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. NOTE: Comments reflect the opinions of the person writing them and should not be assumed to reflect the opinion of the blog.

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

If things aren't depressing enough....

An article in today's WALL STREET JOURNAL laid out CWCapital's plan for PCVST.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323551004578436862450162392.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

In a nutshell:

1) Hold onto the property for as long as possible, as CWCapital takes in huge fees for running the complex. ("CWCapital takes in $625,000 a month from overseeing the asset, with fees totaling $26 million since it first became involved in 2009.")

2) Keep on raising rents to make the purchase of the property more seductive to possible buyers. ("CWCapital believes it can raise rents on some units, boost the project's income and get a higher sales price, said the people familiar with its strategy. The company believes that process will stretch at least into 2014.")  The churning of apartments for ever high rents means a concentration on temporary student housing and the packing in of students into divided rooms to attain the highest level of rent. 

3) Sell when both numbers 1 & 2 have been suitably maximized, though a time limit is probably of import here.

So, where is affordable middle-class housing in all this?  Well, it's being systematically eradicated, with Mayor Bloomberg not on our side at all, and our councilman, Dan Garodnick, offering up the same-old, same-old tenant purchase of the property plan that will, if actualized, also eradicate affordable middle-class housing, though probably on a less speedier track. (If you think we already have serious divisions in our community, wait till the introduction of condo owners comes into the mix.)

I know I've said this several times before, but let me repeat it:  How is it legally possible for a landlord to divide up apartments with partitions/walls and have work orders state that there is NO change in occupancy? (Sample here.) How is it possible that the spirit of rent stabilization is being raped by the landlords, current and past? (What a cruel joke that the churning of PCVST apartments is happening to, yes, "rent stabilized" units.)

I just don't see why certain companies are not being sued, why certain people are not in jail, while the only ones left to suffer for the actions of these companies and individuals are the tenants themselves.

Shame on those who could have done something, but did nothing. And are still doing nothing.

Those who can't access the WSJ article can find it in a commentary on the TA Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/358760671689/ 

*  *  * 

Meanwhile, this is how the luxurious Peter Cooper Village is looking these days.  (Thanks to a reader for the photos.) 



 

68 comments:

Anonymous said...

Laws are bought and sol in NewYork to the highest bidder. That's why we have Bloomberg ruling over his illegal third term and why most of our politicians are not in jail, where they belong

Anonymous said...

CW and their sick joke of a management co are the ultimate parasites. They are bleeding us dry while engorging themselves on our our blood. Where are the TA and the ever-useless Garodnick? Eff 'em all.

Anonymous said...

I took stroll through PCV today and I was shocked at how crappy the grounds looked.

Sad. PCV/ST were once the "crown jewels" of Manhattan.

No more.

Anonymous said...

They can't even fix the broken clock in Playground 10.

Pathetic.

Anonymous said...

There is something else quite interesting that nobody is talking about. At the last meeting Barry Blattman (Brookfield CEO) mentioned that there was no incentive for CWC to recover more than what will require to make the bondholders whole. There would be "no place for the money to go". Why would it be then that CWC is attempting to maximize income on the property to attract higher bidders? Either something doesn't jibe here or I'm misreading something. I was at the last meeting meeting and I know what I heard him say.

Anonymous said...

I know people are frustrated, angry and depressed about the situation here, but the TA and Garodnick don't own or manage this joint and they can only do so much. I would love to hear exactly what you would like to see them do that is actually in their power to do?

Tommyboyardee said...

Well most of the blame for this fiasco is Tishman, their glut of stockpiled vacant apartments have fueled CW's bottom line. Why leave now when they are raking in the cash, eventually the stock holders/debtors will demand a sale, CW'S then handles that!
The steady flow of first time renters will enable a steady flow of 1 term tenants, the way things were will never be again.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>I know people are frustrated, angry and depressed about the situation here, but the TA and Garodnick don't own or manage this joint and they can only do so much. I would love to hear exactly what you would like to see them do that is actually in their power to do?<<

Let me ask you. Do you think that Dan has been a pit-bull toward what is happening here and has been happening here since he became a councilman? I realize that he has taken some action and talks a good talk, but has he really fought for affordable housing here? Has he and his office investigated all the possibilities for reining in the actions of each landlord that we've had? Has Garodnick ever stood up to Bloomberg, who is undoubtedly the most awful politician in regard to this complex? Do you also think that a tenant ownership of this property (well, part ownership) will save affordable housing? Won't such a situation create a new group of people--condo owners--who will fight for their own cause, contrary to the cause of lower-rent, affordable housing?

Anonymous said...

With the way things are going STR, I'm not so sure we have to worry about condo conversion anymore.

Hippo said...

Alas, the WSJ article confirmed all my fears. There is ZERO chance this place will ever go condo or coop. The whole plan is to suck as much cash out of the revolving tenant population, maximize profits in the short-term, let the facilities go to crap...which they have done both literally and figuratively...think dog doo...and ultimately wait until all the old rent-stabilized tenants die or move out. Remember the Rolling Stones song, "Time is on my Side"? A few years ago 2/3 of the apartments were RS. Now slightly half are RS. In ten years, the old RS tenants will be as rare as a dodo bird. The south side of 14th Street between Avenues A and B isjust the beginning of the redevelopment of this area. Stuy Town-Peter Cooper is finished. The diminution of services is DISGRACEFUL. As far as Garodnick is concerned, he is just a slimy, little pol just like the rest of them. He talks a good game but he is in the pocket of the Bloomberg, Quinn, real estate cabal. What a fraud?
But, hey, that's just my opinion. Feel free to disagree.

Anonymous said...

STR - I believe your frustration with Dan Garodnick is misguided. You have to realize that fighting for the cause of lower rent/affordable housing at PCVST is a losing game. First, what does it even mean? Affordable is different for everybody. And lower rent? Look, I 100% agree with you that the rent is too high here, but in what world will rents be significantly lowered when Manhattan real estate is so much in demand? And more importantly, when the complex is owned by a company or corporation who's sole motive is to make a return for shareholders? The glory days of when Metlife owned the place are over. They are not coming back. The world is a different place, and Manhattan is a different place. Also keep in mind it is no coincidence that when the "benevolent" MetLife went public, they sold this place out in the process big time, becoming no different than Tishman or CW. This is what frustrates me when I hear many claim that tenant ownership would be such a horrible thing, or worse than we have now. If tenants are not owning the place, it's just going to be another Tishman or CW. Same crap, different people. Part of what makes PCVST so special is the community that built it. When you question whether condo owners will just fight for their own cause -- you are right, but that is a good thing, not a bad thing. People (people actually living here -- not corporations) that have an ownership stake in this property will treat it with much more care and respect than any faceless corporation will. People living here and paying a mortgage are not looking to maximize profits. They are looking to pay their monthly mortgage and spread their roots here. (and in many cases, their mortgage/monthly fees will probably be less than their current rent) Quality of life concerns will take precedence over profit concerns. I believe there's a large number of people living here that are hanging on, month to month, hoping a condo conversion happens. It's the only way to preserve the dignity of this property and the people that live here and care about it. And with recent news that CW is basically squatting on PCVST, soaking up monthly fees while quality of life suffers (have you called resident services lately?), it's not looking good. If they put the property on the market as an auction to the highest bidder, and another Tishman buys it, I - along with many I believe - will be gone. And the people leaving will be the ones you want here. Because the people who will be taking their place will be students, transients, etc. Those with no invested interest in improving life here. Affordability is great, but if Post-Sandy living here has taught us anything, it's that Quality of Life is important to, and should not be overlooked.

Anonymous said...

Is it legal and ethical (well never mind ethical because we know that doesn't factor into the equation) for a Special Servicer to put its own rinky dinky "management" company in charge of a property it is entrusted with? CW/Compass is gouging the property for a humungous sum each month and is "managing" it into the ground. A lot of tenants are without essential services they are paying for and "management" treats them like shit. What are they actually getting paid for? Just keeping the lights on? I agree that we need someone better than Dan Garodnick because he is really useless. He is too much of a slimy pol/attorney to be of any good around here. He is only out for himself.

Anonymous said...

I read Charles Bagli's book and I was surprised that there was no mention of Bill Potter. Bill was the manager of STPCV for many years and was known as the "Mayor of Stuyvesant Town." He was a real gentleman in the truest sense of the word and ran this place like a well-oiled machine. I'm glad he didn't live to see the shambles it has since become.

Anonymous said...

A tenant association is only as good as the people who volunteer for it. Many male long term tenants I know only seem to care about sports and “back in the day” conversations. They have no idea on what is going on here. As long as their rent does not have a major impact, they could not give a shit. Other long term tenants are like crazy cat ladies who live in denial and oblivion here and again, have no clue of what is going on here. The new zombie moms, well, they have been torched enough by far better satirists than I. Look at the official PCVST FB page and see the likes for the Oval Café and the very selected property shots that do not include any of the horrors such as the dumpsters in PCV and the post Sandy (still) lack of basic services for PCV residents. The horror of the re-cycle rooms, aptly documented. The trash, dog shit, and discarded property, that is everywhere on the property. They love the Ice Rink, the food trucks, the Oval Café, the concerts, the Green Market, and all of the other bread and circus events while the maintenance of the buildings and the QOL spiral downward.

Regarding the new “demo’, the dorm housed millenniums, well, if you look at the official PCVST FB page, their primary concern was when will the gym re-open. See pages 362-363 of the Bagli’s “Other People’s Money” for the following text:
“Noah Nielsen moved to a two bedroom apartment is Stuyvesant Town after graduating from the University of Vermont. He had two roommates. They built (Notice-THEY built a wall-nice inspection process you got going there CWC) a wall in the center of the living room to make three bedrooms and split the rent, $3,500 per month. But Nielsen, like Schloer, had no intention of setting down roots. He left after a year. “I don't want to be surrounded by older people and families, Nielsen said. “I wanted to feel like I’m in Manhattan.”

His vision of Manhattan. CWC’s vision of Manhattan. Bloomberg’s and Amanda Burden's vision of Manhattan. Christine Quinn's vision of Manhattan. Manhattan for the rich and their spawn, tourists, chain stores, banks, Frat bars, expensive restaurants , bottle service clubs, and cheaply made “Luxury” condos (future dorms in progress as well). No working or true middle class. No affordable housing, I see a bleak future here.

Anonymous said...

"I see a bleak future here"

Every time I read all the whining and complaining on this blog my eyes just gloss over. If it's really so bad here then why don't you leave?

I know that's a rhetorical questions - you have "Golden Handcuffs" and are grandfathered into an nonsensical rent control policy and would never leave.

In all seriousness - you all live in Manhattan, in walking distance to the nicest neighborhoods on planet Earth (EV, Gramercy, West Village) and you pay virtually nothing to live here.

Can't you all just be grateful for essentially winning the real estate lottery and be happy?

Anonymous said...

"CW/Compass is gouging the property for a humungous sum each month and is 'managing' it into the ground. . . . What are they actually getting paid for? Just keeping the lights on?"

Not even that. Take a walk around both properties at night--large numbers of street lamps have been out for months. I can count about 5 just from the entrance to my building.

Anonymous said...

A special servicer owes a duty to the bondholders. CW doesn't care a fig for New York City, affordable housing, or any one of us. We're just a source of cash flow, and if we leave, they actually can make MORE with our successors.

Anonymous said...

Dan Garodnick only cares about helping his former law firm clean up on a Brookfield deal. Although I have supported Dan in every election he has ever run in, I WILL NOT VOTE FOR HIM THIS TIME AROUND. The only problem is will anyone run against him? He has a lot of campaign money (mostly from his former law firm and the real estate cabal) and this is NY. Remember, Vito Lopez, Hiram Monserrat, Pedro Espada, Elliot Engel (who doesnt even live in the state) and the illegal Bloomberg 3rd term. Heck, when Chuck Schumer started in the Senate, NY was number 2 in terms of population and # 1 in terms of jobs. We had 41 electoral college votes. Now we are tied with Florida with 29 and that is only because in 2010 illegals were allowed to be counted or NY would have lost more than the 2 electoral college votes we lost that year. In summary, since Schumer has been in the senate, NY has lost almost 30% of its population and jobs, mostly to Texas, yet he wins in a landslide every time he runs. No Senator in the history of the country has seen their state lose more people and more jobs than Chuck Schumer yet the crazies in NY keep re-electing him. Point being don't expect things to get better when you keep electing the same failures.

Anonymous said...

I too heard that money in excess of the what the bondholders required had "no where to go." As long as the valuation of the property is below that figure - and there is no bid for that amount, the servicer appears to be doing their job. Brookfield claims they will make a bid that makes the bondholders whole. But if CW isn't taking bids, they can earn millions in fees while they drag the process out. Someone said there is a time limit on CW, what is that?

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>Can't you all just be grateful for essentially winning the real estate lottery and be happy?<<

There was no lottery. Affordable middle class housing should be available to more New Yorkers, rather than less. That's the fight. But I'm sure you'd like to see affordable housing of any type leave Manhattan. And we're rent stabilized not rent controlled. Who are you? Some real estate guy or a pissed market rate paying tenant? This complex existed very well, and with a nice profit, pre-sale days.

Go away. We ain't moving.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>When you question whether condo owners will just fight for their own cause -- you are right, but that is a good thing, not a bad thing. People (people actually living here -- not corporations) that have an ownership stake in this property will treat it with much more care and respect than any faceless corporation will.<<

You make a good point. But everyone looks at things from their own self-interest (primarily), and the self-interest of condo owners will diverge from the self-interest of those who elect to remain as renters and who are truly rent-stabilized in non-renovated apartments. Most of these condo owners will look upon the older rent-stabilized tenants as leeches, even if now they are part of the same family. We see this attitude already with the market rate paying tenants, who consider anyone not paying what they pay to be getting a free ride. And we have seen how a small cadre of "Stuy Moms" (surely market raters) were talking on their Facebook about finding out the identities of some older tenants who were posting on the TA Facebook and reporting them to CWCaptial to get them kicked out of the complex. The gloating was that CWCapital would very much welcome such an action. So, yeah, introducing condo ownership into this complex is going to mean two things: 1) a new group of tenants that will be at odds with other tenants, and 2) less tenants whose self-interest is in affordable, rent-stabilized apartments, with a probable reduction in TA membership.

Anonymous said...

>> So, yeah, introducing condo ownership into this complex is going to mean two things: 1) a new group of tenants that will be at odds with other tenants, and 2) less tenants whose self-interest is in affordable, rent-stabilized apartments, with a probable reduction in TA membership.<<

I respectfully disagree.

1) Yes, there will be new tenants, and yes some will be at odds with others (as is the nature with an 11,000+-unit property), and while some market rate tenants may view those paying less as leeches (I personally disagree, and I think the majority of mature, intelligent renters living here would disagree as well) -- it’s CW/Tishman/MetLife that REALLY view those paying low rent as leeches. THEY are the ones I’d be more concerned about, not renters here. And if you think tenants owning the property are going to view lower-paying renters with as much contempt as CW or any other profit-making corporation would, I would say that’s clearly incorrect.


2) Yes, more tenants owning their units would mean less renters, but again, I fail to see what the realistic alternative is here. If a condo conversion never happens, you’re still – year after year - going to get less and less tenants whose self-interest is in affordable, rent-stabilized apartments as rents go up and up and transients/students become the norm, as they are the ones being marketed to and since they’ll be the only ones that can afford to live here, putting up walls and piling 6 into a 2BR. It’s a tough pill to swallow, but low rents will not be coming back to PCVST or anywhere else in Manhattan for that matter. Better to try and control your own destiny through a conversion then wait for a real estate Santa to reduce people’s rent. It might not be perfect for everybody, but unless you have a realistic solution (and that doesn’t mean waiting for a politician to pass a law lowering your rent for you) it’s better than the status quo.

Anonymous said...

Well, well, isn’t it the usual RE industry type troll who spiels his BS. As usual, no response to the QOL issues that affect ALL the tenants here, including those who pay market rates as well, not just the long term tenants. Do you think I’m making this major QOL shit up? Go over to the PCVST FB page and note how essential services are not being provided, how management is entering apartments without permission to replace dangerous shower curtain glass walls which they cannot say are dangerous because their counsel has advised them not to do so. How the replacement intercoms suck. How the residents in PCV have only ONE laundry facility to go to. We fight to protect and improve this community. We have a vested interest here with our children, local schools and our parents, many frail and elderly. You have obviously have no stake here, your self-absorbed attitude is rather obvious. And as STR has pointed out, we are all (currently) rent stabilized, not “rent controlled.” Get your RE facts straight troll before you post. But then we get this crap from you: “and you pay virtually nothing to live here.” I bet you post this line of RE industry shit at the EV Grieve blog as well. No, not really true . We just don’t split it among four roommates. And on that note why don’t you and your three roommates GTF outta here?

John said...

I don't think there was a formal bankruptcy. Stuyvesant Town defaulted on its mortgages so the mortgage servicer took control of the property. I believe all of the mortgages are still outstanding. Sales proceeds up to the value of the senior mortgages ($3Bn plus accrued interest) will go to the senior lenders. Further sales proceeds would go to a series of junior lenders. My guess is that CWC is not going to sell until the 2020 expiration of the J-51 credits is in sight. At that point most of the apartments will probably be market rate.

Anonymous said...

"We just don’t split it among four roommates. And on that note why don’t you and your three roommates GTF outta here?"

AMEN!

Anonymous said...

what the heck are the big gian containers in pcv?

Anonymous said...

Can anyone here answer how long CW Capital can LEGALLY remain as Special Servicer?

Anonymous said...

Amen to 314PM.

Anonymous said...

In today's T&V, a tenant describes the harrowing experiences he has suffered because of an unruly large dog. The dog has even attacked him and drawn blood. Surely he should file a complaint with the 13th Pct and he should also carry a can of dog repellent, pepper spray or something like that. God this place has gone to Hell!

Anonymous said...

My recollection is that CW has control of the property until 2015. If they don't sell it by the end of their "contract," it's not clear whether they're able to renew their involvement. This was discussed at a TA meeting. They aren't allowed to hold the property in perpetuity.

Anonymous said...

"Is it legal and ethical (well never mind ethical because we know that doesn't factor into the equation) for a Special Servicer to put its own rinky dinky "management" company in charge of a property it is entrusted with?"

Tishman Speyer did the same thing, even though they weren't a special servicer.

Anonymous said...

" Surely he should file a complaint with the 13th Pct and he should also carry a can of dog repellent, pepper spray or something like that"

That dog owner is lucky he is in New York City because anywhere else in this country, it would be shot on the spot and it would be perfectly legal to do that.

Anonymous said...

"Tishman Speyer did the same thing, even though they weren't a special servicer."

You discredited your own statement. TS was the owner, so there were no conflicts of interest. In the case of CWC there are obvious conflicts of interest. So what if TS did the same thing? Irrelevant.

Anonymous said...

"Tishman Speyer did the same thing, even though they weren't a special servicer."

In my opinion, Tishman Speyer, scumbags as they were, were BETTER managers than this crappy outfit! At least they responded to tenants' emails and phone calls and did get repairs done when they were needed. With Compass Rock, it's a case of the lights are on, but no-one's home.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 345PM
Containers are what passes for landscaping in the new PCV slum created by our " friends" at CW as they milk this property for millions in management fees.

Anonymous said...

I am reading on the TA facebook that CW is raising rents at will. Surely, now that all the apartments are rent stabilized, they can only raise rents at lease renewal and only at the percentage that the RGB set down?

Anonymous said...

All apartments r rent regulated??????

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Rent stabilized. Can you believe it?

Anonymous said...

There is a place for the money in excess of the first mortgage to go - it is what is known as the mezzanine debt. And guess who is at the top of the mezz rung? That's right - CW Capital - as a result of their buyout of Ackman. That mezz is worth $300 million if it can be recovered. CW paid $40 million for it. Did someone say motivation?

Anonymous said...

Rent stabilized. Can you believe it? ...

So how does CW get away with raising the rents the way they do? Isn't what they are doing illegal?

Anonymous said...

"There is a place for the money in excess of the first mortgage to go - it is what is known as the mezzanine debt. And guess who is at the top of the mezz rung? That's right - CW Capital - as a result of their buyout of Ackman. That mezz is worth $300 million if it can be recovered. CW paid $40 million for it. Did someone say motivation?"

Fair enough, but then why did Blattman say there wasn't anyplace for the money to go if apparently there is?

Anonymous said...

"Fair enough, but then why did Blattman say there wasn't anyplace for the money to go if apparently there is?"

Ask Mr. Blattman

Anonymous said...

Regarding rent, recent tenants got a lease with legal rent and a lower preferential rent. Increases can be higher than what RS specifies because mgmt has the option to go above the Pref rent, which was created due to the Roberts case.

John said...

I think Blattman was just wrong. He may have known that at the time, but said it anyway because it had a populist appeal.

Bagli's book says that CW took over the entity that owned PCVST in order to avoid the transfer tax that would have come from directly taking over the property. The book says that back interest and fees have brought the senior lenders claim up to $4Bn. After that all of the junior loans are still outstanding.

Anonymous said...

The money that has "nowhere to go" is going into the pockets of CW/Compass Rock. Bloodsucking parasites.

Anonymous said...

I m confused!!! Does this mean that all tenants- RS & MR - can have their rents raised ,above & beyond rent guidelines , when renewing the lease??? Is there a formula???? I thought the Rent Guidelines ruled the land . I think the TA should be addressing this issue. We are due some clarification.

Anonymous said...

"I think Blattman was just wrong. He may have known that at the time, but said it anyway because it had a populist appeal."

It sure would be nice to get a clarification from the TA regarding this. Between the TA website which links to a "Focus on Conversion" TA/Brookfield website which links to a "Protect STPCV" Facebook page, there is hardly any timely useful information. Timely being the operative word. Is CWC going to work with us or is the WSJ article correct? TA?

Anonymous said...

When this place is sold, it will be sold to the highest bidder. Period. CWC has a fiduciary responsibility to the bond holders. It has ZERO responsibility to the TA, Garodnick or anyone else.

Anonymous said...

"CWC has a fiduciary responsibility to the bond holders. It has ZERO responsibility to the TA, Garodnick or anyone else."

It has a responsibility to the tenants to provide the facilities we are paying for, e.g., functioning laundry rooms, elevators, etc., as well as the right to live in our apartments without having our lives made hellish by the ever-partying students. It also has a responsibility to keep us as safe as is reasonably possible and the constant churn of the apartments, transient population and b&bers, compounded by reductions in Security staff, mean that they are not fulfilling that duty.

Anonymous said...

Like I said, CWC's responsibility is, first and foremost, to the bond holders, which means they need to keep costs down and revenues up. The way they keep revenues up is by renovating and churning apartments and cutting staff to the bone. Agree that it stinks, but that's their plan and they are determined to stick with it as you can see for yourself as the quality of life here sinks lower and lower every day. Sad how the almighty dollar has destroyed this once terrific place to live.

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous April 28, 2013 at 8:46 PM said...
I m confused!!! Does this mean that all tenants- RS & MR - can have their rents raised ,above & beyond rent guidelines , when renewing the lease??? Is there a formula???? I thought the Rent Guidelines ruled the land . I think the TA should be addressing this issue. We are due some clarification.

Stop being confused. The original RS tenants' rent will continue to be raised according to RGB guidelines.

The rents that may go up are the former MR apartments that have preferential rents--rents that are lower than what is the official rent (because with all the vacancy increases and renos, some rents can be above what the market will pay).

For further explanation, see Dan's plain-language explanation of the Roberts settlement here:
http://www.garodnick.com/press-release/roberts-settlement-plain-language

Anonymous said...

To add to my previous post re: rents going up: Some former MR tenants have been paying interim rents, which were rolled back after Roberts was won but are lower than the rents established by the settlement. The settlement gives CW the right to raise the rent midlease, although we don't know if CW is going to do this.

Again, see Dan's explanation at http://www.garodnick.com/press-release/roberts-settlement-plain-language

Anonymous said...

Seems to me that the Roberts settlement just told the "former MR tenants" to bend over and ....

Anonymous said...

Again, see Dan's explanation at http://www.garodnick.com/press-release/roberts-settlement-plain-language

Why would anyone believe anything Dan Garodnick has to say. He is a professional liar who only cares about his self interests. He has done more harm to ST than almost anyone else.

Anonymous said...

I don't understand how you guys just make up facts. The property "made a nice profit" before it was sold by MetLife? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME? Don't you have a clue? MetLife sold it to Tishman Speyer to compensate for all the lost rent that it ate for all those decades that it ran the place like a dorm for friends and family. Please check your facts.

Anonymous said...

"Why would anyone believe anything Dan Garodnick has to say. He is a professional liar who only cares about his self interests. He has done more harm to ST than almost anyone else."

You missed the point, which was to direct the confused poster (and anyone else who was interested) to a clear explanation of why some former MR rents might go up as a result of Roberts. Dan provided such an explanation.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>I don't understand how you guys just make up facts. The property "made a nice profit" before it was sold by MetLife? ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME? Don't you have a clue? MetLife sold it to Tishman Speyer to compensate for all the lost rent that it ate for all those decades that it ran the place like a dorm for friends and family. Please check your facts.<<

Actually, YOU should check your facts. MetLife brought in a 60 or 70 million dollar profit the year before it sold this place. This fact was brought out by NY Times reporter Charles Bagli.

Anonymous said...

StuyTown routinely netted Met over 100mil per year. Remember, they owned the property outright, and had tax abatements, even prior to the J-51.

It's obvious that Anon April 30, 2013 at 11:58 PM has been drinking the Kool Aid of those who blame the long time residents here for their miserably high rent. Guess what bucko ? It's not their fault.

Anonymous said...

Let's say that Met Life, in fact, did make a profit of $70 or even $100 million. Does that sound like a decent return on a value of three billion? The purpose of a business is to maximize return for its shareholders. Met ran this place like a dorm for its friends. That is not running a business, and they were forced to adopt a new strategy which lead to the eventual sale.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

MetLife didn't have shareholders for a long time. Maximizing profits, where basic needs are concerned, are primary considerations only for those who worship at the House of Greed and who have no empathy for their fellow man. Could such a person be you?

Anonymous said...

Your 3 billion valuation is a specious argument. The property wasn't worth 3 billion until Met suckered Tishman into buying it, and they promptly found out it wasn't going to cover their debt service, a debt service BTW that Met never carried.

Met never ran the place like a "dorm" for it's friends, it built and ran the place for the returning World War II veterans who fought for YOUR right to not be a part of Hitler Youth today. How about showing a little gratitude for the men, women AND their families who sacrificed and fought so that you could enjoy a life of freedom and prosperity some 65 years later ??

Anonymous said...

Before Met Life went public ST was a cash cow and tax write off. Going public is what forced sale.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

AMEN, poster 5:12pm!

Anonymous said...

"AMEN, poster 5:12pm!"

Ditto to that as well!

Anonymous said...

We need to start to post more pictures because I think that pushes management to move. We could take pics of filthy hallways n the sandy security guards sleeping in hallways . Pics of dirty carpets. I could go on & on. Let's get going. We could have fun !!!!!

Anonymous said...

"We need to start to post more pictures because I think that pushes management to move."

That the containers were removed shortly after these pix were posted is a coincidence. Management was following its own schedule all along.

The question to ask is why were waterlogged and molding items placed in sealed containers for 6 months and allowed to deteriorate even further? Probably so that Management could justify dumping all the stuff without being bothered to try to return it to its owners. Taking it all to an environmentally qualified Bronx warehouse, shuttle service notwithstanding? All part of their evil plan to discourage tenants. The notice that we received said that the warehouse staff will be wearing protective gear. No mention of masks or anything else for tenants.

But, yes, let's have a photo fest. There's so much to document. Night shouldn't be a deterrent--it shouldn't be hard to capture all the streetlights that are out.

Anonymous said...

"We need to start to post more pictures because I think that pushes management to move. We could take pics of filthy hallways n the sandy security guards sleeping in hallways . Pics of dirty carpets. I could go on & on. Let's get going. We could have fun !!!!!"

I've always felt that the calls for a rent strike were misguided and a one way ticket to eviction. I do, however, agree with this poster. Why not do everything legally within our power to shame these bastards? I've also felt that, if we can, we should protest in front of the leasing office and always wonder why the TA isn't investigating this possibility. God there's so many things we could protest and anything that would interfere with these idiots from renting out apartments would get their attention.

Anonymous said...

"Why not do everything legally within our power to shame these bastards? I've also felt that, if we can, we should protest in front of the leasing office and always wonder why the TA isn't investigating this possibility. God there's so many things we could protest and anything that would interfere with these idiots from renting out apartments would get their attention"

I'd go for it! A group effort is needed.