Hacker News Reader

Comment by carterac | Hacker News Reader

Matt, I'm reprinting my reply on your blog here:

Duuuude, NO! Or at least, that's what I want to scream at you after reading this. But it is hard for me to refute your logic around investors. Of course, SV has a larger and older network. Can't deny that. But, of course, in SV there are also waaaay more entrepreneurs vying for VC dolla bills. Having spent time in both locations, I wouldn't say it's any easier to raise funds in SV, although they do have more smart money for sure.

But now with FRC, Flybridge, and Founder's Collective (among many others) stepping up in NYC, I think we're just seeing the beginning of an awesome growth curve.

Plus, haven't you been reading Dave McClure's blog? It's not about the tech, it's about the design and marketing. Which NYC has in SPADES.

Alright dude, enjoy SV!

View on HN

New York will succeed as a startup hub if the rents come down fast enough. Right now, they're still too high; you pretty much have to work a Wall Street job or be parentally supported to live here, and this is a problem.

Not true, you can find cheap places to live, if you're willing to live outside Manhattan. Jersey City, Queens, BK, are all viable options for the scrappy founder.

I agree, but it's a pain in the ass to get into the city from those places.

Brooklyn Heights is close to Manhattan and beautiful-- probably one of the nicest neighborhoods in New York-- but it's almost as expensive as living on the island. There are also affordable, beautiful places in the outer boroughs, but an hour's commute away.

Again, not true. Have you lived in Astoria (N train to Manhattan in half hour), Fort Greene (so many choices and 15 min to manhattan), Jersey City (path train to manhattan in less than half hour).

Brooklyn Heights is a terrible example. It's where the executives who work across the water live. Of course that is going to be super expensive.

There are lots of places that you can find, that are comparable to SF & Boston, and sometimes cheaper. Let me know if you need help here!

Just curious, do you live and/or work in NYC? I find the rent (even in places like Astoria and Fort Greene) to be unreasonable, especially once you consider broker's fees.

The best values IMO are in the NJ suburbs, where you can catch a 40 min direct train into Penn Station, but pay half the rent of Manhattan, Hoboken, Astoria, etc. But that's obviously not quite as sexy and appealing.

I think a point everyone's missing is that even if you both live and work in Manhattan, you could have a 45 minute commute each way.

I do live (fort greene) and work (manhattan) in NYC. You should never use broker's though, they're a waste of money. It does take a little work to find a good deal, but you definitely can if you look early enough.

Overall, I would agree. NJ seems to have the most cheap places.

Great point about 45 commute just inside Manhattan.

EDIT: I live in fort greene and I pay 735 a month -- for validation purposes.

Brokers seem like a good deal because they would be if they did their job. If a broker could get you a 10% better place, or 10% cheaper rent (which we'll consider equivalent) then a broker would be paid off in a year and a half (New York brokers typically charge 10-17% of a year's rent, for the uninitated). However, they start you off on miserable apartments, often play bait-and-switch games with nice ones that "just happen" to get taken before your application clears, and stop taking your calls after 5 or 6 showings-- God forbid they do some actual work to earn that commission. This makes them essentially worthless.

Avoiding broker fees is a bit easier said than done IMO. I suppose it's much easier if you already live in the city. But if you're moving to NYC and only have a limited time to find an apartment, it's hard to avoid.

"I live in fort greene and I pay 735 a month -- for validation purposes."

With roomates or 1BR/Studio?

2BR (straight up, not flex) 1.5 bath. I live with one other person.

Wow, where in Fort Greene? That's pretty incredible.

Right. Since urban areas are (in practice) fuzzily-defined, the real economic question is not "What are the rents?" but "What is the best rent/commute/quality-of-life trade-off available?" The fact that a few neighborhoods are expensive isn't relevant, but the fact that every accessible neighborhood is expensive is a problem.

Defining "reasonable rent" as 30% of after-tax income (which is about the point at which governments should limit rent levels, IMO) and noting that an entry-level job in New York pays about $3500/month after tax, reasonable rent would be $1050 for a starter apartment.

It's not impossible to find a decent apartment for under $1000/month in "the greater New York area", but it is impossible to do so with less than a 30-minute commute.

I don't want to go off-topic but:

"Defining "reasonable rent" as 30% of after-tax income (which is about the point at which governments should limit rent levels, IMO)"

How on earth would that work?

Make it illegal to spend more than 30% of one's after-tax income on rent. A fine is assessed to the landlord (and a small token fine of perhaps $50 to the tenant).

Now the glut of idiots (and parentally-funded schmucks who currently live in $4000+/month apartments while working unpaid marketing/fashion internships, who would be forced out of the city) willing to destroy their finances in order to live in New York is gone; they're forced by law out of the auction. Our rents are high because we have to compete with these assholes. So let's take them out.

Landlords will either lower their rents to reasonable values or accept vacancies.

I would add parts of alphabet city to that list. I can get from C ave to work on 8th ave in 30 minutes by bus, 15-20 by train. 1BR rent is $1650. Harlem is also gentrified and will run a little north of $1200. Express A train from 145th takes 30 minutes.

I guess we have different definitions of "pain in the ass".

In Brooklyn you can find places to live along the N that are 3 or 4 stops to Union Square.

And yeah, Brooklyn Heights is nice, but other than the promenade and some large apartment buildings, there is nothing there that set it apart from Cobble Hill/Carroll Gardens/Park Slope/etc (although those places are expensive in their own right, but nothing like the city).

Brownstone Brooklyn isn't exactly cheap -- my place is considered a steal here in Park Slope, but it's still an eyebrow raising amount of money.

Places like Prospect Heights, Crown Heights, and Clinton Hill are gentrifying quickly, and rents are getting up near the $2k month for a 1 bedroom mark. It's just not sustainable.

You'd have to be crazy to live in Crown Heights for 2K a month.

I think on of the biggest problems is looking for a reasonable place to live in NYC is a total beat down. It takes time, and diligence and you can become disillusioned very, very quickly. You can also get screwed if you are new and don't know the various neighborhood profiles. And brokers... I don't even want to get started on brokers.

I live in a 1BR in Brooklyn (Carroll Gardens), but I work remotely for a startup. I still live here because it's easily on the short list for best city in the world. If I had to take a hit in salary to work at a local startup, I'd probably look at Sunset Park or Bay Ridge. Living in the boonies (by Manhattan standards, they are perfectly nice neighborhoods) is a trade off you have to make to interact with such a great city on a budget.

Bushwick. $1275, 1BR. Booyeah.

This shows how far New York has diverged from reality. No one in any other city would consider this "booyeah" worthy.

In most cities, you can raise a family in a $1275/month apartment.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com