January 11, 2008

Figure Out How To Fix The Façade And You’ll Probably Fare Quite Well

2550 Greenwich (www.SocketSite.com)

Compared to 2045 Quesada, it’s really not that bad. But then again, that’s not saying too much (or a design benchmark to which we would aspire). And perhaps that’s part of the reason the list price for 2550 Greenwich was just dropped $550,000 (15.7%).

And while we’re still trying to decipher the listing, it does appear that in addition to the three bedroom two and one-half bath main home (with elevator), the list price includes a guest cottage of 2,068 square feet as well (not to mention five parking spaces).

Figure out how to fix the façade and you’ll probably fare quite well (and garner the gratitude of more than one neighbor on the block).

UPDATE (2/22): 2550 Greenwich closed escrow on 2/21/08 with a reported contract price of $2,850,000.

∙ Listing: 2550 Greenwich (3/2.5) - $2,950,000 [MLS]
At Least It Has The Requisite Bay Windows, Right? [SocketSite]

First Published: January 11, 2008 3:45 AM

Comments from "Plugged In" Readers

"...was just dropped $550,000 (15.7%)..."

Enough said....

Posted by: Michael L. at January 11, 2008 8:37 AM

ru kidding? this may be the most beautiful facade stripping job ever. talk about a vision those people had...

Posted by: livinlargeinsf at January 11, 2008 8:54 AM

At this pricepoint I bet the right person could buy that, solely address the facade, and make a pretty penny. Do we know whether the guest house is rented?

Posted by: fluj at January 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Easy and cheap (because you used all your trust fund for the down payment) is to paint the three sides of the bay window/balcony a darker grey color and use that same color to "outline" the two odd windows on the left. No, wait, I take that back. Paint the entire facade a darker color, keep the window trim white and highlight the afore mentioned areas with the medium tone. That would pop.

Posted by: Tweety at January 11, 2008 9:47 AM

Can we get another photoshop contest! Need godzilla!

Posted by: eddy at January 11, 2008 9:57 AM

fluj, i've got to respectfully disagree. $3mil gets you a fixer?
how pretty a penny are you talking about?

i'd love to see someone do the numbers (buying, carrying, fixing and selling)
and present them with a straight face...

Posted by: paco at January 11, 2008 10:40 AM

Hey Paco. Maybe. I wouldn't do it. But somebody might. Because Cow Hollow SFRs west of Divis have been sellng for ~$1000 a foot for a couple years now. What if the facade could be "fixed" for 150K or less? Turn it around and sell it right at the median for $3.6 in four or five months. Again, that's pretty risky. But impossible? This thing has a five car garage and a 2000 foot guest house and it's a premier block.

Posted by: fluj at January 11, 2008 11:17 AM

this is the ugliest building i have ever seen.

Posted by: spencer at January 11, 2008 11:23 AM

That is astoundingly ugly. I would be ashamed to own something that ugly. Even at a third the price I think you'd have to question the aesthetic judgement of someone who buys that. And no, it's not exactly Gold Coast real estate, so it' not a tear down.

Posted by: Laura at January 11, 2008 11:50 AM

I love how the interior pictures are extra dark.

Anyway, this is still too expensive. The guest house looks like it still has tenants who probably have to pass through the main house and share tandem parking. Based solely on the pictures, I say this place demands a complete remodel - new kitchens and new baths, plus you have to rip off the entire front of the house! You are going to need an architect, spend months pulling permits, and dealing with horrified neighbors. My guess is that it would cost minimum $400 per foot to fix this place. That's 1.4 million for 3500 sft. And if there are rent controlled tenants, are they going to be amenable to a substantial remodel? In the end, you'll have almost 4.5 million in this place. I would argue it should be priced at 1.75-2 million, especially if there are tenants.

Posted by: Sleepiguy at January 11, 2008 12:32 PM

Doesn't this type of reconstruction require the approval of neighbors? The owner must have run out of funds, because the interior work is far from complete. I agree, this one will probably sit for quite a while.

The realtor responsible for this listing should be ashamed of himself for allowing such poor photos on the MLS listing. If I were the owner I'd fire him for being so careless. Posting such dark pictures for a property at that price point is just unacceptable.

Posted by: Lori at January 11, 2008 1:21 PM

This looks like an uncompleted flip, so I wouldn't blame the Realtor. Given the lack of staging, I'd say the owner just told the Realtor to sell it as cheaply as possible, so the Realtor took the photos himself.

It's hard to get the lighting right when the sunlight streams in through a window: the autofocus cameras just shutter way down.

Posted by: tipster at January 11, 2008 1:47 PM

Actually it is pretty easy to get the lighting right so long as you have a fairly decent camera ($200 or more). But I agree with you, the seller probably told the realtor to do the job as cheap as possible and the realtor snapped a few shots with their cellphone. A $200 photographer gig would really pay off here. What's that ? 0.2% of the selling realtor's commission ? Sounds like a bargain.

Has their been a recent trend away from staging, pro photography, and other higher cost marketing methods ?

Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at January 11, 2008 4:24 PM

There is a new thing out..............it's called a flash! Then maybe we could see the true beauty of this brothel!

Posted by: dap at January 11, 2008 5:28 PM

I don't think this place is THAT ugly... I think it would be fine if you just pulled out all the windows and put in different symmetric ones... took out that front Juliette porch and put the Bay Windows back in, and then painted, it would be ok. how much could that possibly cost? $30-40,000? (I have no idea, maybe it would cost $200,000!!)

The inside pics are so dark and horrible I have no idea if it's nice or not, but seems pretty 80's to me.

Here's a hint: if you can't get the pics to look ok due to sun streaming in the home, then take pictures at NIGHT!!!! You can then create perfect lighting and uplighting etc.

Bad pics are my #1 pet peeve of SF Real Estate listings. It's a $3Million house! Go to Costco and buy a $300 digital camera and take a bunch of pics and then choose the best 8 or whatever! It's not that hard!

Posted by: ex SF-er at January 13, 2008 9:01 AM

i know inventory is low and that location is prime but i'd be astounded if this property trades above $2m. i'm willing to bet a burrito on it. i predict this puppy will be withdrawn.

Posted by: paco at January 13, 2008 9:49 PM

Holy crap! It's pending...

Posted by: Sleepiguy at January 14, 2008 3:01 PM

paco, where are our burritos?

Posted by: John at January 14, 2008 3:20 PM

i'm ready and willing to buy those burritos for all of those who took me up on my wager. 'course pending does not mean does not mean closed....

Posted by: paco at January 14, 2008 8:31 PM

Absolutely the worst proportions going.

Posted by: L at January 26, 2008 3:15 PM

2550 Greenwich closed escrow on 2/21/08 with a reported contract price of $2,850,000.

Posted by: SocketSite at February 22, 2008 6:52 PM

Post a comment


(required - will be published)


(required - will not be published, sold, or shared)


(optional - your "Posted by" name will link to this URL)

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)


Continue Perusing SocketSite:

« JustQuotes: Bosa Buys Parcel 5 On The South Side Of Mission Creek | HOME | Bay Area Home Sales Slow, Except In San Francisco »