Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rudedog who wrote (22125)	12/14/1998 12:17:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

I think that's the key difference between SF and NY. In NY, you can still trade off commuting against price. In SF, many of the suburbs are more expensive than the city, and the city is the current theoretical recordholder in the US for rents (among real cities). You can live in Oakland or Hayward and save maybe 25%, but with a long commute and other deficits (extra cars, etc) that can make it unworthwhile. Of course, both cities have rent control, so it's hard to say what people are actually paying (the best rent-controlled deals never make it to the paper, and maybe not to the stats.) Right now a studio apartment in Pacific Heights, our version of Central Park West, is about $2000 for a new move-in. But a 3 bedroom (normally, 1/2 or 1/3 a big Victorian) can had for $4000. I think that's cheaper than NY, and it's a very very nice neighborhood, albeit with way fewer limos and famous faces. In the more average residential areas it's more like $1000 and $2000. A very average house in one of the middle-class, low crime areas like Sunset goes for 500K, or rents for 2500-3500, if not rent-controlled I think that's one reason why hard core development has become more possible in NY. NY has no cache among developers as a place to live or work, but they are being squeezed out of the BA by prices. And now that the local banks and institutions here have been taken over and gutted by NY firms, there's no reason for the financial development efforts not to move to NY, as long as you can still find housing within a reasonable distance. That won't bother the development community around here too much, as the financial work has mostly been regarded as second-tier, lowbrow work. It should bother them some, of course, because all local development supports developer wages. Personally, I am going to be very happy if some of the BA's main competition as a development locale is in NY. That ought to hold up wages and consulting rates pretty well. Way better than more overseas workers. BTW, I have seen a lot of figures thrown around here about wages, but I'm not sure how in line with reality they are. There is a huge range of prices, from 3xK to 1xxK, in both cities, depending on experience and language, for salaried positions. But I would bet the average cost is within 10%. For consulting is another matter. I would bet financial programming contractors in NY are now making quite a bit more than here, for the moment. Cheers, Chaz

To: rudedog who wrote (22125)	12/15/1998 12:19:00 AM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Thanks rudedog... come to think of it I know central park is expensive.... theres just too many restaurants named that for it not to be. I was thinking about moving to NYC because I want to embark on a new career in documentary filmmaking. Its odd that, with everything so expensive there, that creativity is so prevalent. NYC is still the capital of the art world for example. Last year I lived in Austin and that is one place that has everything going for it at a very cheap price. Michelle