1307 Bay Street
Three of four nearly identical Marina condos have sold over the past 29 months in a classic five-unit building at 1307 Bay. Unit #1 sold $1,110,000 in April of 2005. Unit #2 (which is above #1) sold for $1,142,000 in April of 2006. And in November of 2006, unit #4 (which is next to unit #1) sold for $1,170,000.
As such, pricing unit #3 (which is above unit #4 and features a much nicer kitchen and bathrooms than unit #2) at $1,229,000 (as it was almost four months ago) would make perfect sense. Of course that’s assuming home values in the Marina have continued to rise.
And yet unit #3 hasn’t sold. Not after the price was reduced to $1,195,000 a month later. Not after subsequently being reduced to $1,179,000. And not since being reduced to $1,139,000 two weeks ago.
Damn those comps.
∙ Listing: 1307 Bay Street #3 (2/2) – $1,139,000 [MLS]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by NotPrime

    Interesting. I’m also finding it interesting how quickly a lot of these Marina places turn over. I’d think someone spending a few million dollars on a pad would choose to stay a while.

  2. Posted by anon

    No, these prices cannot be right. On another thread, fluj confirmed that condos in area 7 were still selling immediately at all-time high prices.

  3. Posted by fluj

    Everybody on here knows that the Marina has somewhat surprisingly been outperforming nearly everywhere else to near record levels. In a market like this, it’s been odd to say the least. Personally I don’t think the Marina is all that! Remember,this is an anecdote, not a data subset.
    Have you visited this property? I have not. Jeez. Nothing like a little passive agressive dis first thing in the morning.

  4. Posted by gh

    Seems like some properties get scooped up quickly down there…but I think one sitting on very busy Bay St. may be a little tougher to sell in this market. Buyers have to be getting a little more opportunistic. I imagine if any real ‘supply’ hit the Marina, prices would suffer.

  5. Posted by NotPrime

    Also, there seems to be a bit of mass delusion in ignoring the potential impact of an earthquake in this area.

  6. Posted by gh

    Yes, most people down look at you cross-eyed when you point out the sites were buildings fell into the street. 1989 might as well be 1959 given the transiency down there. However, i don’t think this one is on fill.

  7. Posted by james

    which unit is the penthouse? i think i know the guy that bought that last, a developer, and gutted it to make it his own private pimp pad.
    [Editor’s Note: That would be unit #5 (which isn’t nearly identical to the other four).]

  8. Posted by james

    ps that building is on solid rock. huge selling point for the marina. most of it is not.

  9. Posted by fluj

    Anon at 8:32 a.m., what do you make of this? Am I still a big fat liar?
    I personally don’t make much of it. It’s just a data point that shows what I’ve said. But it’s just an anecdote. still tho, wow. 4 days at $1,260 a foot.
    http://sfarmls.rapmls.com/scripts/mgrqispi.dll?APPNAME=Sanfrancisco&PRGNAME=MLSLogin&ARGUMENT=Ok7KmNi58nbInAxeCH8GTcJkWqqffUAweBvtgTHtSiQ%3D&KeyRid=1

  10. Posted by Jummy

    It’s clear to me that prices are falling in all neighborhoods. It’s just that all the stats falla couple months behind what is actuall happening.
    i guess I really don’t understand why anyone would pay over a million dollars for a mediocre 1400sq foot condo on a very loud street.. I think the location is great because it is so close to Chrissy Field and Ft. Mason, but still this price is out of control

  11. Posted by gh

    2661 Union is a 100% location (damn, that place is beautiful)…there isn’t a four lane mini-freeway out in front. Big difference.

  12. Posted by julf

    fluj- your anecdote doesn’t say squat about changes in property values. the fact that expensive places are selling doesn’t mean that “prices” are up. for all you know this place would have sold for even more a year ago.
    how about a few examples of places that sold in 2006 and then again in 2007 without major renovations and with big increases in price?

  13. Posted by fluj

    Julf, my friend, first off nice name. It’s oddly familiar for some reason. Second, I posted that in response to the guy who used the pictured property in this topic to specifically call me out. It was tit for tat to illustrate that individual anecdotes are by and large meaningless.
    Think about what you’re asking for a moment. Spring of 2006 was the acknowledged highwater mark, across the board. You’re asking about the practice of buying a property one year, and then selling the next without doing any improvements? Why should there be a gain? Why shouldn’t a loss be as likely as a gain or a push?
    Areas 7 are going great. I showed that, earlier. I don’t care if you don’t believe me. ‘Nuff people on here know that to be true.

  14. Posted by tipster

    These arguments make it look like someone standing on a sinking ship saying everything is fine, while they move higher and higher to stay dry.
    First it was Area 7 that remained on fire, while the burbs were falling. And sure enough, when OTHER units in this building were selling, they sold quickly, in spite of the fact that the burbs were tanking. The cheerleaders said that just proved that District 7 would never crash.
    Mortgages got harder and harder to get, but they still claimed everything was fine. No problems at all.
    Now, you have to find the best blocks in Area 7, like the last three blocks of Union Street in area 7, to find places where prices are holding up.
    The captains of the sinking ship just keep climbing higher and higher on the ship, claiming there’s no problem, that they are still dry. But you can see the radius of the last of the holdout areas shrinking smaller and smaller…

  15. Posted by fluj

    this is one condo, on a busy street. i offered another condo, in a better location. both anecdotal. yet you latch onto this one as proof. oh kaaaaaaaaaaaaay

  16. Posted by fluj

    By the way, the owner of this Bay condo bought it 10 years ago for 435K. Think he/she will make any money, if and when this sells? If this is a married couple, at least s 500K gain will be tax free. If you buy and hold for the long run, in California, you usually wind up doing just fine. Is that why everybody is so mad? All the wanna be flippers missed the boat?
    “aahhhh. the hatred. i’m basking in it.” — john brown, VH1′s “the white rapper show”

  17. Posted by MarinaPrimePatrol

    Best time to buy in the Marina is right after an earthquake that destroys a large # of properties (i.e. around 1990-1991). Hold on as long as you can, but try to sell before another major earthquake strikes.
    Buying now will make you as crazy as MarinaPrime.

  18. Posted by julf

    fluj – I’m not debating real estate as a great long term investment, or even that a one year horizon is reasonable, only that you haven’t provided a single shred of evidence to support a claim that the market is moving up in this area.
    This “busy street” is no more busy now than it was when the other three condos in this building sold. The only thing that seems to have changed is how quickly they are selling and what they’re worth.

  19. Posted by fluj

    OK, Julf my arch rival. Who luvs ya buddy? (I feel like we’re on some Spy vs. Spy Mad Magazine stuff).
    Here is the hard data I’ve been talking about:
    Condos in Areas 7, 1/1- 12/31/2006: 238 sales, $1,071,457 average list price, 1393 avg sq ft, $783 ppsq ft list, 38 days on market, $798 ppsq ft sale, $1,089,830 avg sales price.
    Condoes in Areas 7, 1/1/2007 to five minutes ago: 205 sales, $1,166,984 average list price, 1438 avg sq ft, $811 ppsqft list, 35 days on the market, $831 ppsq ft sales, $1,201,244 avg sales price.
    In every single category save number of sales, ’07 area 7 condos have outperformed ’06 area 7 condos. They’ve sold faster. They’ve sold for more, and they’ve sold for more per foot.
    And we are only in September. The number of sales will also surpass ’06 totals by the end of next month or so.

  20. Posted by viewlover

    I’m curious about the ‘to five minutes’ with regard to the current time period above. The averages may be showing upward ticking, but I would be willing to bet that there is a downward curve happening around the August time period for both number of sales and slope of price appreciation.
    I would also like to say that this is a pretty volatile market. Plucking down 7 figures for housing takes more thinking and daring since valuations are questionable. And unlike a couple of years ago, the uncertainty is wieghted on depreciation vs. appreciation. Since down payments of 20% are also now required, the risk lay on the buyer. Any one who can wait, should.

  21. Posted by Tipster

    Those are fun numbers, fluj, but they mask the better mix this year over last year. To strip away everything, I look at shell space as one indicator. The improvements in one versus another are irrelevant in shell space, 2-3 unit buildings owned for a very long time by an owner who hasn’t improved them for years.
    Last year, in mid 2006, a 2 flat 3437 square foot building at 2335 Francisco, one unit tenant occupied, went for $2.3M, or $669 psf. The building across the street 2328 Francisco went for 2.025 and was two units with 3050 square feet, vacant, for $663psf.
    This year, 2347 Bay Street, a 3 unit building with only a garden apartment occupied is listed for $2.550 and is 4300 Square feet on a larger lot than either of the two above. Thats $593 psf, two blocks nearer to the palace of fine arts (prices generally rise the closer to the palace – the 2300 block of Francisco St. is 5 blocks away, this block of Bay street is one block away).
    Assuming it sells for something close to asking, that’s a drop of 10% in about a year and a half.
    Which is a little more about what Mr. Case and Mr. Shiller say it should have dropped to. Your stats just show the nicer stuff that’s selling this year.

  22. Posted by KK

    “Best time to buy in the Marina is right after an earthquake that destroys a large # of properties (i.e. around 1990-1991).”
    You mean after numerous people are injured, killed or displaced due to a natural disaster. What a A–hole.

  23. Posted by fluj

    Viewlover, no kidding August was downward ticking. It was the nadir. But September has been better. Oh seven’s 120K advantage in average sales transaction is not gonna overcome. And this year will see more sales, clearly.
    Tipster, fun numbers, yes, but also flat numbers. Just the nicer stuff? Area 7 is ALL nice stuff! We aren’t mixing in Silver Terrace to bring down median averages. Jeez. And for your evidence you want to bring TICs into the mix? Clearly, that is apples and oranges.
    I really don’t care what you guys think. I merely showed you what happened, with condos, last year, versus this year, in areas 7. Keep on thinking whatever you like.
    Julf?

  24. Posted by tipster

    They aren’t TICs, they are basic buildings, free of any improvements that would distort the numbers from one building to the next.
    And if you want to call them TICs, go ahead, but they were the same things last year and sold for 10% less this year. Apples to apples and that’s it.
    The “averages” you cite can be skewed by the mix of housing: yes, it is almost all high end stuff this year, last year is was a very mixed bag with lots of older stuff mixed in. And that is what is skewing the numbers. Which is, of course, why you are posting them.
    And no, you didn’t show us what happened from one year to the next. Crap got bought last year, fixed up and resold for a higher price. Does that mean prices are rising? Yes and no. It means buyers are paying more for better space. It does not mean values are rising.

  25. Posted by fluj

    No. Flipping is nothing new. People also bought run down places in ’05 and fixed them up, and sold them om ’06.
    Last year, 2006, is the acknowledged highwater mark by both bulls and bears, dude. It’s the acknowledged highwater mark by yours truly — for everywhere except a few areas, 7 among them.
    I was just comparing condos, because I was challenged specifically about condos.
    WHy can’t you guys admit that I’m right about this? I don’t have an agenda. I was challenged and I responded. I posited ’06 versus ’07 sales, condos, and it still isn’t good enough.
    You’re talking about buildings with vacant units and “Which is, of course, why your are posting them.”
    Please.

  26. Posted by fluj

    … and I just thought of something. You can’t just buy buildings and turn them into condos in the space of one year. Your point is invalid, tipster.

  27. Posted by tipster

    Whatever, Fluj, they just dropped the price on this place again, to $1.069M, or $763 psf. From 1.229 based on 2006 comps to 1.069. That’s down over 10%, right about what the other buildings are showing.
    Proves my point perfectly.

  28. Posted by John

    Stop fighting, Fluj and tipster.
    Because you two are fighting over some wrong description.
    I believe this #3 is a downstair unit. Take a look at the photos. There are trees outside the window, so a better comparison is #1 and #3, not #3 and #2. The upstair units should be worth at least 10% higher, for better views and away from the street.
    It seems the #1 is the corner unit and #3 is the first floor unit to the right. Some people may prefer the corner unit because it has two more windows and thus more bright. However, it also has more noise. In any case, right now the asking price is pretty close to the #1′s 2005 selling price, and we will see if it moves.
    [Editor's Note: Sorry, unit #3 is on the second floor ("upstairs") while #1 is on the first. And unit #1 has the east corner of the building (more light) while #3 has the west (less noise).]

  29. Posted by tipster

    John, according to the original socketsite post, #3 is above #4. According to you, that should make it 10% higher than number 4, which sold for 1.170 last year/ That puts comps on this unit as of last year at 1.17+0.117 or 1.287.
    If prices dropped by 10%, that is 1.287-0.129 or 1.158.
    This unit didn’t sell at 1.139 and is now at 1.069. So the price is more than 10% off last year’s comps. Even if it takes $100K to bring it up to par with the unit underneath, it’s still 10% off.

  30. Posted by John

    Editor, how are you sure #3 is upstairs?
    By looking at the photos on MSL, there are trees outside the window. Then take a look at the building. The second floor won’t get any trees outside the window.
    [Editor’s Note: Having walked up the stairs and taken a tour, pretty darn sure.]

  31. Posted by John

    So, the photos aren’t correct? The listing agent need to be questioned.

  32. Posted by Pac Heights Renter

    I wonder how long it has been since flug has sold a property? Most of the “sales” in first part of 2007 posted by flug went in to contract in 2006. With almost nothing going under contract now flug and other Realtors are going to have a bad Christmas (and look forward to a dark 2008).

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *