GnomeGeneral wrote:
I have a friend who lives there, who is moving downtown tomorrow. We had to pay $10 for valet, because you can't park your car in their lot yourself and I wasn't going to leave my car in the surrounding neighborhood. Another interesting thing is his car insurance went up despite his residence being in a "gated" community. The downtown zipcode costs LESS to insure then the zipcode at the beacon. The car insurance companies have spoken. And they are telling us our cars are safer downtown.

sjcarolan wrote:
Clearly you are confused, again-you made a similar argument a few weeks ago, to no avail. You are now comparing Manhattan neighborhoods with amenities galore (bars/restaurants/etc) within a one block radius to the Beacon, which has amenities (projects and a highway on-ramp) within a one block radius. Beacon is in the middle of nowhere from a shopping/mass-transit pov. Give it a rest buddy.

sjcarolan wrote:
Im glad you like it there, but stop trying to convince me and everyone else who doenst live there there that the location is something it's not.

sjcarolan wrote:
The fact is I know the area quite well as I actually looked at a unit when I was in the market. I also ride my bike all over JC including past your building on my way to Lincoln Park.


At this point lets agree to disagree. You think the location is perfect and I find it less desireable.

sjcarolan wrote:

Let's talk about Williamsburg, I lived there for 3 years. The L train stops on Bedford/Lorimer/Graham...great proximity and yes public housing in some parts but the point is that they are close to public transport....not sure what you are getting at as the Beacon is NOT.

I guess you are in the minority that wants to live an urban atmosphere without the conveniences typically associated with city living - shops/restaurants/transport all within walking distance. As Ive said before, I am thrilled that you are so pleased with your buy, but that does not change the fact that the location is subpar at best-and the majority of people value location in real estate.

sjcarolan wrote:

How can you say location, location, location doesnt apply here??? I agree you want to get into a location before it booms, but you want a location that is in a GOOD location relative to conveniences/subways/etc before the rest of the world has caught on, as in Willlamsburg or Grove ST path 10 years ago when people moved to relatively downtrodden areas that had great proximity to subway/path (something the Beacon does not currently have, and will never have).

Most people who are posting negatively are arguing that the Beacon initially was ridiculously overpriced given its location. My impression BSUN is that you bought at a distressed price at auction, in which case you may have paid an amount that is appropriate. The fact that a large number of units had to be disposed of via auction proves that the market agreed the initial prices were extremely overpriced.

yahjcforya wrote:


On the other hand, I think what some of people is stating in this thread is that some folks living/brought at the Beacon is in certain amount of denial that they made a bad investment, at least in the short run. It will be years before they even come close to recouping the original cost if they can at all. I think many people have stated that the three rules of real estate is location, location, location. The location and the maintenance cost (question, what is so great about the amenities that it is worth over $800 and sometimes over $1000 for a 2 bedroom)is enough to turn a lot if not most of the folks away. This is why the values went down as much as 40% from the peak/original ask and will continue to underperformed the downtown, journal square areas for years to come...

SLyng wrote:

2. "bsun" joined 3 wks ago and all 15 of his posts are about the Beacon... But I'm sure he has no hidden agenda

SLyng wrote:

The Best you can hope for is to correct any outright lies about the subject...

groovlstk wrote:
Funny, I don't recall ever seeing anyone who owns at 77 Hudson start a thread here to "educate" the rest of us on how wonderful the building is and why it's such a great value and, by the way, the corner unit on their floor is for sale and it's a great value to all you potential homebuyers.

Roaring20s wrote:
I just noticed a huge banner on the side of the old JCMC. The verbiage was for the Beacon

There's next to no info on the site...just wants your personal info.

groovlstk wrote:
In what world do people believe the Beacon is a competitor to 77 Hudson?

jennymayla wrote:
Stay classy, bsun.

JC_Man wrote:
It's just not the economy stupid - location, location, location. M650 is located on the border of a war zone. Real Estate 101.

kitten wrote:
Quote:

bsun wrote:
Quote:

jennymayla wrote:
For sure, JCSHEP. I've seen that first hand and have personally invested in the area. But I'd also argue that we have a bit of a way to go, particularly with creating and sustaining more local business, as well as addressing the constant crime, even on the small time level. The stolen bike thread just reinforces that message. I know, we live in a city, yadda yadda but that doesn't make it ok.

And many other neighborhoods throughout JC have not had the same turnaround...yet.

Paving a housing project and putting up a Barnes & Noble ain't the answer.

Then you haven't been around nyc or surrounding. Trust me, Barnes & Noble is your Beacon of good location. You see a upcoming B&N sign in the negborhood, it's time to take another mortage out. There is only 2 B&N in Brooklyn and guess where they are located.

In JC, there is only one at Newport.

There's a B&N at Newport??

jennymayla wrote:
For sure, JCSHEP. I've seen that first hand and have personally invested in the area. But I'd also argue that we have a bit of a way to go, particularly with creating and sustaining more local business, as well as addressing the constant crime, even on the small time level. The stolen bike thread just reinforces that message. I know, we live in a city, yadda yadda but that doesn't make it ok.

And many other neighborhoods throughout JC have not had the same turnaround...yet.

Paving a housing project and putting up a Barnes & Noble ain't the answer.

wibbit wrote:
i dont think there is any point discussing this further as we are just going in circles, each side have made all of their points.

Looking back 2 years, I dont think anyone can disput the fact the anti-beacon crowd was correct on the price predictions as evident by the recent prices. Now lets bury this thread for another 2 years, and see who's right again at end of 2011.

Xerxes wrote:
Can you get the shuttle at 2AM? Do you call and they come for you?

It's easy in retrospect to say look how a neighborhood changed AFTER it has changed and AFTER an economic growth spurt (roughly 1993 through 2008.) But it might be a mistake to extrapolate that to a single developer moving far afield to start his own little Valhallah. In BAD economic times one cannot presume all such ventures will succeed just becasue they did during the go-go years, and generally speaking, an auction is a sign of failure no matter WHAT spin the developer tries to weave.

Jersey City has a recent particular pattern of growth near the PATH trains..Newport, Avalon Cove, Harborside and Paulus Hook. These areas grow as the region gets popular. Same cannot be said for areas 3/4 miles from the stations with no appreciable new development in-between.

The fate of Jersey City is intricately tied to only one factor...the financial health of New York City. If NYC booms, the Beacon can expand Westward along Bergen Avenue to Journal Square. If NYC financials struggle, the Beacon will stand alone in the dreary wilderness for a long time.

sjcarolan wrote:
In my mind you cannot make a comparison to Grove a few years ago, the major difference being that the area around grove has ideal proximity to transportation (ie you do not need to take a shuttle OR walk 15 minutes to get PATH). I would venture to guess that 85%+ of Downtown JC residents come to JC because of its great commute to Manhattan. I know I did, and I know we immediately ruled out the Beacon because we did not want to have to deal with a shuttle.

That is not to say that the Beacon is not a beautiful building. I could care less about the projects IF the location was closer to PATH, but its not, and never will be. Again, I am thrilled that people like the building, as do I. But in the grand scheme, it's location is far from ideal. And while its surroundings may improve, it will be tempered by the fact that its location is sub-par.