Most water parks have a deluge shower ... plunge pool too!
Surely you must have noticed the barely suppressed satire in Ms Green's article.
When we moved several years ago and decided to buy a house, and our la-di-la (for us) real estate agent showed around la-di-la (for us) houses, we quickly came up with a hypothesis: Beyond a certain comfortable, nice standard, the fancier and bigger the kitchen/workout room, the less the chance that the family actually cooked anything in the kitchen or worked out. Our hypothesis seem to bear out. One strange quirk was that the fanciest kitchen owners seemed more inclined to hoard all their old plastic take-out containers! We'd see them piled high in the cupboards and drawers. What gives?!
An interesting article, but still, rather sad. Why do people want to live this way? I would feel very guilty living in such unnecessary luxury while the homeless sleep on the street. I'm very thankful I don't lust after this lifestyle. The very wealthy need so many people to look after their special needs. It must all be a headache for them trying to maintain this vaunted, vacuous lifestyle. I don't know what a hamam is and I don't really care. When I want to relax I read a book or play the piano. I don't need a luxury view or pampering by a team of yes men. Simple pleasures are always the best.
1
The word you are looking for - to replace amenities - is obscenities.
But you have to ask yourself, how comfortable would you be getting naked with your neighbors
Umm, classic in the rest of the world.
Umm, classic in the rest of the world.
Extolling the virtues of American excess is one thing, but can we tone it down in New York...New York is quickly becoming a playground for the filthy rich to the exclusion of the rest of us, and as if us natives haven't been priced out enough, now we have to complete with Sheikhs coming for their own personal hamam (thank you NYT for the pronunciation, and for the record, the condescension was not lost on us)! I miss my city, I miss the allure of walking around in Tribeca by myself because it was a virtual ghost town. I miss the feeling that the world was my oyster and anything was possible in the NYC even if my bank account wasn't bulging, I miss opening the Real Estate section in the NY Times and underlining a dozen apartments that I would look at because they were in my (not so bulging) budget...
6
This is not news. This is real estate pornography at its most pernicious. Treating it as news is disingenuous.
2
The image of the parking garage at 443 Greenwich is beautiful. The hamams? I agree with the author that most people would rather not see their neighbors naked.
1
I live a very comfortable existence. I've been lucky (I work hard too). This article could make me feel poor. Instead it makes me both sad and angry. Sad for the people who could do so much more with the money these "ultra rich" people have, and angry that we have let the rich steal our country.
14
Somehow, I can't imagine all those super-wealthy actually using any "common area", no matter how push. They tend to be extremely private, even preferring personal chefs to restaurants.
Thanks, but when I win some super lottery, I'll take a manor house over these soulless places any day. Oh - I also do my quiet meditation in church on Sun, in my garden, and reading with my dogs on my lap.
Thanks, but when I win some super lottery, I'll take a manor house over these soulless places any day. Oh - I also do my quiet meditation in church on Sun, in my garden, and reading with my dogs on my lap.
4
I echo Mr. Glanting's comment. I am sick of the NYT's Home and Garden section for millionaires. I used to look forward to reading it but the past few years have been a turnoff. The majority of your articles include $8000 chandeliers, $15,000 coffee tables and $1500 vases. Sorry folks, but real people can't afford that. How about focusing on AFFORDABLE home and garden ideas and making the articles on luxury items the exception?
Not for nothing, the Style section has the same problem.
Not for nothing, the Style section has the same problem.
20
Agreed. I read these ridiculous features to find design and color inspiration that I then create from found, thrifted, and handmade objects. My home is full of wonderful objects that I and my husband make, love, and cost very little.
2
yes! thanks!
It's kind of funny to read all the outraged comments to this. Sure, I will never own one of these $100M apartments. However, I'm well aware that in the grand scheme of things, I'm fortunate, and there are many others who would look at my home and see lavish excesses well beyond their own means. For someone who has a strong interest in architecture, I want to read about all ranges, from palaces to affordable remodels. Telling the Times they shouldn't report on luxury markets is a type of censorship I don't want to sign up for.
4
I never suggested they NOT report on luxury items, I proposed it should be the EXCEPTION rather than the rule. What is your definition of censorship?
4
Can we agree that censorship would have to involve actual news? Not reporting about "flourishes and amenities" - even a strict policy to not report - would not equate to actual harm to any reader.
Although I suppose the French revolution would have happened much earlier had their been lots of reporting about the bons bons being served at Versailles.
Although I suppose the French revolution would have happened much earlier had their been lots of reporting about the bons bons being served at Versailles.
Halcyon or Elysium? It reminds me of the matt damon movie Elysium.
6
I am not Marxist. I am not Communist. But when the New York Times sees fit to praise and extol the excesses of luxury when so many are hanging on by hook and crook, it's an insult. By circumstance, luck and perseverance I have a home in a high income area. I don't need a Turkish bath, I need new gutters. Come back to earth.
43
They missed the "Ultimate Amenity": Sitting in your backyard, on the grass, in a lawn chair, drinking beer, watching the kids play. People have been doing it for centuries as "calming tool".
39
If someone is shelling out 5 million plus for an apartment in cash, I'd bet they have (or rent) other homes in "the country", "on the beach", or "near the slopes".
1
Seeing the marvelous quality & endless quantity, it is hard to believe any developer would actually need a special deal to accomplish these projects. Yet I have read that special deals have been the nature of the game.
An interesting article would tie all these beautiful architectural photos to photos of the pols who worked the tax abatement deals, special variances, favors, leniency, etc. granted in the building of these homages to nearly pathological self-absorption and excess. It would cost out the long term hit to the city's other taxpayers, or possibly what might have been accomplished in local schools had the deal-making pols played hardball for the little guy.
Certainly the super wealthy deserve our respect for their hard work, and our kindness as due any other persons. However, we must also learn from them, particularly the art of the deal, if we want them to respect all the people who actually make up the city they seem to prize so highly.
As it is, one might cynically suggest that the folks buying these places could have actually been asked to pay more in taxes and do without special deals, and still afforded tile under the wheels of their rarely used Bentleys. In fact I believe they might have rewarded themselves in even grander style, to assuage their taxed pain. I hope I am not being cruel.
An interesting article would tie all these beautiful architectural photos to photos of the pols who worked the tax abatement deals, special variances, favors, leniency, etc. granted in the building of these homages to nearly pathological self-absorption and excess. It would cost out the long term hit to the city's other taxpayers, or possibly what might have been accomplished in local schools had the deal-making pols played hardball for the little guy.
Certainly the super wealthy deserve our respect for their hard work, and our kindness as due any other persons. However, we must also learn from them, particularly the art of the deal, if we want them to respect all the people who actually make up the city they seem to prize so highly.
As it is, one might cynically suggest that the folks buying these places could have actually been asked to pay more in taxes and do without special deals, and still afforded tile under the wheels of their rarely used Bentleys. In fact I believe they might have rewarded themselves in even grander style, to assuage their taxed pain. I hope I am not being cruel.
24
Want to make money in the stock market? Invest heavily in companies that manufacture: (1) pitchforks; and (2) torches. You heard it here first!
24
Kudos to best comment. These condos appeal to whom, from where? New York City, the once great symbol of American opportunity and sucess, now Londonized as the city of ultra-rich pied-a-terres for the world-weary.
2
strangely, I have no envy at all for these "amenities"...which surprises me, as I am subject to extreme house envy much of my days. I live near Boston, and love my small yard where I grow a couple plants, let the dog outside, and get a little sun myself. My car sleeps in the drive, so I get a little fresh air walking to it and doing a bit of shoveling in winter. My hamam is the local gym, a few minutes away, with convenient classes in yoga (many styles), Zumba, Barre, and so on- $40/month.
10
The hamam is only good if there's someone there who will scrub you to within an inch of your life.
4
This is looking more and more like the America of the robber baron era.
37
With one crucial difference: The "robber barons" of the late 19th and early 20th centuries left us with great public heritages, like railroads, libraries, foundations, and other socially positive uses for their "ill-gotten" gains. Some of the most aggressive and predatory ur-capitalists turned philanthropist in their later years. They left us social "capital" like railroads, libraries, foundations, and more.
Whereas the current crop of sheikhs from cruel and oppressive Muslim dictatorships care not a fig for the welfare of the country where they invest their ill-gotten gains in self-indulgent mega-residences. They contribute nothing to the body social, unlike the American homegrown "robber-barons" of the past.
Whereas the current crop of sheikhs from cruel and oppressive Muslim dictatorships care not a fig for the welfare of the country where they invest their ill-gotten gains in self-indulgent mega-residences. They contribute nothing to the body social, unlike the American homegrown "robber-barons" of the past.
8
And don't forget that many of these ultra trophy apartments enjoy 421a tax exemptions, a 94% city property tax break!
Leona Helmsley was right. Only the little people pay taxes!
Leona Helmsley was right. Only the little people pay taxes!
42
What is the 421a taX eXemption?
Notice how those top floor lounges, clubs and movement studios look suspiciously like penhouse units? My bet is that they will remain common areas until the last condo is sold off. At that point, the sponsor will convert the common space back to a private penthouse and put it on the market for $10,000 a square foot. Read your offering memo carefully.
17
Very important we concern ourselves with any possible trick played on billionaires, their well being affects us all!
15
For those who thought there was no value in tax breaks for the rich. Some of it seems to have trickled down...to their dogs.
44
Aah yes.... the rich get richer....
13
Are we supposed to get excited about room with tiles and a shower? A room with upholstered furniture and a balcony? A big room with a kitchen?
Sorry, it will take better amenities than these for me to plunk down my $100 million.
Sorry, it will take better amenities than these for me to plunk down my $100 million.
7
Well that's essentially the problem the rich have: wealth is often an empty let-down. they can only eat so much and only so well, they can only inhabit one room at a time, they still have to breathe the same air as everyone else. They are still going to die one day and their lives will be as meaningless as anyone else's as they turn into dust. So yeah, the amenities they fight tooth and nail for really don't add up to anything all that thrilling: just more rooms, another kitchen - another bathroom - a place to stretch - ad infinitum.
39
Enough is an ever receding horizon.
5
These people should definitely be paying more - much more - in taxes.
And luxury amenities for dog/dog care?
And luxury amenities for dog/dog care?
39
You have no idea how much they might be paying. I make one million and am taxed at over forty percent. I dont think its fair i have to work almost half of the year for uncle sam....so money can be wasted in Afghanistan and such. I know you nyc liberals will say boohoo, but seriously...i think solution is more measured spending and less taxes for all....
5
Kafen ebell - I hope that you include corporate welfare in that "Afghanistan and such" comment.
Here's a thought, if liberals had their way more people would be earning a living wage and would be contributing more tax dollars for the things we all need, roads, bridges etc.
Here's a thought, if liberals had their way more people would be earning a living wage and would be contributing more tax dollars for the things we all need, roads, bridges etc.
6
Kafen ebell -
median household income was $51,939 in 2013 (Wikipedia), so let's say it's hovering little over $52,000 now. That means after-tax you are earning a little more than 11 times as much. That's awfully nice. Actually, apples to apples, if you took taxes into account the median after-tax income compared to yours probably means you are earning more than 12 times. So don't feel so bad.
I assume "make" means it's from some sort of a salary, and part of the problem is that top-tier incomes have been soaring while median incomes have stagnated or even declined (again, from Wiki: "However, it has trended down since 2007, falling 8% from the pre-recession peak of $56,436. It remains well below the 1999 record of $56,895"). I am sure a major reason you are earning one million is because of the top-tier resentment at paying taxes which means collectively you all boost your salaries up up up!
median household income was $51,939 in 2013 (Wikipedia), so let's say it's hovering little over $52,000 now. That means after-tax you are earning a little more than 11 times as much. That's awfully nice. Actually, apples to apples, if you took taxes into account the median after-tax income compared to yours probably means you are earning more than 12 times. So don't feel so bad.
I assume "make" means it's from some sort of a salary, and part of the problem is that top-tier incomes have been soaring while median incomes have stagnated or even declined (again, from Wiki: "However, it has trended down since 2007, falling 8% from the pre-recession peak of $56,436. It remains well below the 1999 record of $56,895"). I am sure a major reason you are earning one million is because of the top-tier resentment at paying taxes which means collectively you all boost your salaries up up up!
1
No comment- speechless
30