Two bedroom, two bath in New York City for advertised (on Nakedapartments.com) for $2,000 a month ... I hear that's pretty-good for the NYC-market (though I was living in Oklahoma City in places about the same size, for less than 1/4 the price!... they DID attract bed-bugs, but it was good until the infestations took over! ) There's the living-room, with French doors leading into the TWO-WINDOW BEDROOM (a super-good deal in NYC), the kitchenette ... the VERY SPACE where Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta conceived of some of her BEST STUFF (i.e. before 'the audience-reaction' was too big a factor ... although the album was titled "THE FAME").
Even if I had the money, I still won't pay that much to rent her old apartment. It's just not practical. I would rather just save that money to buy a house of my own.
That's not a bad price for that apartment at all in New York City - though I would be curious to see how luxurious or not it was for that price. If this is before she became famous, it may have just been a relatively run of the mill apartment perhaps with a few upgraded perks. Didn't she come from a wealthy family? It wouldn't surprise me if her parents were footing the bill the whole time - no 20 something can afford that type of rent with a just out of college job in NYC. There are apartments and condos here in Cleveland renting for more than that, at $2,500 on up, but they are generally large luxury condos right in the heart of the city, with all top of the line appliances and fixtures, and some are even already furnished. The sale price on many of them ranges from around $500,000 to around $1.5MM if you were to buy them outright instead. I've seen some in downtown Columbus Ohio starting at $3,500 per month on up.
That sounds really nice, but I do not think I would. I would just love to save that all up for a house that I want. Plus I do not like the word "rent". Rent means it is not mine which is saddening. I get attached to things WAY too easily. So I prefer to buy instead of rent. For that kind of money I can just buy my own. With buying my own I can get a house that is to my liking aww yeah!
I think the price is quite reasonable for such a 'big' star. But even so, I don't really care who has lived in an apartment before me. If the price and the energy of the apartment is right, then I will purchase it. In this case though, I believe that Lady Gaga is an esteemed member of the Illuminati, and has even talked about satanic things in certain media interviews. I don't want to be living in any space that has had that kind of energy in it.
If I'm a hardcore Gaga fan with a lot of money to spare then why not? But even if I do have the money to spend and even if I was a Gaga fan I wouldn't pay that much a month, although I have to say it's pretty reasonable. I mean sure it's expensive but if you think about it it's not bad since the apartment seems, well, nice I guess.
I'm a huge fan of Lady Gaga, but I'm sorry, that's just ridiculous! I take it her now being famous will plays a part in the price? If I had that much money to rent any property, I'd rather be pouring it into my own place, not a rental! That would be like throwing money away.
Seems comparable to the Toronto market, I think. Couldn't pay me to live there and you couldn't pay me to live in a celebrity's old apartment either. Not just because celebrities kind of make me gag, but because I'm sure it would have many visitors and on top of the city noise, I don't want to have to deal with that.
It's not that far off London prices either. If it's her old apartment,before she became famous, chances are, it's pretty bog-standard really. Someone is going to get a good deal.
If I would knew that the apartment I am about to rent was Lady Gaga's or any other celebrity's home, I wouldn't pay an extra dime for it, but would demand from the landlord an indemnification payment for all the nuisance I would have to face. When people know where a celebrity lives (or have lived) it is usual they hangout around, bother trying to look into, or ringing the phone to see who is living now in there.
That sounds like a steal for a 2 bedroom, 2 bath apartment in New York City. Of course, I'd have to see if the building had an elevator, where it was located, and whether or not the owner/manager accepted pets, before deciding, but the fact that any celebrity had lived there wouldn't be a deciding factor for me.
Would you consider a rent-to-own (maybe a lease-to-own)? I can't mess with the 'grown-up' stuff (due to my traumatic brain-injury), but I've lived in an apartment or two 'by lease'---I think that means I pay for it monthly (like rent), but then I "own it" for a month ... and I'm not entirely certain what that means. I think it has something to do with 'being fully-responsible for whatever happens inside.' Maybe "if you were selectingLog In," but in the NYC housing-market I hear $2000-a-month is pretty cheap (of course, that probably couples with the high-paying jobs of their job-market).
I've been to New York before and that place sounds okay for the price. Of course it's ridiculous but finding a good enough place to live there at a very affordable price is pretty rare not unless you're living with a relative or someone you know and besides, if you're earning a good amount of money each month, then why not?
Maybe "if you were selectingLog In," but in the NYC housing-market I hear $2000-a-month is pretty cheap (of course, that probably couples with the high-paying jobs of their job-market).[/QUOTE] Hehe I guess that's all relative, then. But given how expensive rentals are meant to be in New York, I'd be interested in seeing just how Lady Gaga's old pad compares against properties in that area in terms of quality. I wonder if it measures up or if it's just because she used to live there.
Oh that does not sound too bad then! I totally forgot about a rent to own. Yeah I am not too smart with that kind of stuff. I would agree to something as long as I can have it at some point. Being kicked out at any point would suck, if I come short with paying. It is like getting kicked out of a survey after being in it for a while. That can be REALLY annoying. It would be nice to just buy the house on the spot.
I'm sorry but I really don't care what famous person lived there I wouldn't be paying no two grand for an apartment when I could get a 4 or 5 bedroom home for 2 grand a month that's just a little too much for a two bedroom apartment I could see if it was a house but an apartment yeah no,. Lol
Wow $2K a month? Even if I make more than enough money every week to pay for that apartment I still wouldn't. That's just overkill if you ask me, but then again it's in New York, I mean I haven't been to New York so I don't know exactly how expensive housing can get there but I heard it's pretty expensive there. Well generally speaking it's really expensive to live in big cities anyway so it's no surprise.
I'm not a Lady Gaga fan, so I wouldn't pay anything to rent her apartment. However, $2000 per month in NYC is a very good rent rate for decent neighborhood and an apartment that size. It is the same in California as well. The rent is very high here.
I'm sure it won't stay on the market very long! That is pretty cheap considering that Gaga lived there. I wonder why it is so cheap? Maybe the rest of the building isn't so nice? No amenities? That is a steal for NY!
I couldn't care less who lived in it previously, so I wouldn't pay any EXTRA for that tidbit. For the price in general, though, in NYC?? That's a pretty cheap price compared to a lot of them there.
