Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would bet that there are more billionaires on any given day in Miami than the Bay Area. I see them all the time at the Breakers in Palm Beach or at Fisher Island's Club. The ones of the Russian, European, South American variety.
No, that doesnt even make sense.
Russians flock to the French Rivera wayyy more than to Miami. Isnt Moscow to Nice the busiest private jet route in the world?
As far as the rest of Europe, NY and LA are definitely bigger destinations than Miami.
No doubt Miami attracts a few from across the pond, but clearly Miami's bread and butter are Latin America's elite.
as far as UHNWIs, the Miami metro has what? 1,400?
That's well and good but SF has the world's 4th largest concentration of UHNWIs, nearly 5,500.
So while Im sure you might be persuaded by the ostentatiousness that surrounds you, I am really not swayed at all in light of what I know and see as well.
Manhattan: 612
The Hamptons: 253
Miami-Dade: 239
Los Angeles County: 177
Greenwich:45
Aspen: 42
Naples: 37
Palm Beach: 28
Dallas: 20
Westchester County: 19
Honolulu: 19
Marin County: 17
Santa Clara County: 16
Atherton: 12
Brooklyn: 10
La Jolla: 10
San Francisco: 9
Santa Barbara: 9
Atlanta: 9
Newport Beach: 6
Houston: 6
Washington, DC: 6
Which also correlated to the Knight Frank study.
Hmmmm....... New York? Check! Miami? Check! London? Check! LA? Check! South of France? Check, please!
LOL.
So basically you have to post FAKE numbers in order to justify your argument. Just how big of a gap is your intelligence? You didn't think we would check your numbers? SF Bay Area has 83 $10M+ homes on the market; and this is a region with restricted supply so it is always going to have less inventory of any price range compared with Miami.
Your number are completely wrong. Here are the REAL numbers: Number of $10M+ Home sold in the last year:
Miami (from West Palm Beach north to Culter Bay to the south): 60 homes sold.
SF Bay (From Napa to Monterey Bay):61 homes sold.
These data is pulled from Redfin.com.
So the fact is, SF Bay actually sold MORE homes in your arbitary $10M range than Miami.
Basically even using your very obscure criteria, you were completely wrong.
Facts is a ***** isn't it?
Furthermore, if SF Bay has roughly 80 homes costing $10M+ on the market and roughly 60 of such homes sold each year, the chance of said home being sold within the year is 75%. In Miami, it is 25% (Roughly 240 listings per year and 60 sales per year). Basically Miami has a lot of expensive inventory but the supply outstrips demand.
In other words, Miami has too much expensive properties and not enough buyers. Browsing through Miami's listing, it's not unusual to see said mansions sit on the market for over six months. Some for over a year. Basically 75% of these houses have no buyer.
These so called super luxury market, it's not really a market. When only 25% is sold within a year, the market is crap. Plain and simple.
.
A++ for effort. I know you stayed up until the wee hours of the morning feverishly trying to save your pre convinced ideas that the Bay Area was any sort of elite destination for the international rich buying super-real estate but im going to have to undo and correct that false data above that probably comforted you through the night. Sorry!
And let this be my last time I have to correct you, because it's getting rather redundant.
(1) Monterey isn't in the Bay Area. I know you're getting desperate and hysterical, but let's not resort to flat out lying. San Francisco just can't compete with other luxury, destination, global type cities when it comes to ultra luxury real estate. You will survive, trust me? I have no idea why people in San Francisco view that statement as fighting words lol. Do people in Atlanta, Chicago, Boston, Washington and Philadelphia take this personally? Nope. Why are San Franciscans the only folks who have a hard time taking this news? San Franciscans sure have big egos and think they're NYC or something lol.
(2) Slick move trying trying to include commercial real-estate (multi-family) to pad the numbers but don't think I wouldn't catch on to you.
When I compiled my nice list, I was nice enough to double-check information to ensure accuracy in my data. I pulled the records from multiple sources and double-checked with local public records, to make sure that they were actual home sales. And omitted errors (i.e. homes that sold for $2mm and were incorrectly filed as $22mm home sales, such was the case with a few in the Bay Area). I don't lie, I promise Just take my word for it and move along...
A++ for effort. I know you stayed up until the wee hours of the morning feverishly trying to save your pre convinced ideas that the Bay Area was any sort of elite destination for the international rich buying super-real estate but im going to have to undo and correct that false data above that probably comforted you through the night. Sorry!
And let this be my last time I have to correct you, because it's getting rather redundant.
(1) Monterey isn't in the Bay Area. I know you're getting desperate and hysterical, but let's not resort to flat out lying. San Francisco just can't compete with other luxury, destination, global type cities when it comes to ultra luxury real estate. You will survive, trust me? I have no idea why people in San Francisco view that statement as fighting words lol. Do people in Atlanta, Chicago, Boston, Washington and Philadelphia take this personally? Nope. Why are San Franciscans the only folks who have a hard time taking this news? San Franciscans sure have big egos and think they're NYC or something lol.
(2) Slick move trying trying to include commercial real-estate (multi-family) to pad the numbers but don't think I wouldn't catch on to you.
When I compiled my nice list, I was nice enough to double-check information to ensure accuracy in my data. I pulled the records from multiple sources and double-checked with local public records, to make sure that they were actual home sales. And omitted errors (i.e. homes that sold for $2mm and were incorrectly filed as $22mm home sales, such was the case with a few in the Bay Area). I don't lie, I promise Just take my word for it and move along...
Miami CSA has double this number. Go ahead and look if you're still that thirsty but I'd advise you to save your time and again, take my word for it
LOL. First of all, such a dumb statement to make that the numbers would include commercial - Redfin.com does NOT have commercial listings, it is strictly a residential homes website. NO commercial or multi-family homes were included. Only single family homes, townhomes, and condos.
Second of all, HOW is anything you just posted refute anything I've said???? If anything, your "facts" supports me! And it's not the first time you've done that. First you posted an article of expensive cities has DOES NOT contains Miami, and now this. I thought you're supposed to be debating me, not helping me out. But thank you.
Even using your fuzzy math and your obscure definition of what is the Bay Area, you just basically confirmed that SF Bay sold 48 $10M homes last year!
Does that sound like the super rich is not buying here? Does that sound like a place that has no appeal to them? Does having 48 luxury homes sold in a year sounds like it doesn't have a luxury homes market?
You basically did all this work.... to refute your own argument!! LOL. This is funny.
And of course you only posted the SF numbers and ignored the Miami ones. My guess is, the number is pretty similar for both cities (if there are erroneous numbers for SF for redfin, it certainly does for Miami as well; so since the two cities' raw data are similar, the filtered ones should be similar also).
Quote:
I have no idea why people in San Francisco view that statement as fighting words lol. Do people in Atlanta, Chicago, Boston, Washington and Philadelphia take this personally? Nope. Why are San Franciscans the only folks who have a hard time taking this news? San Franciscans sure have big egos and think they're NYC or something lol.
Because you're being dumb, that's why. Let me explain - you take one of the most expensive cities in this nation, the most expensive city in one of the most affluent states in this union, a place that is a tourist destination since Judy Garland sang about it, and a city with endless songs referencing it; and you flat out say it has no appeal to the rich.
That's be like some idiots saying the Miami beaches have no appeal to the young. This level of idiocy of course is going to invite a smack down. Because it takes very little effort to us to do so.
.
^^^48 in SF MSA + SJ and 82 in South FL. Statistically different. Doesn't disprove anything, though. Doesn't say which market has the most ultra-high-end real estate. Doesn't say which the ultra-rich prefer (for insert anything here...to live, play, invest, etc).
All it says is that in 2014 more $10M+ homes sold in South FL than the Bay Area. This probably holds true for most if not all years. It still doesn't lead one to conclude that one area has more ultra-luxe real estate or that the super rich prefer one over the other.
It does indicate that one market is more transactional than another. If one were to look at age of dwelling, I would bet that the average age in South FL is MUCH newer, leading one to believe more stuff is being built there.
As has been pointed out, another metric that could be looked at is time on market. Does one market have a much longer average than the other? That could lead to other conclusions.
I also don't think people are arguing which market *most* people prefer to vacation in. For instance, now is Spring Break. I'm sure South FL is buzzing with tourists while the Bay Area is business as usual. *Most* people is a far cry from UHNWI.
In a nutshell, every stat posted by JR and his other pseudonym, SDPMiami, is pretty much useless.
So basically you have to post FAKE numbers in order to justify your argument. Just how big of a gap is your intelligence? You didn't think we would check your numbers? SF Bay Area has 83 $10M+ homes on the market; and this is a region with restricted supply so it is always going to have less inventory of any price range compared with Miami.
Your number are completely wrong. Here are the REAL numbers: Number of $10M+ Home sold in the last year:
Miami (from West Palm Beach north to Culter Bay to the south): 60 homes sold.
SF Bay (From Napa to Monterey Bay):61 homes sold.
These data is pulled from Redfin.com.
So the fact is, SF Bay actually sold MORE homes in your arbitary $10M range than Miami.
Basically even using your very obscure criteria, you were completely wrong.
Facts is a ***** isn't it?
Furthermore, if SF Bay has roughly 80 homes costing $10M+ on the market and roughly 60 of such homes sold each year, the chance of said home being sold within the year is 75%. In Miami, it is 25% (Roughly 240 listings per year and 60 sales per year). Basically Miami has a lot of expensive inventory but the supply outstrips demand.
In other words, Miami has too much expensive properties and not enough buyers. Browsing through Miami's listing, it's not unusual to see said mansions sit on the market for over six months. Some for over a year. Basically 75% of these houses have no buyer.
These so called super luxury market, it's not really a market. When only 25% is sold within a year, the market is crap. Plain and simple.
.
+1 pwned. This was brilliant.
I was actually thinking the same thing. The few sales that went through were the third world despots and Russian wannabes who couldnt buy what they wanted in the Cote D'Azur. Otherwise most languish.
I was actually thinking the same thing. The few sales that went through were the third world despots and Russian wannabes who couldnt buy what they wanted in the Cote D'Azur. Otherwise most languish.
Spoke to soon didn't ya?
Scroll up, then quickly delete your post and save yourself the embarrassment
$10MM sales
Miami 82
Bay Area 48
Your friend tried to pull a fast one on us and making up/embellishing data! It's not that serious lol. It seems the other Bay Area poster, anonelitist, is finally coming to his senses though. I think it's time you and the Pinocchio nose "beb0p" just finally give it up.
San Francisco's number of ultra luxury home sales are shockingly low for a place with a lot of millionaires, and the seat of the tech industry. People there don't seem to think the place is worth what other cities are worth when it comes to luxury/leisure/recreational living/real estate. You want to know why again? I'll be nice and bite my tongue
As someone who grew up in the South Bay, works for a Valley company and who now lives in Miami Beach, I can tell you that the World does not rotate around the Bay Area and that places exist outside of it that many people actually prefer.
What is so difficult to understand about this? In reading this thread, I have to laugh at those who are hellbent on putting Miami down as if it were some sort of second rate consolation prize for the wealthy wanna-be citizens of the World. It's clearly not and it's clearly not one dimensional in its appeal.
As for these uber-luxurious and expensive listings and closings, I'll add that there is a lot of activity going on along the Bay and on the islands in Miami Beach where homes worth 2-5 million dollars are being scraped and replaced with ones worth many millions more. I'll also add that this dynamic is playing out over and over and over within a very limited geography. Islands on the Venetian Causeway in particular see a constant rotation of such projects with some of the islands having a half dozen or more of them going on simultaneously. It never seems to end.
To the point about wealthy Russians, it's true. The numbers of them in Miami Beach alone is far beyond token and the money pouring into the RE market here isn't solely coming from Latin America. It's coming from all over the place.
Unlike the Bay Area, people don't come to Miami to become rich; they choose to come to Miami and spend money after they are already rich.
LOL. First of all, such a dumb statement to make that the numbers would include commercial - Redfin.com does NOT have commercial listings, it is strictly a residential homes website. NO commercial or multi-family homes were included. Only single family homes, townhomes, and condos.
Second of all, HOW is anything you just posted refute anything I've said???? If anything, your "facts" supports me! And it's not the first time you've done that. First you posted an article of expensive cities has DOES NOT contains Miami, and now this. I thought you're supposed to be debating me, not helping me out. But thank you.
Even using your fuzzy math and your obscure definition of what is the Bay Area, you just basically confirmed that SF Bay sold 48 $10M homes last year!
Does that sound like the super rich is not buying here? Does that sound like a place that has no appeal to them? Does having 48 luxury homes sold in a year sounds like it doesn't have a luxury homes market?
You basically did all this work.... to refute your own argument!! LOL. This is funny.
And of course you only posted the SF numbers and ignored the Miami ones. My guess is, the number is pretty similar for both cities (if there are erroneous numbers for SF for redfin, it certainly does for Miami as well; so since the two cities' raw data are similar, the filtered ones should be similar also).
Because you're being dumb, that's why. Let me explain - you take one of the most expensive cities in this nation, the most expensive city in one of the most affluent states in this union, a place that is a tourist destination since Judy Garland sang about it, and a city with endless songs referencing it; and you flat out say it has no appeal to the rich.
That's be like some idiots saying the Miami beaches have no appeal to the young. This level of idiocy of course is going to invite a smack down. Because it takes very little effort to us to do so.
.
Ok Pinocchio
You were caught red handed.
I bet posters from other fine cities - Atlanta, San Diego, Dallas, Houston, Washington, Chicago, Boston are reading this tread with amazement. That the Bay Area's absense when it comes to super-high end real estate would draw so much anger. So much anger that they would resort to lying via false data because they just can't accept the fact that the place is an afterthought when it comes to upwardly mobile super-rich individuals.
Question: Why does that bother you so much? A bruise to the ego? Why doesn't any other city care? Were people in San Francisco indoctrinated and told that they live in a super special place or something? I uncovered a secret and they're pouncing and making things up now. Hahahah
I also don't think people are arguing which
market *most* people prefer to vacation in.
For instance, now is Spring Break. I'm sure
South FL is buzzing with tourists while the
Bay Area is business as usual.
Basically.
Miami is a great vacation city, but to actually live in? Id feel deprived on so many levels.
And we see this same feeling in other secondary home cities, hence the low number of UHNWIs relative the nauseating hype.
Miami ranks 6th in a subjective survey of financial advisors but plunges to the mid 30s in the actual ranking of cities by the number of UHNWIs.
Why? Because it's role is that of a place to have fun, and then you go back home.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just take my word for it and move along...
