Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

AugustWest7120 t1_iz7184x wrote

This city is getting stranger and stranger. And more homogenized. Ugh.

166

whiskey_pancakes t1_iz7af8e wrote

Yup, it’s either another bank, drug store, or Starbucks

105

IoSonCalaf t1_iz7ee1p wrote

Or a weed store

66

Motor_Ad_473 t1_iz8puhu wrote

That’s a strong word for what those stores are. One step above a table on the sidewalk.

14

damnatio_memoriae t1_iz8ouea wrote

or a coffee shop or beer bar that looks like it's local but somehow has all the same prepackaged crap that the other fake local coffee shop or beer bar has.

12

governor11201 t1_iz7u7oo wrote

Duller. The city is getting duller

More homogenized is true - and more homogenized is duller

50

Sea_Sand_3622 t1_iz82e5u wrote

Have you been in the subway the last three years? It is quiet scary , definitely not dull.

−26

ToffeeFever t1_iz7sc6q wrote

NIMBYs and property being quickly gobbled up by private equity and foreign interests taking the "fun" out of Fun City.

21

Rthymrug t1_iz7ypl7 wrote

NIMBY has nothing to do with this story. What is it with this sub and the past couple months it's NIMBY this or NIMBY that. My only take away is that people have no idea what they're saying.

−2

Pool_Shark t1_iz81xvn wrote

Idk if it’s paid Astro turfing or just some weird cult but there are people that seem to be convinced all problems in NYC could simply be resolved by building more luxury apartment buildings

22

Rthymrug t1_iz83513 wrote

Foreign investors definitely seem to fit that criteria.

14

HEIMDVLLR t1_iz7udbd wrote

Definitely not NIMBY, more like YIMBY gentrification.

−4

ToffeeFever t1_iz7xcta wrote

Gentrification of existing stock. The main reason why all my favorite spots to eat and shop at shut down, because they couldn't survive a year or two with space in short supply and rents charging a fortune without competing space cutting into it. And in many places where land were historically zoned for anything else other than retail like manufacturing (that only exists abroad now), it takes years and more added costs to get through the city's broken land review process!

14

damnatio_memoriae t1_iz8p1n3 wrote

> with space in short supply

what are you even talking about. everywhere i go for at least the last five years but especially since covid, it's empty store fronts. it's not because of NIMBYs. it's because private interests own everything and prefer to keep it vacant than lower the rent.

7

The_Razielim t1_iz9yzo8 wrote

Yep, there's locations that have been closed since before I moved into my current neighborhood (nearing 6 years now), and have just been vacant storefronts the entire time.

There's what used to be a small Italian(?) spot that closed maybe 1-2 weeks after I moved into this neighborhood that has just been shuttered for the last 5.5 years.

It's absolutely ridiculous how many things are allowed to just sit empty, doing nothing.

2

mrpotatoe3044 t1_izakav8 wrote

Ironically, NIMBYism is major driver of gentrification. Most people in lower income neighborhoods don't own their property and they get priced out when the supply can't keep up with the demand.

1

HEIMDVLLR t1_izanx38 wrote

Gentrification is definitely behind the YIMBY shit. They avoid the local mom and pop establishments and open/support the new businesses. Unless one of them “discovers” the spot and gives the okay via an IG reel or local blog write up.

The local businesses are forced to make upgrades to their façade and stock new/artisanal products, to accommodate the transplants. If they don’t, they go out of business because their loyal customer base has been priced out of the neighborhood.

2

mrpotatoe3044 t1_izaqlwk wrote

You have the directionality wrong. Locals won't be priced out of neighborhoods if the city actually built adequate housing stock to keep up with demand. Not expanding housing stock doesn't prevent gentrification, it actually worsens it. High income earners will still flock to these neighborhoods because even they get priced out of the more "attractive" neighborhoods, which they then push out the people who have lived there.

If there was enough housing stock in the first place, there would be no pressure on these neighborhoods. If these neighborhoods had adequate housing stock, then they could absorb these transplants without displacing the people who formerly lived there.

The only benefactors from NIMBYism are property owners, as it artificially inflates their asset. Unfortunately this demographic is one of the most consistent voting blocks, which is why the city council is almost entirely NIMBY, and they'd prefer shit like a parking garage then approving high density housing.

1

HEIMDVLLR t1_izaugvm wrote

> Locals won't be priced out of neighborhoods if the city actually built adequate housing stock to keep up with demand.

The demand will never go down unless the city goes bankrupt and NYC becomes the “City of God”, like in the late 60s, early 70s.

Explain the real reason why gentrification exploded. People are getting priced out be the new residents are willing to pay 2x-3x the rent. They avoid the established businesses that the locals supported. They complain about the local customs/activities/noises, in turn criminalizing/punishing the locals.

Just look at the mircomobility movement. NYC always had cyclist of all ages. But after gentrification popped up, they became anti-car and swear the MTA has no flaws.

1

mrpotatoe3044 t1_izaw4bl wrote

You're right, the demand for NYC will never disappear, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to keep up with demand. In fact, NYC hasn't even been trying. Construction growth has mostly flatlined since the 1990s and NYC issues fewer housing permits then nearly every other large city, clearly under-building is not working. We can't stick our heads in the sand and pretend like people won't flock to NYC, people will, and it will only displace more residents if we do nothing.

Yes, transplants may like different things than long term residents, but like I said, if we had adequate housing stock they wouldn't displace the locals in the first place.

You seem like you're arguing a strawman of the micromobility movement, something I am only loosely aware of. I'll eat my hat if you can find anyone who claims "the MTA has no flaws".

It's ironic you cite car ownership as a trait unique to lower income locals, considering the majority of new yorkers don't have a car, and those that do tend to have higher incomes. Car ownership is directly correlated with income in NYC, which means the "transplants" you have been deriding are the population most likely to own a car.

https://wellango.github.io/posts/2021/06/who-owns-cars-in-nyc/

2

HEIMDVLLR t1_izb7nct wrote

I see you drank somebodies koolaid. Your comments reek of a realty broker transplant. No level of vacant properties will decrease the demand. As someone else stated there’s a lot residential and commercial vacancies in the city currently.

Gentrification is pushing out local low-income and middle-class families. Not because of a “stock” shortage, but because they can afford to pay 3x the asking price.

You’re right, not everyone owns a car but we understand pumping more money into the MTA isn’t the answer. Transit deserts, have been ignored by the MTA and the micro-mobility advocates. Thats because the transit deserts are undesirable to the transplants, “because it’s too far from the subway”. Even though those communities have zero congestion.

−2

mrpotatoe3044 t1_izbrw6z wrote

>. As someone else stated there’s a lot residential and commercial vacancies in the city currently.

Ah, I see my mistake was presuming you had any amount of good faith in commenting. It's obvious you don't. But just to go through why you're so incredibly wrong.

NYC vacancies are at all time low https://www.globest.com/2022/09/12/nyc-multifamily-vacancy-rate-hovers-at-two-decade-low/?slreturn=20221107175941. This is a neglible amount of vacancies. 97% of NYC office buildings aren't viable for conversion to apt buildings.

"Not because of a “stock” shortage, but because they can afford to pay 3x the asking price"

This is factually wrong, once again. 97.7% percent of homes were sold for approximately the asking price.

https://www.noradarealestate.com/blog/new-york-real-estate-market/#:~:text=In%20September%202022%2C%20the%20median,the%20asking%20price%20on%20average

"Thats because the transit deserts are undesirable to the transplants, “because it’s too far from the subway”. Even though those communities have zero congestion"

Sounds a lot like someone drank the "pro-car" koolaid, your comment reeks like that of an entitled driver. I'm assuming you own a car lmao? The obvious answer here is to expand the MTA to these deserts and bus service.

Your entire argument is based on your anecdotal feelings & emotions. There is no merit to them, whatsoever. But i'm sure you will ignore this comment and call me a good for nothing transplant.

3

Amphiscian t1_iz9y78o wrote

I feel like people in this comment thread are missing the part where Caroline's is in the middle of Times Square. I'm sad that they're closing it, as I'm a big stand-up fan, but it's not like this was some neighborhood gem in the LES being replaced by corporate real estate or something.

12

sgsquared t1_j1d8vnp wrote

They went to Times Square before it was what it is today. Started as a cabaret in Chelsea and when they moved to TS, it was unsavory.

1

muffinman744 t1_iza2jzm wrote

Just wanted to hijack the top comment to say they said they’re looking for a new/bigger venue in their post. Doesn’t look like they are closing for good.

3

AnacharsisIV t1_izbrwdo wrote

I wish the city was getting stranger! The homogenization is the opposite of strangeness.

2

[deleted] t1_iz71gwe wrote

[deleted]

131

The_CerealDefense t1_iz76d80 wrote

I'm confused why the US govt allows a foreign nation to own significant real estate in the US, not a foreign national, an actual nation. Outside of diplomatic or residence type places etc. of course

75

captainktainer t1_iz79tl1 wrote

Because when other countries own property in the United States, it gives us leverage over them and encourages them to feel generally positive about our welfare. It's related to why Alexander Hamilton wanted the new federal government to assume state debts and issue US bonds to anyone who would buy them. People with whom you have ongoing economic ties, especially involving property, will tend to support your welfare so as to avoid endangering their investment. There are downsides to that arrangement, but it's a powerful tool in maintaining the United States' preeminence in international affairs and encouraging other nations not to put our peace and stability in too much danger.

92

Duchock t1_iz7fx5t wrote

Absolutely this. International Relations 101.

Edit: yes, it sucks sometimes that the consequences are often at the determent of locals, but it's a tradeoff. This particular example is not even a drop in the bucket for local impact, but something like housing owned as investment properties or tax shelters by foreigners which has no chance of serving the purpose of being housing is a bigger one.

19

hotel_air_freshener t1_iz7ozv6 wrote

Yeah it just sucks that when I look at these gleaming safe deposit box towers, destroying yet another cultural institution, the lights are never on at night. They should be taxed if vacant/unused.

16

Isawthebeets t1_iz7u5mp wrote

Would you rather it midtown instead of say in Brooklyn or Queens?

−2

hotel_air_freshener t1_iz8hhuw wrote

I’d rather it be taxed or more affordability priced for residents of NY regardless of what borough it’s in.

8

threerocks3rox t1_iz95hns wrote

if Saudi investments keeps our risk of nuclear annihilation lower, I’ll deal with two Starbucks on every corner. I’m still going to bitch about it though.

5

Luke90210 t1_iz7t7ze wrote

Europeans in the 19th century didn't quite understand the federal government wasn't going to make good on state debts sold to them and lost money.

Currently US Treasury bonds are considered among the safest, if boring, investments to hold around the world.

6

gaiusahala t1_izbcvv2 wrote

Right. The nuclear option (short of war) against these gulf petro-states would be seizing all their assets in the US. The more they buy up the better.

1

switch8000 t1_iz7sj5n wrote

Now I’ve got the damn song stuck in my head again.

0

The_CerealDefense t1_iz7i66p wrote

Oh I get this one, but I think the downsides are worse. Yes, you don't want your investment to go belly up, like for example when many countries nationalized industries and such. There's good and bad, but I think there needs to be a firmer line on things such as real estate acquisition vs. direct investment or equity investments which. The idea that a foreign nation collects rents like an artistocrat of old in the US is pretty fucking odd and comes with many issues

−2

akmalhot t1_iz80zm4 wrote

Doesn't the Saudi or Chinese fund own the iconic Waldorf Astoria in midtown east

6

Backseat_boss t1_iz7402x wrote

Wowwwwwwwwww. I can’t believe it I used to love going there, I frequent the cellar a lot more now.

130

NothingToItSoIDoIt t1_iz78tmv wrote

> used to love going there

> frequent the Cellar a lot more now

I think this is a common theme, hence the closing…

130

realbynight t1_iz8tsaq wrote

They still pack the room out. They are at the end of a 10 year lease so I think the price hike is the main reason.

42

Traditional_Way1052 t1_izbb3v6 wrote

So tired of this. They keep raising rent and all that's left is banks and real estate and restaurants.

5

againblahisnothere t1_iz7q5yo wrote

I was just there and had the best time. Venue was super chill too. This sucks

23

thatguygreg t1_iz8mynn wrote

Wooooooooooow was my exact reaction — end of an era for sure

8

Sea_Sand_3622 t1_iz83i1u wrote

Shes made a business decision to move on, 40 years in one spot is a long time, she has the know how to open up a smaller place with cheaper rent downtown or Brooklyn, even west on 9th Avenue, that’s if she’s up to that hassle consuming her life at her age. Let her sell the rights to her name , have some one else work hard opening the place up and she can get a fee as a consultant. Comedy clubs will come and go but that craft will always find a spot for showcasing.

66

Spring-Available t1_iz77zp3 wrote

I thought that place was an institution.

53

eldersveld t1_izanqa1 wrote

No NYC institution is so beloved that it can’t be sacrificed at the altar of capitalist greed

17

crmd t1_iz77cht wrote

Sad to see any comedy club close, but I haven’t even thought of Caroline’s since Cathy Ladman and Rosie O’Donnell were headliners.

28

TheNormalAlternative t1_iz79f2f wrote

Why would property owners from the Middle East care about the history and culture of NYC?

I tell you about those foreign landlords. No respect, no respect at all.

19

Motor_Ad_473 t1_iz8k3tq wrote

What? They’re doing exactly what this economy has enabled them to do.

You think America intervenes in other countries with respect to their history and culture?

These investors just want to make money. That’s the beginning and end of the story. Your politicians are selling your culture.

7

Bootyndabeach t1_iz89viw wrote

Gilbert Gottfried passes away and Caroline's goes not to long after. Crazy...

13

muffinman744 t1_iz8fn5e wrote

They are closing that location for now, but they posted on their social media that they are looking for a new stage/venue. They’ll be back

11

sincerelyhated t1_izaeet1 wrote

It will never be the same

2

muffinman744 t1_izaemto wrote

That’s fair. Personally it wasn’t my favorite club, but I do think it was an iconic spot for the neighborhood. Hopefully the next spot they pick out will be an upgrade for them, only time will tell though.

2

mltv_98 t1_izc2fy5 wrote

Said that when she closed the club on 8th avenue.

Said it again when she closed Caroline’s at south street seaport(featured in the movie working girl)

NY always changes. It’s not a bad thing.

2

genyWoot t1_iz7ucyj wrote

This is really sad.

5

stork38 t1_iz7gmwa wrote

Well, at least there's always those other fine comedy clubs the hustlers in Times Square sell tickets to

4

mrwhitaker3 t1_iz7kk7b wrote

Sad. I just read about this on Deadline and came to see what other people thought. Was a city staple IMO.

2

donutcronut t1_iz7vsdh wrote

That's really unfortunate. Haven't been in quite a few years but always enjoyed going there.

2

bdigital4 t1_iz8iizi wrote

I saw Charlie Murphy here. It was amazing

2

Any-Flamingo-8233 t1_izaqkgw wrote

Sad for the history but the place was a complete disaster. They treated their workers like hot garbage and cheaped out on basically everything. Refused to maintain any semblance of pride or quality. It was a dilapidated mess.

2

AutoModerator t1_iz6z3j0 wrote

Users often report submissions from this site and ask us to ban it for sensationalized articles. At /r/nyc, we oppose blanket banning any news source. Readers have a >responsibility to be skeptical, check sources and comment on any flaws. You can help improve this thread by linking to media that verifies or questions this article's claims. Your link could help readers better understand this issue. If you do find >evidence that this article or its title are false or misleading, contact the moderators who will review it.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

JustEmmi t1_iz9kytq wrote

Nooooooo! I’ve only been there for one show but it was a great venue 🥲

1

Steelemedia t1_iz9nzay wrote

Saw Sinbad @ Carolines. Cool venue

1

Double-Ad4986 t1_izaxayv wrote

I read the owner is just seeking out other locations not just closing entirely. They'll probably end up in brooklyn I bet

1

bottom t1_iz78osi wrote

Use shit it of it goes people!!!!

−11