Comments
PoopEmoji8618 t1_je54ecg wrote
I’m surprised there’s no consequence for winning and not paying. But I guess I know nothing about auctions
Lightning318 t1_je55cv6 wrote
They will lose any money they sent (some auctions require a deposit when registering, buyers premiums will be due very soon after the auction closes), and they will probably be blacklisted from registering for future auctions.
OptimusSublime t1_je58pjn wrote
The only thing that surprises me is that the building is practically vacant and needs 100 million dollars in upgrades. So it's essentially just a huge Instagram background right now? For lack of a better analogy.
Janus_The_Great t1_je5dqgt wrote
classy rich new york guy move...
RoozGol t1_je5lmef wrote
Elon Musk type of investment
jay5627 t1_je5oxjx wrote
Was his name John Spano?
WagwanDeezNutz t1_je5rybm wrote
i'd bet he's negotiating a smaller number. even if he can knock 20m off the price that's worth it
smellyfrog0811 t1_je5syi1 wrote
Not how an auction works
smellyfrog0811 t1_je5t7ht wrote
The previous owners couldn’t agree on renovations once their tenant occupying 100% of the building long term vacated.
WagwanDeezNutz t1_je5timx wrote
Sure it is. You have a guy locked in at price no other guy was willing to pay. You can run it again and bring out the bottom feeders or try to keep it close to his winning bid and give up a little.
Its poker math
Pennwisedom t1_je5uc9y wrote
From like 1959 on St Martin's Press / Macmillan Publishing would buy empty office space when tenants would leave until by 2004 they had taken over the entire building but they left in 2019 and it's basically been empty since then.
PorchHonky t1_je5vo64 wrote
You fools wanna all pitch in & buy this fucking thing?
D14DFF0B t1_je5xcx7 wrote
Physical structures degrade.
bittoxic00 t1_je5z2wg wrote
Shill bidder?
GreatLookingGuy t1_je608xt wrote
I got 5 on it
More_Garlic_ t1_je64qw5 wrote
I mean, it's covered with scaffolding, so not even worth a photo right now.
Vizualize t1_je66ijf wrote
Yes. Let's take our cities culture and landmarks and auction them off to the highest bidding asshole. They sold the Chrysler Building and I think are attempting to renovate iit nto a partial hotel or something.
Slaterr t1_je6aei8 wrote
Underrated comment
_Faucheuse_ t1_je6aspr wrote
And will be covered in scaffolding for a long time. Brick and mortar buildings are a reason the scaffolds are up, barring new construction. Repointing a building that size is a huge undertaking and a long ass process. and that's just the exterior... I'd hafta be paid good money to see what is behind those walls and above the ceilings inside the place. Construction during the turn of the 19th century was using all sorts of materials that today we know are just a big old stew of cancer.
TizonaBlu t1_je6d64q wrote
I mean, if it’s up to this sub, the flatiron building would be torn down and turned into a skyscraper.
chug84 t1_je6dv59 wrote
Yeah no, they'll just sell it to the runner up and tell the original buyer to fuck themself.
Hrekires t1_je6epak wrote
Wasn't it sold from one private owner to another? Like, what else should be done with it?
Not really sure I'd trust the city itself with buying it, renovating it, and finding tenants to lease space in it.
WagwanDeezNutz t1_je6fr5m wrote
nope. they will offer it to the runner up who will decline to close at his last best bid - probably pretty close to the 190m. he will argue that this chuckle fucker artificially bid it that high with no intent on closing, bringing him along for the ride.
in the end they will run it again
OrpheusNYC t1_je6hktc wrote
Shit, I got a hundo for that.
PorchHonky t1_je6hs30 wrote
Atta boy! I call the top floor!
elizabeth-cooper t1_je6ibkg wrote
The problem was that it was sold to a foreign company. This is an American company.
Pterodactylic t1_je6nrau wrote
I can't remember the last time it wasn't covered in scaffolding, I'm not in that part of town that much but I don't think I've seen the bare structure in the last 5 years.
NewYorker0 t1_je6tccq wrote
The building was built by a private citizen, owned by private citizens and auctioned off to another private citizen. The government never built or owned this place, don’t know what you’re complaining about it
YounomsayinMawfk t1_je6x5rp wrote
I saw a documentary about this building. I don't know the owner's last name but he goes by Winston. The building's in bad shape but I believe it's supposed to get renovated by some group called the "High Table."
jjd13001 t1_je6y0a6 wrote
It’s vacant because the offices inside it are horrible, they’re all very weird angles and very small. The building is pretty to look at but inside it’s a completely different story.
smellyfrog0811 t1_je6yi63 wrote
Falkor t1_je6yjt5 wrote
I think you’re making a John Wick reference, if so the continental in John Wick is not the Flatiron its another building in the financial district
The Continental https://maps.app.goo.gl/MfjB2YuzRCJJ1ZDe7?g_st=ic
cogginsmatt t1_je77j3n wrote
Well print is dead so the Daily Bugle had to move out, they were the biggest tenant
Souperplex t1_je78m3v wrote
I'll throw in $200.
MirthandMystery t1_je79oka wrote
Such a shame about this building being so disrespected. It’s enormously influential and famous, has a rich history, is in a perfect location yet seems to attract awful owners who hire useless building managers.
This building could easily be half for artists use on the middle floors, a jazz club on the ground floor, and upper section for boutique tech or business HQ offices, maybe a wedding venue on a floor or even a small artsy pre-K school for kids. And the rooftop could have a beautiful green space with a day coffee shop/lounge for nighttime use.
It could offer a wide variety of uses for creatives who’d be inspired and have the best view of the park across the street, as well as the best view of the gorgeous old neighboring corner brick building across from it at 186 Fifth Ave.
About 186th 5th ave: “The attractive red brick and terracotta building was originally erected in 1883 by Henry J. Hardenbergh, the architect who is also responsible for the Plaza Hotel. The landmark building once housed The Western Union Telegraph Co. and is now partially converted to house four residential condominiums.”
SIGNW t1_je7choz wrote
>another building in the financial district
Yup, it used to be the cocoa exchange, now there are all sorts of oddly shaped converted apartments (and probably a terrible place for a hotel/hideout)
mrpeeng t1_je7cr1z wrote
Best I can do is an IOU.
based_user t1_je7cz6t wrote
Once you take the scaffolding down….
zorbadiro t1_je7dg58 wrote
isn't that the definition of stealing something?
elNational t1_je7ejqq wrote
I don't think there's that many "creatives" that can afford the high price psf.
Pays_in_snakes t1_je7gg4v wrote
Which apparently works for an auction
PorchHonky t1_je7gid8 wrote
Oh, that’s fine. We can float you, bro.
HonestPerspective638 t1_je7jivm wrote
if you pay 100Million and demo interor and reno will run tripple that.. its a massive investment.
Corazon-DeLeon t1_je7rf4v wrote
Oh wow. I literally wanted to go and bid knowing full well I don’t have the millions on me right now 😂 kinda funny to see I wasn’t the only one thinking that
MasterChicken52 t1_je81m3i wrote
The runner up doesn’t really want it and couldn’t believe the winner bid as high as he did with all the renovations that need done. So it may go up again, who knows? It will be interesting to see.
I just hope whoever does end up with it respects the history and cultural importance of the building and takes care of it.
RAAD88 t1_je85kpj wrote
Squatters rights!
mei740 t1_je866gf wrote
It’s a historical landmark. Governor Hochul will watch it burn if the new building will increase taxes.
It’s an amazing landmark that shows that any piece of land is worth money in NYC.
spicytoastaficionado t1_je8aguk wrote
>This building could easily be half for artists use on the middle floors, a jazz club on the ground floor, and upper section for boutique tech or business HQ offices, maybe a wedding venue on a floor or even a small artsy pre-K school for kids. And the rooftop could have a beautiful green space with a day coffee shop/lounge for nighttime use.
What you're describing would be a complete renovation of the building where you gut and rebuild the entire interior, on top of the cost to buy it along with navigating the complexities of heavy renovation of a landmark status building.
Not sure anything that would require hundreds of millions of dollars in upfront costs could be described as "easily" done.
Also, anyone spending that kind of $$$ would want a ROI. I don't think the artists who could actually afford a space in Flatiron 2.0 are the type you have in mind.
And as far as office space, if a startup wanted Manhattan office space, they could do a lot cheaper than whatever it would cost to rent out space in a newly renovated Flatiron Building.
TSSAlex t1_je8b07e wrote
Lease, not buy.
Halal_Cart t1_je8c7zz wrote
Someone should buy it and make it into an Ad building like the one in Times Square.
notreallyswiss t1_je8c8xk wrote
I mean similar things (at an admittedly smaller, but by no means minuscule price tag) are currently happening with the Jacob Riis Bathhouses. Some investors are eager for historic renovation tax right offs. And some people just have a vision for reimagining a cool building. One big difference is that the developers will only be able to lease the Boathouse from the National Park Service and someone would have to outright buy the Flatiron:
The development team behind renovations planned for the historic Jacob Riis Park bathhouse, following the extensive damages it suffered during Superstorm Sandy, has landed $47.5 million in financing to move ahead with the project. CBSK Developers, Brooklyn Bazaar and Aulder Capital closed on the money, split between a $32.5 million construction loan from Procida and a $15 million historic tax credit equity investment from Foss & Co. Work on the Rockaway Beach project began last month, and the developers expect to complete it by the summer of 2024. The bathhouse dates back to 1932 but had been underutilized for almost 50 years. It was hit hard during Superstorm Sandy, which destroyed its doors and window coverings and knocked down its courtyard wall. Jacob Riis Park became part of the National Park Service in 1972, and the federal agency selected events and concession company Brooklyn Bazaar to renovate the bathhouse following an RFP process. Brooklyn Bazaar and development partner CBSK inked a 60-year lease for the bathhouse with the National Park Service in October. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $65 million, and the developers will put up the remaining $17.5 million themselves. The overhaul is starting with a renovation of the building's facade, windows and turrets. The developers will also add a rooftop restaurant, a beachfront bar, ground-floor eateries and retailers selling beach supplies to the structure. The project will bring 28 hotel rooms to the bathhouse as well, along with a catering hall, event spaces, and a new pool and lounge areas to its outdoor courtyard. The renovations will preserve the famous Byzantine, Moorish and Moderne influences in the bathhouse's architecture. "The building has been an iconic landmark on the Queens waterfront for decades, and our restoration plan for the bathhouse will transform it into a modern beachfront hub complete with a full range of amenities for the public," CBSK Principal Scott Shnay said in a statement.
spicytoastaficionado t1_je8e43o wrote
That isn't how auctions, especially high-value real estate auctions, operate. There is no post-sale price haggling.
You don't win a $190m auction, stiff the deposit, and then try and negotiate 10% off the sale price.
Jeff Gural's group (which was part of 3/4 of the previous ownership) already declined to exercise his runner-up option because he knows if/when the building goes back up for auction, he could nab it at a much lower price when you take out Garlick's bids.
The "poker math" theory only works if Garlick emerges as the owner and pays significantly less than he bought it for.
In reality, Garlick will be blacklisted from future auctions and the new owner will be the ones paying less than $190m.
spicytoastaficionado t1_je8evbt wrote
What you're describing is accurate, but it also contradicts your previous "poker math" theory since Garlick will not be allowed to bid in a future auction and is unlikely to be involved w/ future ownership.
So unless you're alleging some sort of shill bidding conspiracy between Garlick and the runner-up (Gural's group), the next winner paying less than $190m doesn't benefit Garlick in any way.
spicytoastaficionado t1_je8hrkn wrote
>One big difference is that the developers will only be able to lease the Boathouse from the National Park Service and someone would have to outright buy the Flatiron:
Which is a significant difference.
Even taking out Garlick's bids, the selling price for the Flatiron itself would likely be ballpark, or more, than the entire bathhouse project.
Don't get me wrong, I hope the Flatiron lands some owners who end up being responsible stewards of the property and do something productive with it.
But I think we have to be realistic about the very long, expensive, and effortful process involved to completely reimagine a landmark building like Flatiron.
chicken-fried-rice0 t1_je8jzz1 wrote
i’ll throw 50
LongIsland1995 t1_je8tldr wrote
Maybe it can be turned into a giant escape room
WigglingWeiner t1_je8vx5a wrote
[deleted] t1_je9c10i wrote
[removed]
PorchHonky t1_je9fb1x wrote
Ok, but you’ll have to use the service entrance.
zsreport t1_je9gn3e wrote
It is possible to make scaffolding look cool and worth the photo
[deleted] t1_je9jh9x wrote
aMonkeyRidingABadger t1_jeabnbh wrote
Streetview to the rescue. It looks like they were actively putting it up in October 2019. It wasn't there at all in June 2019.
blorg t1_jedtohq wrote
>Garlick is a mystery even to the most hardcore New York real estate insiders. Attempts to reach him since last week have been unsuccessful. Developers, attorneys and brokers say they’d never heard of him before the auction. His company’s website is vague. His Twitter account is suspended. A good chunk of his LinkedIn activity consists of engagement with videos of Gary Vaynerchuk.
>Nonetheless, he showed up on the steps of the New York County Courthouse in Lower Manhattan on a mild March day and won an auction for a Big Apple landmark, claiming it had been his dream to own the building since he was 14 years old.
>But Garlick’s coup and the fracas that ensued may never have been possible without a key lapse in the proceeding: Bidders were not required to put down any deposit before participating in the auction, according to court filings.
>“It’s highly unorthodox to do an auction without requiring a deposit”, said Greg Corbin, a bankruptcy specialist at brokerage Rosewood Realty Group. “Over the past 15 years of conducting distressed asset auctions, only once have we allowed people to bid without providing funds up front.” ...
>Only after the auction would a winning bidder need to show proof of their finances to the referee and put down a 10 percent deposit within two days, according to a notice of sale filed as part of the interlocutory judgment. The winner would then need to post the remaining balance within either 10 days after the court confirmed the sale or 90 days after the auction date, whichever came later.
>But because there was no deposit required before the auction, anyone who happened to be in Lower Manhattan that afternoon might have placed a bid – whether or not they had the ability and desire to actually follow through.
SolutionRelative4586 t1_jeg1rej wrote
I mean, the guy was probably trolling so he's not worried about being blacklisted lol.
He didn't have to put a deposit down.
Buyers premium can't be paid if you don't have any money, so that's irrelevant.
The guy you're replying to is 100% correct that it's amazing anyone could have done this troll with apparently zero real consequences.
azspeedbullet t1_je540mr wrote
buyers remorse