in this video, Guterman allows the reporter to call the residents of Stuyvesant Town "colorful" and laughs with her at the insinuation that the residents are "colorful- I find this highly disrespectful - what exactly do they mean when they are laughing for being "colorful". That insult taken with the fact the postcard they sent out doesnt even have a picture of Stuyvesant Town, but of a Al Smith Housing buildings on the LES.

here is the link to the video where Guterman goes along with the insult to our community - http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xf02qo_guterman-says-ackman-will-lose-stuy_news

Best part of the video is the claim that Guterman wont make a profit from the conversion - as if he were doing this on behalf of Mother Theresa and good will towards mankind.

Anonymous said...

The more I hear about this, the less inclined I am to buy.

Anonymous said...

You sound jealous of the fact that some of us miss Lux Living and would like to know how he is getting along. I hope he is well.

Anonymous said...

You sound jealous of the fact that some of us miss Lux Living and would like to know how he is getting along.

He's got a life. Now you should get one too.

Anonymous said...

Waiting outside a friends building pcv this morning and there were 7 maintenance guys just standing with shovels but talking. Shooting the breez and i was there for 15 min before my friend arrived.

They were still shooting the breeze when we left. Not complaining about the chit chat (Rose, that's your problem) but 7 guys to do ????? in the bushes...

Stuy Town Reporter said...

No more Lux posts, please. I'm not letting through the latest ones because this is getting out of hand now, and I won't allow any more through in the future.

Anonymous said...

For one thing, Guterman is a joke, and here is why: he sent us postcards with a picture on it, a picture of the Al Smith housing development, not PCVST - what a joke. Guterman is seeking to be the winning bid and tell us he is better for us when he cant even get our picture right? He doesnt even know the difference between the right or wrong picture of Stuy Town.

Say all you want, but Guterman thinks we live in the projects, otherwise he would have known the picture on the post card was wrong.

Anonymous said...

Guterman is a sleazy sheister. But then, aren't they all! It's a requirement in the RE industry that you be sleazy, amoral and totally repulsive. Just look at em all - Trump, Speyer, Guterman, Durst, Maklowe, Silverstein, et al. What do they all have in common? Sleazy, amoral and totally repulsive. (All the ones I've left out fit the same description!)

Anonymous said...

Well at least the slimeball had us in the right borough. I'm surprised he didn't have us in Bushwick or Brownsville.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone actually have anything productive to say here. I have been here for a little over 11 years, less than some more than most these days it seems. If it goes condo or coop good for us. Change is inevitable and we have to go with it to a point. I love the old Stuy Town, quiet and reserved. Wish it would have stayed that way. Maybe if we can be owners we can have that again. And don't make crude remarks if you do not put your name.

Gary

Anonymous said...

"Does anyone actually have anything productive to say here. I have been here for a little over 11 years, less than some more than most these days it seems. If it goes condo or coop good for us. Change is inevitable and we have to go with it to a point. I love the old Stuy Town, quiet and reserved. Wish it would have stayed that way. Maybe if we can be owners we can have that again. And don't make crude remarks if you do not put your name."

I've been living here around the same amount of time as you (two years more) and you've pretty much echoed my sentiment verbatim. I do believe that any hope we have of bringing this place back will be through conversion. If it doesn't work at least we can sell the asset and roll it into a liveable apartment somewhere. I say this realizing that there are some who believe the asset will be worth 0. I do have to say though that I really can't think of much they can do to change things. How are they going to make sure people pick up after their dogs, address the noise problems from the dogs, and the frat parties? But I agree with you insofar as we need to give it a shot.