Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jclf56d wrote

They're more in demand in visible terms, but in economic terms demand is still higher in Manhattan. If Manhattan was as cheap as here, they'd be #1 on this metric by far.

As for the JC rents higher than NYC thing, no one ever brings up composition effects. Let's say you go from 2000 old units and 2000 new units to 2000 old units and 3000 new units with no changes in the rent of the actual units themselves. "Jersey City average rent" will still go up even though the exact same number of old units at the same price are still available.


Maleficent-Baby-1926 t1_jclgetx wrote

i didnt get the visible terms vs economic terms piece


JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jcllkpq wrote

Visible terms = the competition when you tour an apartment

Economic terms = where people would want to live if money and supply wasn't an obstacle, but it is, and Manhattan rents are too high for many people to qualify, automatically eliminating a bunch of bidders. But be assured, if they could qualify, they'd be applying there before here.


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jcmaoml wrote

It’s also the data sources. Different real estate companies use different listing services to advertise units. Nobody is everywhere. Some even have exclusivity periods with certain services. There’s also landlords who only do by referral or advertise with a sign in the window.

And despite what many people think, there’s no official registry of available units, so any research on listed rent is going to have a lot of bias. Just depends what the researchers want to say.