425 1st Street #2202
With only six days between its listing for $1,300,000 and closing escrow, it’s probably fair to assume an offer was in hand prior to hitting the MLS.
That being said, the sale of 425 First Street #2202 officially closed escrow on 6/24/08 with a reported contract price of $1,300,000. And as far as we know, this represents the first on-the-record secondary market resale of a post-possession – versus contract assignment – condo at One Rincon Hill.
Do keep in mind that the 1,309 square foot “02” two-bedrooms with Bay Bridge views are oft considered to be some of the most desirable units in the building although a listing for #1802 at $1,399,000 was withdrawn without selling and leased (asking $5,250/mo).
And in terms of the original contract price for the unit two years ago, stay tuned (but it’s safe to assume it was significantly less).
UPDATE: Pre-construction pricing for #1802 and #2202 when the sales office first opened: $980,000 and $1,020,000 respectively (not including any upgrades).
Trying To Establish The True Secondary Resale Market: One Rincon Hill [SocketSite]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    To be honest, I’m surprized it sold at that price. We are a 2/2 in the 03 stack [low double digit floor] at bought in the low 900s, so I’m guessing that this person’s pre-construction price was between between $1m and $1.1m. Bit of a slap in the face to those that talked about ORH buyers being underwater. However, I’m obviously pleased – it’s a nice mark to market for people like myself.

  2. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    Pre-construction price [from 2006] was $1.02m for unit 2202. Accordingly, the $1.3m sales price is a fairly good reason why people might look for contract assignments at pre-construction prices, a question some asked about on this past thread.
    http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2008/05/trying_to_establish_the_true_secondary_market_one_rinco.html
    Moreover, all of those who thought the sales office was lying when they said all units that failed to close [thus returned to their inventory] and were marked up may also want to revise their rhetoric.

  3. Posted by fluj

    Are you sure about that Recent ORH? a 27.45% gain without ever having lived in the property?

  4. Posted by SFwatcher

    Remarkable. I guess ORH is still hot. If someone can still flip a condo(without living)for around 30% gain…Wow.

  5. Posted by enonymous

    I doubted that these would increase in value so quickly, or so much.
    I’m still quite surprised, but I was clearly wrong. Actually my neutral to bearish view of SF real estate has been seemingly consistently wrong (despite what the metrics might tell you, looking for properties in the city with a close family member 2 years ago and again overt he past few months has been a rude awakening).
    Congrats to the flipper, and egg on my face. I always thought these buyers were throwing their money away. This would explain why I have so much less of it.

  6. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    “Are you sure about that Recent ORH? a 27.45% gain without ever having lived in the property?”
    Fluj,
    The number [$1.02m] is from a very reliable source, so I’m quite confident about it. However, he probaly had to put down a deposit two years ago, but it’s still a fairly nice markup. Again [personal opinion here] I think this has more to do with the lower pre-construction prices than the robust state of SF real estate.
    As a comparison, 20B at 301 Main Street [the Infinity] with water views sold on 3/9/08 for $1.77m or $1345 per square foot. At $1.3m this unit [2202] is just below $1000 per sq. ft, so perhaps the buyer of this unit is looking at comparables and may perceive ORH as a far more appealing proposition, despite the oft cited “location” factor.

  7. Posted by tipster

    It CLOSED escrow 6 days after being listed. I don’t think this transaction passes the smell test.
    All real estate is Theater. This listing could very well be theater. Did ORH, or someone they sent out, buy it? Did they “contribute” to the purchase price to “assist” the buyer for marketing purposes (both for the unclosed units and the ones in the next building)?
    I see people on Craigslist begging people to take over their contracts at no gain, and then: Surprise, the first reported resale (the one the contract holders who haven’t closed would be watching) is a big gain for one of the contract holders?
    The manipulable facts don’t seem to match the unmanipulated facts. Sorry. In these situations, there is usually more than the public face of the transaction reveals. Might be on the up and up, it is one of the most desirable units, but it sure smells VERY different from what I’ve seen on Craigslist.
    Sort of like in the last days of the disco craze, when, after the lines of people disappeared, the NYC disco owners paid attractive people to stand in line so that others would think disco was still “in” and pay sky high prices. Or near the end of the dot com craze when the people who got the ipo shares were required to buy more on the first day to goose the first day gain. Or the NRCCs goosing the purchase price of homes near the end of the housing bubble.
    I’ve seen enough of those sort of situations to make me slightly skeptical when some “announcement” doesn’t match what I see in general. I can be wrong, frequently am, but this sure smells funny. 30%? Seems quite extraordinary.

  8. Posted by diemos

    Recent ORH buyer,
    I assume that fluj’s comment is more about tweaking us bears than questioning your numbers. $1000/sqft is more than I was predicting at this point, but I wonder how much the delay of new inventory from Tower II is supporting these prices.

  9. Posted by cooper

    I agree with Tipster…Something smells a little funny.
    Look at how many of the units in ORH are avaiable just under floor 30. Then take a look at Craigslist at all the people trying to get out.
    The financial markets today are telling us there is another leg down in the “Great Unwind”. That means any leverage asset, such as real estate should be prepared for yet another 20-30% decline. Especially condos in an over supplied sector of the city. The 20% I called for is in the most recent case schiller data, and to me now–we’ll get another 20% by this time next year. At least…and its gonne be ugly with most of it short sales. And if this guy really got a 30% flip just by holding a contract–he’s a genius for getting out now while he could. Anyone else in ORH and the soma condo market especially should try and do the same.

  10. Posted by mrbogue

    This sounds a bit like classic pump and dump stock market manipulation. A company is basically in shambles or current economic outlook for its’ industry is bleak, its’ small float can be manipulated upwards in a relatively short time to bring the perceived market value of the company to some sky high price. The bubble bursts after buying interest dries up, and some large “connected” stockholder (not necessarily an insider, but quite possibly a partner, friend, or relative) rides/sells the remaining shares/units all the way to the bottom. The sky high price will never, ever be re-achieved even with record-breaking volume on the ask.

  11. Posted by missionbayres

    Congrats to the buyer. Ultimately, it’s good news for BOTH One Rincon and Infinity. I just hope this is more of a trend or testament to the strength of the market than a aberration or one time event. We’d probably like to see more resales at appreciated prices before making judgement on market directions.
    All the activity on Craigslist cannot be ignored though. I wonder why this buyer didn’t go on Craigslist to get a better deal?
    This ad seems like a 02 stack on the 30-40th floor. If this is, in fact, a 02 stack, then this unit can be had for 1.3M(same as 2202), but 10-15 floors higher.
    http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/rfs/731777401.html

  12. Posted by dg

    Exactly.. This is way too stinky of a transaction to base anything solid as a result of it.
    Or maybe this buyer just happen to be that clueless? I am sure his RE agent had his/her best interest in mind when he decided to pay 1000/foot for a lower floor unit. Maybe he has never heard of craigslist?
    Oh the drama…

  13. Posted by fluj

    “I assume that fluj’s comment is more about tweaking us bears than questioning your numbers.”
    You’d be wrong, there.
    I found this surprising. I have not really followed this development as it’s not my specialty. The only information I’ve gleaned has been from this website and this seems contrary to everything I’ve read on here.

  14. Posted by sf

    Great view of the smog!

  15. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    I guess it’s true what they say, denial [De-Nile] isn’t just a river in Egypt.
    “Especially condos in an over supplied sector of the city”
    Cooper,
    We have certainly seen a fair number of condos in the SOMA area over the past few years. However, if you drive up and down Brickell Avenue in Miami, you will see literally dozens of new condo towers, some of them the height of the Infinity. And all this before you even get to South Beach. To me, that’s oversupply, and condos there have been pummeled accordingly, to the tune of 20%+. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I don’t see the same level of unraveling out here … there simply isn’t that degree of oversupply IMO.

  16. Posted by pvc

    It’s entirely possible the buyer was in the dark. There is a pool of buyers who don’t do their homework, who don’t read RE blogs, who don’t know where to check previous purchase prices and sales histories and neighborhood comps, etc, and instead just listen to their realtor. Realtors, as we all know, can sometimes be a source of honest information and ethical guidance, but just as often what you get is a sales pitch clouded by hype and misrepresentation of the property and the market.

  17. Posted by jessep

    Wow, why someone would pay over a million dollars to be next to a freeway and a gas station is beyond me.
    “Wonderful views”

  18. Posted by anon

    no surprises here. nice flip!
    also goes to remind that prices are set by the buyers. It doesn’t matter if there is one bear or a million bears. if units keep getting sold at comps like this, that is all that matters.

  19. Posted by chuckie

    A question for the investors on here:
    On CL, asking rental for similar is $4500 per month. That’s a GRM of about 24. Or, assuming HOA of $1000 per month, would you say that’s a GRM of 31?

  20. Posted by dg

    There is an 02 stack on a mid-30s floor right now available for $1.3M (asking) and that’s just under 1000/ft. It is scheduled to close sometime in July.
    While I believe ORH buyer got a helluva deal based on $/sq ft, many others are not making such wise decisions here..

  21. Posted by John

    Do SS readers think all buyers read SS (and consult with everyone here) before making an offer?
    Or, do SS readers think Craigslist already replaced MLS?
    Probably 99% of the buyers don’t read SS and don’t read craigslist.
    Second, even if the buyer has read CL and SS, not all ORH units are equal. First, someone may only want a 2BR (that eliminate 80% of all the ads on CL)…if you read through the CL ads for 2BR, they are all asking 1.2M and over.
    Then, the buyer may insist on waterfront view. There are a couple of city view units (06) on CL, one at 1.21M and one at 1.35M. The others don’t have unit numbers do I am not sure – one ad sounds like waterfront view, at 1.37M.
    So, if you compare this unit to the 2BR units on CL, the price seems to be pretty fair.

  22. Posted by Impressed!

    If it is a real sale, the listing agent really set the pace and apparently did a great job as a listing agent through all the noise in the marekt. $1,000 p/sf for the view in the picture seems actually good condidering what other view units sell for in other buildings.

  23. Posted by Mole Man

    thamsenman says Wow, why someone would pay over a million dollars to be next to a freeway and a gas station is beyond me.
    Honestly, this is Rincon Hill. Do look it up.

  24. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    “It’s entirely possible the buyer was in the dark. There is a pool of buyers who don’t do their homework, who don’t read RE blogs, who don’t know where to check previous purchase prices and sales histories and neighborhood comps, etc, and instead just listen to their realtor.”
    PVC,
    Another thing to note is that these assignments aren’t as ‘clean’ as they may sound. ORH insists that the original buyer [person who put down the deposit] must be a party at closing. So, one can’t simply assign the right to the pre-construction price outright. One has to have legal agreements in place beforehand, something that sets buyer and seller back about $3k in legal fees [combined]. There is an element of risk involved closing a sale with someone one doesn’t know, so you have to have the right format and right attorney in place. Accordingly, some parties may opt not to go this route, and go with a more ‘clean’ transaction on the secondary market.

  25. Posted by John

    In any case, we should all congratulate Recent ORH buyer for getting a execellent deal.

  26. Posted by ex SF-er

    this definitely bodes well for ORH as well as SF real estate.
    I have to admit that I am one of the surprised ones as well. Let’s see if more close at this level.
    I’ve said before that for me that one bellweather would be how closings/movings in go at ORH and infinity. Thus far they show resiliency of the market.
    FWIW: I could see paying more for a true sale as opposed to those funky reassignments. not sure how much more… but more.
    I’d like to get more info to make sure it’s an arm’s length transaction of course.

  27. Posted by jamie

    Thanks for the post and the comments – good stuff.
    Anything new about the big holes on Fremont off of Harrison Street?

  28. Posted by goldriversf

    It’s only one sale, don’t mean a whole lot. I am skeptical about the circumstance of this resale. In the mid of credit crises, and uncertainty of the market who are these buyers? Are they all like Googlers who can treat $1.3 m like pocket changes? A bit scrutiny maybe in order here.

  29. Posted by jeccat

    Let’s not kid ourselves: there are a number of people in this city who can afford to put 20% down on this property, and I’ll bet there are also a number of banks willing to gamble on a mortgage of this size for a financially stable person.

  30. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    “Even if the buyer has read CL and SS, not all ORH units are equal. First, someone may only want a 2BR (that eliminate 80% of all the ads on CL)…if you read through the CL ads for 2BR, they are all asking 1.2M and over.
    Then, the buyer may insist on waterfront view. There are a couple of city view units (06) on CL, one at 1.21M and one at 1.35M. The others don’t have unit numbers do I am not sure – one ad sounds like waterfront view, at 1.37M.
    So, if you compare this unit to the 2BR units on CL, the price seems to be pretty fair.”
    John,
    Your point is very well taken. A fair number of people have dismissed this $1.3m price as a sham. As you have pointed out, if someone wanted a bridge facing unit, as properties close higher and higher in the building, the costs similarly rise. Accordingly, the price is not way out of line with what is being sought for available assignments on CL. Moreover, with some of the price points that are being sought for neighboring new buildings [that have a view] the $1.3m seems far from outlandish.
    Still, I do expect the denial to persist for a bit longer …

  31. Posted by anon

    Won’t much of this view (at least toward the east bay) get seriously blocked if/when ORH2 goes up?

  32. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    “Won’t much of this view (at least toward the east bay) get seriously blocked if/when ORH2 goes up?”
    Anon,
    Tower II will essentially be built NE of Tower I and will block off the views in the direction of the Infinity Towers, but won’t inhibit the Bay Bridge, expanses of water or sunrise views.
    [Removed by Editor (don't even think about turning this into another ORH vs Infinity debate)]

  33. Posted by SocketSite

    Probably 99% of the buyers don’t read SS and don’t read craigslist.
    Well, we can unequivocally bust that hypothesis (at least in terms of SocketSite). And in terms of whether or not this was an arm’s length transaction, let’s just say we do our homework and wouldn’t have published it otherwise.

  34. Posted by missionbayres

    Recent ORH buyer,
    One Rincon should hire you as their rep.
    Your defense and endless devotion to the building is really, really commendable…

  35. Posted by cooper

    As for ORH being hired as a rep–i agree his/her defense is commemdable. but if I had a lot of my net worth in there I would defend it too.
    but you can’t stop whats happening in the market and hope is not a real estate investment strategy.
    so to Recent ORH Buyer– SELL WHILE YOU CAN

  36. Posted by San Fronzischeme

    Yeah, we can’t blame ORH buyer from piling on sand bags to the levees. We’d all do that in his situation. Good job if the levees hold.

  37. Posted by fluj

    “Yeah, we can’t blame ORH buyer from piling on sand bags to the levees. We’d all do that in his situation. Good job if the levees hold”
    This, in the $1.3M sale thread ? Man. Too funny. The $1.3M sale is just one deal, sure. But still …
    Let’s not pretend as if you and 30 or more posters on here aren’t wishing the market down and praying for rain so that the levee breaks.

  38. Posted by San FronziScheme

    Back at bashing and character attacks? Are you the same fluj who was crying uncle just a few hours ago? Darn, I’d almost regret supporting you against the hyenas who were tearing you apart.

  39. Posted by fluj

    Where was the character attack there?
    You’re talking “levee breaks” in a thread about a $1.3M sale on $1.02M purchase that was not lived in. I questioned your language, not your character. In fact I’ll question it again. “Bashing”? “Character attacks” ?
    Your m.o. is the opposite of Recent ORH buyers. Plain as day. That’s no bash and it’s no character attack.

  40. Posted by San FronziScheme

    Let’s not pretend as if you and 30 or more posters on here aren’t wishing the market down and praying for rain so that the levee breaks.
    If this not character attack, then what is? You’re implicitely saying that 30 (???) posters (I’ll have to assume bears) will enjoy seeing recent ORH buyer lose his shirt? Nope, at least not me.

  41. Posted by diemos

    “aren’t wishing the market down and praying for rain so that the levee breaks.”
    Some of us are athiests who have seen the weather report, understand the design and limitations of the levees, and are standing on high ground with their waders on.

  42. Posted by fluj

    “If this not character attack, then what is? You’re implicitely saying that 30 (???) posters (I’ll have to assume bears) will enjoy seeing recent ORH buyer lose his shirt? Nope, at least not me. ”
    Dude, you cannot have it both ways. You used the words “piling sandbags” and levee breaks in a thread about an unqualified success. Now you want to say you wouldn’t partake in any shadenfreude? And no, that was not a character attack any way you cut it.
    A character attack is like, “Fluj you are stupid.” “Fluj all you do is post on socketsite and have never sold a property.”
    Come on man.
    [Editor's Note: And now back to ORH (by force if necessary).]

  43. Posted by viewlover

    recent ORH, you bought at low psf if I remember, looks like you did well all around given this new comp.. I’m not a fan but recognize that given the number of closings, this building is not the distress property so many postings imply. It also is indicative of the resiliancy of the SF market, which is a reflection of the changing face of the new San Franciscans.

  44. Posted by ex SF-er

    well, to me an arm’s length transaction that went from 1.02 to 1.3 mill is clearly a sign of strength
    we have a data point. now we need but gather some more.
    but it’s ORH 1. bears 0.

  45. Posted by anon sf

    There was some mention earlier that this could’ve been a ‘manipulated’ sale? How do we know the developer or associate of the developer didn’t purchase this unit to distort the comps. Is this possible?
    I find it hard to believe the buyer was this clueless, or possibly swayed by a deceitful agent.

  46. Posted by badlydrawnbear

    Since there has been plenty of bear bashing (and some bull bashing) on this thread. I thought I would stand up and say my opinion regarding the macro effects going on in the housing, credit, equity, and commodity markets are still incredibably negative.
    The SF market might be insulated from these effect but even someone with the best supplies and insulation hiking in Antarctica can die of exposure.
    The fact is oil continues to rise, the stock market continues to fall, credit is tighenting, a huge wave of foreclosures and defaults continues to grow.
    Gravity still exists even in SF.
    But congrats I can definitely congratulate the ORH seller on making a great profit with a two year investment.
    Remember bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered.

  47. Posted by John

    A lot of sore bears here.
    Come on, it is one single data point. Fighting over it (and talking about it as ‘manipulation’ etc only make you look sore.
    The fact is, some properties still do well (doesn’t mean it will continue to do well). Some properties are doing badly. Just be fair. One data point doesn’t make it a bull market, but don’t be in denial either.
    And anon, pretty soon (and I know someone on SS will track it), the buyer’s info will be recorded, show up on PropertyShark etc. If you found out it is a ‘manipulated’ sale, I am sure that will be another topic on SS.
    To tell the truth, I don’t even see why anyone would manipulate it at this price (and why someone would think it is manipulated), because as I pointed out, 1.3M is about the mid point for 2BR unit listed on craigslist.

  48. Posted by paco

    bdb,
    “markets are still incredibably negative.”
    wow, that’s pretty negative

  49. Posted by Rincon Hill resident

    Well whether or not it’s manipulated, I like to know what the buyer was thinking when they decided to put an offer at 1.3M on this unit knowing the original purchase price was just 1.02M. Obviously, the RE market is much worse now than in 2006 so it’s definitely not a wise investment if you ask me.
    Then again, I also question the original 1.02M price (is Recent ORH buyer is pulling our leg again?).

  50. Posted by dg

    Come on Paul Hwang… being as dialed in to these high rises as you are, you gotta have more to say than that!

  51. Posted by dg

    Why is Paul Hwang’s comment at 11:20pm no longer there?
    [Editor's Note: You pretty much answered that question yourself (and it's once again time to crackdown). We don't care if you're a bull a bear or agnostic, but we do ask your comments add value, avoid personal attacks, and attempt to stay on-topic. And of course, no spam(ing).]

  52. Posted by ex SF-er

    bdb:
    I too am incredibly negative on the RE market, both national and also SF specific. But that does not mean that I can’t acknowledge this bullish data point. In fact, IMO it means that I need to acknowledge this data point.
    We cannot blind ourselves to data points just because they don’t “fit in” to the original hypothesis. Instead, we must use the data to see if it can be reconciled with the hypothesis, to see if it is an outlier, or to see if the hypothesis itself needs to be altered.
    As we all know, RE downturns usually affect the least desireable first and then the more desireable later (if at all). In big downturns, everything is eventually affected. in smaller ones, sometimes the more desireable properties are spared.
    My hypothesis has been that this will be a very big downturn. It is also that this will take a very long time (many many years), and that most of the losses will be due to inflation. My hypothesis includes the ideas that the desireable properties will hold out at first. I have never been sure if ORH is actually a desireable property. It is clearly an intriguing property, a hyped property, a property with a lot of glitz. But desireable? I haven’t been sure.
    this is one of the reasons I’ve stated many times that we’d better know the strength of the SF market this spring/summer as ORH and Infinity closes. Because they are a lot of data points and in my previous thoughts they were middle desireable.
    Thus, ORH doing well in 2008 is not contrary to my personal hypothesis. If more data points continue to roll in then I will have to alter my thoughts on ORH and reclassify it as “desireable”. If more data points come in strong (in inflation adjusted terms) from across the city over the next 2-3 years then I will know that my hypothesis was wrong.
    there is also a secondary aspect of this: how will both projects do (as opposed to both primary towers). There are hundreds of more units of ORH/Infinity to come on line soon. will the demand stay strong for those?

  53. Posted by tipster

    Every property is desirable at a certain price point.
    You already have lots of data points: people merely trying to get their deposits back on craigslist, practically begging. This is not an issue of one data point not fitting in with someone’s hypothesis, the issue is that this data point doesn’t fit with the rest of the data. That ad someone posted of a higher floor unit for the same price was from the ORH sales office. Two units available, and some fool pays list for the lower one from a private party?
    This so called sale doesn’t fit. When there is big money involved, and an opportunity to manipulate the data, and the data doesn’t fit, you need to be extra vigilant. Could it be real? Yup. Is it likely to be fake? Yup.
    Could the sales office have told a buyer that if they bought that property, the sales office would hand the buyer $200K. Yup. Would it have been worth it in the long run for the Sales Office to do something like that? Yup, cuz there is big money involved. Would that be an improper NRCC from the seller? Nope. Not saying any of this happened. But it could have happened, and very few people would ever have to know about it.
    At the end of a bubble, this sort of thing happens all the time. It’s because a very few people have a very big interest in extending the bubble. So they will do what it takes to extend it.

  54. Posted by diemos

    “and that most of the losses will be due to inflation.”
    If I saw any potential for serious wage inflation over the next 5 years I might agree with you. But what we are experiencing is commodity inflation with flat wages. That leaves less every month in peoples pockets to pay the mortgage.
    Couple that with the fact that we’re already seeing prices 50% off in outlying areas of california and I stick with my outlook of significant price declines.

  55. Posted by ex SF-er

    tipster:
    I don’t exclude your scenario as impossible. On the contrary, I feel that this may indeed be what happened. But at the same time it is also very possible that we have an ignorant person with a lot of cash.
    short term fluctuations do not negate long term predictions, that’s all I’m saying. down markets will have up days. down RE markets will have up units. and vice versa
    it isn’t too different from the stock market. After Bear Stearns bailout and the Fed action the market rebounded significantly. Many people used the market rebound to say “the worst is over” and “all the writedowns have happened”. But I know that some of the biggest UPWARD moves in stock markets happen during bear markets (the so called “bear traps” or “dead cat bounces”). And thus, I analyzed the new data (stock market going up) and then incorporated it into my hypothesis (stock market is going down longer term) and so I shorted as the market went up.
    Uber-bulls truly thought the worst was over becasue they refused to incorporate all the data into their models. so they bought into the hype, and now are likely feeling some pain.
    now the market has fallen again to 2 year lows. and I must re-evaluate my position despite the fact that the market is moving in “my” direction. why? because although I still think that the stock market is going down further over the next year or two, I know that short term there will be a bump… and I need to decide if it’s worth riding the bump or not. I don’t want to make the same mistake that my bull-brothers made.
    in the same way, this data point is a data point. It shows strength in the ORH and SF market. It doesn’t decide anything, but it should be incorporated into all the other data points. over time as we gather more data points we’ll know more. this is one of the reason why RE is sticky… it takes FOREVER to gather the data points, and they’re often old stale data by the time you do get the data. (often 1-2 months old). it also doesn’t help that the data points are somewhat opaque (what was purchase price, how much “freebies” were given, what sort of remodelling happend between sales, was there cash back, and so on).

  56. Posted by John

    Whether the market is bull or bear is about the TREND, not about the absolute value.
    Is DJ at 12000 bear or bull? It is bear if it was 13000. It is bull if it comes up from 11000.
    And we know the pre-construction price of new units are always a wild shot. Some developers set it too low. Some set too high. That is not market price. It is fun to know that some of the original buyers made money on their investments. However, it is meaningless to use it to know the market trend.
    Now we have the first data point, we will only know the trend when we have more resale data points.
    However,
    @ex SF-er, actually the last downturn in 90′s happened to the high-end market first, and the high-end recovered first. So it is not true that “As we all know, RE downturns usually affect the least desireable first and then the more desireable later”.
    @tipster, your speculation is quite easy to verify. Call the sales office, say you want to buy, and tell us what offers you get.
    Come on, at this day of age, if any funny deals like that happen, we will see it on some blogs somewhere.

  57. Posted by cooper

    DG Said
    Why is Paul Hwang’s comment at 11:20pm no longer there?
    [Editor's Note: You pretty much answered that question yourself (and it's once again time to crackdown). We don't care if you're a bull a bear or agnostic, but we do care if you add value (or not).]
    Uh what did Paul Hwang say? It’s not like he doesn’t know this building well with like 20 units for sale here. I dare say he knows a lot more than the editor of this site about this topic. Why delete his comment?
    Could some PLEASE start a competing site to Socket site that does not have an editor that actually edits and removes everything we say.
    [Editor's Note: The entirety of Paul's comment: "That's real estate."]

  58. Posted by ex SF-er

    John:
    I wrote “usually”.
    downturns usually do affect least desireable areas first and then the more desireable areas. I stand by my statement.

  59. Posted by Michael L.

    Don’t forget though – the low end is a good indication for what’s to follow.

  60. Posted by Paul Hwang

    UPDATE: Pre-construction pricing for #1802 and #2202 (assuming in contract on day one): $980,000 and $1,020,000 respectively.
    This data is not accurate. These are not the upgraded prices nor are they the nonupgraded prices. Since they were both sold on the first day June 12 2006, any pricng besides the first day is moot, because it didn’t actually exist after the first day.
    [Editor's Note: That's more like it. It's true that the pricing above wouldn't include any upgrades, but we're sticking by our source until proven wrong.]

  61. Posted by Paul Hwang

    Your source is not accurate. My source is me looking at the cotnract on the first day they were selling June 12 2006, me talking to the buyers for the last two years on an almost daily basis and me talking to the buyers this morning. Your source is not accurate.
    [Editor's Note: Numbers speak louder than words, but we'll circle back (and are honestly more concerned with having the right information than being proven wrong).]

  62. Posted by Paul Hwang

    If you know what the price per floor was on the first day (6/12/06) for the 02 stack you would quickly realize at least one of the numbers is not accurate. I would suggest that they both are not. Out of respect for the buyers (6/12/06), you will have to find out the actual numbers for yourselves.

  63. Posted by ozzie

    Your source is wrong. Both numbers are wrong.

  64. Posted by Anonymous

    Wow, look at that view! I bet you can see Stockton [CA] and Lodi from way up there!
    In fact, you can probably see most of the San Francisco Bay Area real estate that’s declining in value in the surrounding areas out those windows.

  65. Posted by enonymous

    you gotta love real estate in this day of nearly perfect information, the only pricing information you get with real estate is generally misinformation.
    “both numbers are wrong”
    if that’s the case, why hasn’t anyone actually indicated what the numbers are?
    oh, I forgot, profiting from real estate is predicated on information asymmetry

  66. Posted by Rincon Hill resident

    So what are the prices then? I tend to believe Paul since he has sold the most units in the building and has some privileges us normal folks don’t have.
    And if Paul is correct, then my intuition was correct that Recent ORH buyer is again pulling our leg.

  67. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    Wow, this thread certainly caught fire overnight … no pun intended. Moreover, with all the talk of levees overflowing, I’m glad I bought property on high ground :-)
    Rincon Hill buyer – My source is a friend of my wife and I, so I consider the person to be reliable. This person was also quite surprized at the pre-construction price. As John stated, pre-construction prices are somewhat of a wild card. As I’ve said before, I think that’s what is most responsible for this markup, not the robust state of SF real estate.
    Ex-SFer – thanks once again for your rational, balanced viewpoint on this subject matter. Once again, a great analysis worthy of note, even if your overall conclusion may somewhat differ from mine.
    To those that still see this as a sham purchase, the SocketSite editor’s words perhaps warrant repetition – “[I]n terms of whether or not this was an arm’s length transaction, let’s just say we do our homework and wouldn’t have published it otherwise.”
    For those disappointed with this $1000 per sq ft mark and who dismiss it as out of hand, I would say take a look at ‘comparables’. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe anything at the Infinity with panoramic water views sold for much less than $1200 per sq. ft. And while the Millenium is definitely far more opulent than either ORH or the Infinity [for those that value those extra inches of marble for their countertops] I believe their pricepoints start at $1500 per sq. ft. Who knows what the price point is by the time one gets to the 32nd floor, which is where the unobstructed bay bridge views begin … as best as I can tell. If the Turberry does commence their structure, they are trying to ‘out-marble’ everyone else, so I imagine their pricepoints will be similar to the Millenium.
    So, for those that see significant price attrition at ORH, from the $1000 mark for the low 20th floor range, if buyers are looking for expansive views, there aren’t a bunch of alternatives [certainly not in new buildings] at lower price points.
    [Editor's Note: For the record, our source is independent of "Recent ORH buyer" (but seems to have the same number).]

  68. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    Didn’t see Paul’s comments before my last posting. It’s possible that $1.02m was the ‘nominal price’ before upgrades. The hardwood floors are an upgrade, and perhaps Paul can provide more details about what other improvements were made. Again, I’m not trying to mislead anyone – just relaying the info that I believed to be correct. Moreover, the ‘nominal price’ doesn’t seem dramatically out of line based on what we paid for our place.

  69. Posted by SF Condo Guy

    Wow, there’s so much sensitivity about whether or not this one seller made money on flipping his/her condo. That’s the point of flipping! You get in on early pre-construction, you sell when the project is complete, you move on. It’s been done thousands of times before (though not very often in San Francisco). It doesn’t mean the buyer was stupid or the market is great or the market is not great — it’s just business!
    If the seller just broke even or lost money, people would take it as a sign of doom. It’s just one transaction. It’s not a sign of anything other than two parties got together and agreed on a price. It happens.

  70. Posted by Paul Hwang

    That’s real estate.
    [Editor's Note: You're killing us (but touche).]

  71. Posted by Trip

    I have no idea what the “real” selling price is either on the original sale or this new one. However, I agree with tipster that the extreme lack of transparency into the transaction raises all sort of suspicions. If everything were on the up-and-up, why wouldn’t ORH make full disclosures and even brag about how well the complex is doing in the market?

  72. Posted by Michael

    “If everything were on the up-and-up, why wouldn’t ORH make full disclosures and even brag about how well the complex is doing in the market?”
    ORH brags about increasing prices on returned inventory all the time. I guarantee the sales office is ecstatic to see this sale get some press but they can’t promote it themselves. Why? The no flip policy which they are supposed to enforce!

  73. Posted by San fronziScheme

    Is this an actual flip by the definition in the ORH anti-flip policy?

  74. Posted by why not ask

    If someone wants the real scoop, wouldn’t it be simple enough to ask the listing agent? I’m assuming that agent may also know the original purchase price.
    Personally, any agent, broker, or investment guru that can return me 30% on leveraged money is a winner…

  75. Posted by John

    Trip said “I agree with tipster that the extreme lack of transparency into the transaction raises all sort of suspicions.”
    Lack of transparency? Come on, this sale gets as much transparency as you get for any resale properties in the city. What kind of additional info do you want?
    And if you want more details, just wait for a few months and it will show up on PropertyShark.

  76. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    “There are a number of ORH places for rent right now … and if you want to buy, wait a bit and see if prices fall. They may or may not fall significantly, but it is hard to imagine a scenario where prices go up any time soon, so there is no downside to holding off.”
    Posted by: Trip at May 23, 2008 1:47 PM
    John,
    With the aforementioned being Trip’s input on a previous thread [remember the "risk free" rental process] I guess he has opted to save face by pointing to an alleged, unspecified “extreme lack of transparency” with the transaction, despite the Socketsite editor’s assurances to the contrary. Others like enonymous opted for a mea culpa earlier on this thread.
    Nothing further needed – it speaks for itself.

  77. Posted by anon

    I don’t think this sale proves that there is risk in renting (“Hurry, buy before you’re priced out!”)
    You can STILL rent an equivalent unit for less than it would cost to buy it, and, in fact, you can probably buy a comparable (or better) unit for less. Sounds like renting is still pretty risk free.

  78. Posted by Trip

    Well, where is the transparency? I couldn’t care less what this went for. But nobody seems to have anything concrete to offer on the original sale of this place, which is the only thing to which we can compare the recent sale. What was the prior sale price? Any other costs beyond that (upgrades, etc.)? All we have are dueling, anonymous blog assurances of “trust me” — all of which also claim the other guys’ info is wrong.
    The lack of solid information is suspicious. If this unit in fact saw any real appreciation, I would think those with a vested interest (e.g. ORH) would trot out the real facts and we could all see for ourselves. Without that, we are all just guessing. (And by the way, Craigslist has ORH units for rent that show the rent-vs-own equation is solidly on the rent side — a nice, cheaper, risk-free alternative (and if this price is real, the imbalance in favor of renting is even greater)).

  79. Posted by ozzie

    “If someone wants the real scoop, wouldn’t it be simple enough to ask the listing agent? I’m assuming that agent may also know the original purchase price.”
    True and no one has asked. I have already stated that the posted numbers are incorrect, however SS seems to want to go with the wrong info. Why???
    [Editor's Note: The answer.]

  80. Posted by cooper

    you know what probably happened….
    The original price was close to the 1m socket site had…then it fell through…then the leasing office raised it to 1.3 say 2007. Fast forward to now, they assign their contract at the 2007 price with no profit except to orh.

  81. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    “True and no one has asked. I have already stated that the posted numbers are incorrect, however SS seems to want to go with the wrong info. Why???”
    Ozzie,
    I assume you are referencing 1802? Perhaps Paul can chime in with details for 2202? Okay, what was the original purchase price[s], factoring in upgrades?

  82. Posted by enonymous

    “If someone wants the real scoop, wouldn’t it be simple enough to ask the listing agent? I’m assuming that agent may also know the original purchase price.”
    True and no one has asked. I have already stated that the posted numbers are incorrect, however SS seems to want to go with the wrong info. Why???
    -ozzie – you have already stated both numbers are wrong. why do we need the editor to give us the numbers when you clear can (but won’t?)

  83. Posted by cooper

    I bet my theory is correct. the original price may have been 1m but it fell out for whatever reason and was picked up in 2007 at 1.3
    nobody made any profit on it.

  84. Posted by ozzie

    If the buyers want to disclose the prices they paid, that’s their business, not mine. But I feel if the wrong information is posted in a headline article, I should say something.
    It’s not good for anyone to have misleading information posted about their property and diminishes the value of reading SS.

  85. Posted by John

    Trip said: “Well, where is the transparency? I couldn’t care less what this went for. But nobody seems to have anything concrete to offer on the original sale of this place, which is the only thing to which we can compare the recent sale. What was the prior sale price? Any other costs beyond that (upgrades, etc.)? All we have are dueling, anonymous blog assurances of “trust me” — all of which also claim the other guys’ info is wrong.”
    Get real. You think the buyers and seller has obligation to you (a by-stander) or public to give out all those info?
    Nobody is going to volunteer any of those information except what’s available at the county recorder’s office.

  86. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    you know what probably happened….
    The original price was close to the 1m socket site had…then it fell through…then the leasing office raised it to 1.3 say 2007. Fast forward to now, they assign their contract at the 2007 price with no profit except to orh.
    Posted by: cooper at June 27, 2008 2:10 PM
    Cooper,
    You promised me you wouldn’t start binge drinking before 3pm on a Friday. Then again, at least binge drinking would give you an excuse for writing complete drivel. You have no idea what you are talking about and add no value to this discussion. You are a bitter malcontent that assumes by writing enough nonsense online you will discourage people from purchasing real estate and prices will drop to your ‘target level’. Your childish logic is laughable. Get lost unless you have anything of value to add, which you certainly don’t here!!
    As Paul and Ozzie will tell you, both of these sellers are the original purchasors from ORH. The only reason that that they are permitted to resell is because the sellers have ‘relocated’ their primary residences. The ORH Sales office has had no involvement since the first sale in 2006. The ‘nominal price’ quote by myself and Socketsite for 2202, both from seperate sources, at $1.02m are accurate. However, upgrades may have been performed to raise that cost basis, something neither Socketsite, or I have refuted. Paul and/or Ozzie – your turn to enlighten us further.

  87. Posted by cooper

    woooooah…with the personal attacks. like seriously you were funny before but now you sound like a nutjob. Paul and Ozzie already said 1.02 wasnt right.
    I came up with a THEORY as to what happened that I think actually makes sense. RIght now your best theory is it was a bunch of upgrades.
    My theory is reasonable. It doesn’t denigrate the property at all..in fact I am sure there will be plenty of cases where the scenario I suggest–contracts at 2007 prices fall out and get assigned.
    If that scenario somehow scares you, then you shouldn’t have bought there in the first place. Because it’s happening there every day.
    Now stop with the personal attacks. I understand you bought there, and may have some money at stake–but you really need to watch with the personal attacks. It adds zero to the discussion and people are tired of reading them.
    Oh and if you think its me personally making the prices go down with a perfectly reasonble theory –I think you do not have a realistic picture of what is happening in the market and what’s driving it down to non bubble levels

  88. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    “I came up with a THEORY as to what happened”
    Your theory is complete nonsense and has no basis in fact whatsoever. Period!
    It’s mindless misinformation like that that [evidently] drives me nuts. Say you don’t like the property – fine. Say you think values will fall – whatever. However, when you pull complete rubbish out of [well, you know where] that is absolutely untrue, that’s simply unacceptable.

  89. Posted by cooper

    I think you’ve lost it.
    I said the condo could have fallen out in 2007 then got reassigned soon after at higher 2007 prices.
    Do you know how many units in ORH fit that description right now?
    You don’t know that its untrue as you have no more facts than the rest of us do. The prices you said were accurate were in fact not so by Paul and Ozzie.
    And as far as this theory “driving you nuts” I concur that it has. One suggestion is to maybe step away from the computer, stop with the personal attacks and if its all bothering you so much maybe that is a clue that you are in over your head and that you should just sell your unit while you still can.

  90. Posted by Homework

    Was Paul the listing agent?

  91. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    Let me make this simple for you – Paul and Ozzie are trying to sell condos. They have had every opportunity to post ‘accurate’ numbers, but have opted not to do so. This should be fairly telling, especially if it may not be in their client’s best interest to do so. I’m not taking a dig at realtors – just stating the facts. Even if you don’t believe me, Socketsite should have a pretty reliable source that it stands by. And while upgrades may have added to the $1.02m cost basis, it certainly wouldn’t have runined the math as to whether this was a worthwhile endeavor. I say that being aware of most of the upgrade packages that were available.
    Could your theory have happened? Yes. Did it actually happen – absolutely not, and that’s what is at issue! Could Al Gore have become president? Yes. Did he? No! These are the facts – everything you have written on this subject is simply false!

  92. Posted by The Smart Guy

    The ORH pricing theories are really quite interesting. In consideration of the seller and buyer’s privacy (and probably in support of their and their clients interest), Paul and Ozzie are not disclosing the original sales pricing. TRUE.
    From my conversation with the listing agent, his focus is on meeting his clients needs and any level of market expertise he offers is retained as a competitive advantage for his clients (so he’s not a frequent SS poster on his sales data). Ozzie and Paul are accurate in their comments and Recent ORH Buyer’s theories are not completely wrong. FYI, The listing agent also spearheaded the first to a Watermark turn — see the SS 15G story from last year.

  93. Posted by Anonymous

    Listen to yourselves. Here you are, ready to tear each other apart over a simple little detail: whether the sale price was really $1,300,000, or originally $1,080,000, or something in between.
    Since when do people pay over a million bucks for an apartment, anyway? In my opinion, that’s nothing to be proud of.

  94. Posted by SocketSite

    So here’s the deal, one of our sources has access to a copy of the developer’s pricing grid for every condo in the building going into the first day of sales. We consider it to be pretty darn accurate. And we wouldn’t have published said prices based simply on hearsay (which others seem want to do).
    It’s true that these prices wouldn’t include upgrades (which were likely purchased). And we can’t speak to whether or not a deal was cut (unlikely) or if an agent missed out as prices were raised on the fly (as was done by the time the sales office re-opened the next day). But until we have a confirmed contract price in hand (which we’d welcome with open arms), that’s the best we can do (other than to clarify our language above).
    And cooper, sorry but you’re wrong.

  95. Posted by cooper

    Recent ORH Buyer–step away from the computer. You keep saying how false my theory was. I think you skipped that day in elementary school when they explained what a theory was. I never stated it was a fact I said hey here is what could have explained it.
    My theory has happened to a good chunk of the units in ORH. And it was the only way to explain the numbers that socketsite put up and that you later confirmed that turned out to be false. In fact those are the only two things we’ve confirmed so far that were 100% false from PAul and Ozzie.
    And like I said –if my theory bothers you–a theory that happens every day in ORH–then that’s a signal that even you know that you bought something at a price you shouldn’t have and you should sell while you still can.

  96. Posted by cooper

    Socketsite
    And cooper, sorry but you’re wrong.
    Actually, the only thing we know as a fact was your original facts were wrong as confirmed by Paul and Ozzie. If you have an alternate theory that explains what happened, feel free to post the facts. We are all waiting for some…

  97. Posted by anon

    I wouldn’t put it past the developer to buy this unit himself at an inflated price. A small price to pay to inflate the value and confidence in the project.

  98. Posted by Dude

    Maybe this was a clean deal with no ulterior motives. But I have to agree with tipster on this one – I smell fish. There’s way too much “short interest” in this building on CL to take this sale at face value:
    http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/rfs/735090930.html
    http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/rfs/731965202.html
    Both on a higher floor for $888 psf. So if this wasn’t a planned transaction, seems somebody got ripped off. But I agree there are enough monied spendthrifts in this city to fall into something like this without doing research (or caring). But I’d like to reserve judgment until PropertyShark shows who the buyer was….

  99. Posted by Sabrina

    Just based on experience with new buildings in Chicago, I would take the early closings in an “anticipated” building with a grain of salt.
    Here in Chicago, the Trump Tower sales staff was trumpeting a flip on one of the hotel/condos that was among the first to close last February. It had a similar history to this Rincon Hill unit- with the flip closing within days of the original closing. Clearly, the buyer was already lined up.
    But since then, there haven’t been any other press releases or announcements about how “well” the buyers are doing.
    Here’s what they said here in Chicago to the press:
    “The sale “shows that there’s a resale market, and that’s good news,” said Tere Proctor, who is sales associate for Koenig & Strey GMAC Real Estate and directs Trump’s sales. She said the sellers “did quite well” on the unit, but wouldn’t get into specifics.”
    Also- for those curious- the article actually stated that The Donald did NOT buy this unit (because, of course, the thought does cross everyone’s mind.)
    I haven’t seen anything else flip in the building since (believe me, The Donald and Company would be talking about it if it were happening.)
    One sale does not make the comps in a building in this kind of market.

  100. Posted by j

    From what I just read, the person who bought an 03 stack in a low floor for around $900k didn’t do so well. If really the 02 stack for 1802 and 2202 were +/- $1 mil, I rather have them over the 03 stack. The 02 stacks are the most desireble at ORH.
    Just facts, please

  101. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    Cooper – “My theory is that the world is flat”
    Recent ORH – “That’s total nonsense – get lost unless you have anything factual to add”
    Cooper – “Don’t make fun of my theory, you are hurting my feelings”
    Cooper [to Socketsite] – “Prove to me that the world is not flat”
    Not sure what else to add at this point when the facts are plain as day …

  102. Posted by South Beach Real Estate

    Here to clear the air:
    -Paul’s information is accurate.
    -Upgrades were included in the resale.
    -Buyer was not the developer
    -South Beach Real Estate was the listing office.
    -No one has called seeking this public information
    Cheers!

  103. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    Dude,
    You are correct on both links. However, neither is an 02 unit and that may have been what the buyer was specifically looking for.
    Moreover, an assignemnt at ORH requires hiring an attorney and having the original party on contact at closing. This may seem risky/unnerving to some, and thus may be a deterent to this route.

  104. Posted by tipster

    “the article actually stated that The Donald did NOT buy this unit”
    Sounds like Bill Clinton: “it depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is”.
    Donald didn’t have to buy the unit. He could have given some $ to the real buyer who might have been a trusted friend or employee or even a stanger who agress to keep quiet for $200K. If it keeps the bubble alive for an extra couple of sales, it’s worth it. He pays the difference on ONE sale, and gets 3 buyers to keep paying the difference on 3 sales. He gets nearly 3x his money back. And his hands are clean. Note, he could have thrown in 10 years of HOA or some other incentive to keep cash from changing hands.
    I don’t want to beat a dead horse on this, because there are an infinite number of possibilities, but I find it amazing that Soma is falling each day, and yet the one “surprise” price is at one of the few developments where a developer has a couple hundred units to unload in the next year, and thus has the motive and opportunity to play games, particularly with such a visible sale – the first MLS sale. One that was off-MLS, and suddenly went on, which is a bit (though not completely) unusual in and of itself.
    At any other building, outside of maybe Infinity, there is not one party with enough of a vested interest to make this sort of game playing worthwhile. They can do this for 4 or 5 sales and it’s still to their benefit. At any other Soma condo, no one has enough unsold inventory to take a loss on one and make it up on a bunch of others. But ORH is different: they have unsold inventory in the first tower and a LOT of unsold inventory in the second. It’s just a business decision, and you make it back in droves. If that unit had sold for $1.0, that would have set a comp that would have cost the developer millions.
    If fluj and I had been surprised at a sale at any other building, I would have said it was one new “data point” like ex-sf-er said. But at one of the few buildings where the developer has such a huge incentive to play these types of games, that very frequently get played in this very situation, this was a big surprise, there’s another unit on a higher floor at the same price from the developer, the developer fought like hell to keep people from flipping via public data records, this was one of the few units they couldn’t keep off the market, and I put all these things together and I smell a rat. Sorry. I’ve seen this WAY too many times before.

  105. Posted by Michael

    “Paul’s information is accurate”
    What information? Price tag to upgrade a unit this size? Add that to $1.02M and I bet that’s the contract price +/- $10K.

  106. Posted by anon

    “But ORH is different: they have unsold inventory in the first tower and a LOT of unsold inventory in the second.”
    Have they started selling tower 2 yet? How they set the pricing will be interesting.

  107. Posted by Paul Hwang

    Socketsite is going to tell me (Paul Hwang), Ozzie (Scott Osbourne) and South Beach Real Estate (Morton Mah / Marcus Lee) what price 1802 and 2202 were reserved for on June 12 2006?
    This is unbelievably funny.

  108. Posted by yo

    i do not understand why everyone is so shocked. there are only a handful of resale ’02′ units and this unit is probably the highest one that is ready for the seller to move-in.
    the us dollar has also at least fallen 15% over 2 years, so overseas buyers are definitely seeing bargains
    what is more interesting are the implications…but can we change it up and consider some positive ones…?

  109. Posted by dg

    yo yo yo! good point. once some of the other stacks start closing we will then see the strength/weakness of the various floor plans within the building, after a number of each close anyway….

  110. Posted by cooper

    To Recent ORH Buyer (with buyers remorse but can’t admit it).
    I really don’t know why you continue posting when the only people who posted incorrect facts were socket site and you. You jumped in super quick to confirm socketsie’s info when it turned out to be bad info. I posted a theory, which I stated as such as an honest attempt to figure out why SS info was off yet the unit went for 1.3- A theory which occurs in quite a few units in ORH.
    Instead of a theory, you stated something as FACT which turned out to be WRONG as verified by the actual Realtors.
    Stop spreading the false info about the building ORH. Nobody wants to read your ra ra cheerleader crud when it’s obviously biased and not factually accurate.

  111. Posted by Morgan

    One Rincon will no longer be the tallest residential tower in the West. I was suprised to read this morning that the 76 story “Park Fifth” tower in Los Angeles has received its loan commitment and is beginning construction. Beijing Construction Engineering Group is providing most of the funding. As a side note, I have always liked the design of the Park Fifth and wish San Francisco would try encouraging such a design.

  112. Posted by Recent ORH Buyer

    Cooper,
    If you continue to expose yourself to be an unrepentant bufoon, I will continue to belittle you. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel.
    “FACT which turned out to be WRONG as verified by the actual Realtors”
    Exactly which fact turned out to be wrong? And what was the correct number that put me in my place? Ah, you have no idea. Clueless once again.
    As stated before [and verified by Socketsite] the $1.02m is the ‘nominal’ price. Remember, there are multiple copies of the original document of sale, and my source read the number right off one of those copies. So why might the number be ‘different’ from Paul’s number … allegedly? South Beach Real Estate verified that there were upgrades. The most comprehensive upgrade package that I’m aware of at ORH was $55K, including upgraded countertops, floors, marble in the bathrooms and may have also included an upgraded stove to Wolf burners … although I’m not positive about the last item. But, let’s assume the upgrades actually totalled even $80k [which is VERY generous] one is still looking at a cost basis of $1.1m. Even with this inflated scenario the numbers look appealing.
    You know Cooper is getting desperate when he is citing realtors as the ultimate source of transparency about R.E. pricing. Again, nothing against Paul, Scott et al. or realtors in general – you are acting in your client’s best interest, which I understand, and is fair enough. However, simply saying my number is wrong [by $5? by $50K?] doesn’t disprove the info provided my myself and Socketsite, from two different sources.

  113. Posted by paco

    you have to wonder if its better to be an unrepentant buffoon
    or a repentant one…

  114. Posted by incredirent

    Now i know why i (along with all my friends) have stopped reading socketsite. Its full of bears who haven’t been to an open house in years.
    Great condos and SFHs in this city sell fast and typically at asking. Period. This resale at ORH is just another example.
    After three years of renting and attending open houses looking for “the deal”, i have come to realize that its simply not going to happen. Either I keep renting or move to Rockridge, San Mateo, etc. My dream of finding a tasteful 2BR/2BA for less than 800K is simply that, a dream.
    Congrats to those who got in early at the Infinity and ORH. I bet you will do well, especially as stagflation makes your fixed mtg payments less costly (you all got fixed rate mtgs, right?)

  115. Posted by dg

    incredient… just wait a little longer. You started looking for a deal in 2005? Hmm… way too early.
    But agreed – socketsite doesn’t have quite the quality it used to, esp without the likes of satchel.
    bu

  116. Posted by nonanon

    “Now i know why i (along with all my friends) have stopped reading socketsite. Its full of bears who haven’t been to an open house in years.”
    rotflmao! i stopped reading…i just leave comments here. give that guy a prize.
    seems like more brokers/buyers/bulls than bears on this thread.

  117. Posted by busted?

    Recent ORH buyer… I hope your not disclosing information that is sourced from a breach of a fiduciary relationship as you contend that your source read the numbers right from confidential the sale documents. If its the escrow company, thats a breach, if its the sales office–they obviously have a mole who may be soon out of a job.
    Your implied access to accurate information does beg another question, if you are so “informed” and so confident in the data–how could you not have the information on the upgrade or breakout of the costs for 2202?

  118. Posted by Recent ORH buyer

    Busted,
    No comment on the first portion of your posting, for obvious reasons :-) In terms of the latter paragraph, it’s a fair question. The upgrades, most likely, were financed/paid for as a transaction seperate and apart from the original purchase. Accordingly, my source would not necessarily have access to these specifics.

  119. Posted by sf anon

    Cooper, don’t take Recent ORH buyer seriously. Few people here do because of his constant name calling and personal attacks. That’s what he resorts to due to his lack of ammo.
    He’s quite insecure you know.
    Regarding this whole resale. I gotta say, I feel sorry for the buyer(s) if they read this blog (unless the buyer is the developer). I bet they feel pretty foolish making this speculative investment now.
    Also has anyone noticed The Met and Bridgeview has been losing value substantially over the last 12 months? As ORH’s closest neighbors, that’s got to be a major concern.

  120. Posted by anon

    I’d surely be a little worried if I bought in this building…
    A few questions:
    What happened to the common area that was supposed to be finished this summer?
    What happened to the second tower?
    Why have they been unable to complete the driveway?

  121. Posted by SpecuHater

    Yeah, I call BS! Do you realize 2602 was just on market at $1.299 and could not be sold. Are you telling me that this buyer somehow overlooked 2602 and was willing to pay more for a lower-floor 02 unit? Not likely. This is clearly theatrics. It’s the same sort of theatrics going on with the sale office marking up units that they reclaim. They are setting them so artificially high that people will be more inclined to take over these contract reassignments, since in comparison they seem like bargains. The last thing ORH wants on their hands is a bunch of vacant units, which hurts demand for their sales of the second tower (and any remaining units in the first tower).

  122. Posted by SpecuHater

    I love how the agents are giving Socket Site a hard time for posting numbers of the 1802 and 2202 units. They’ve never stated it as fact and they have revealed how they got it (from a pricing grid going into the first day of sales). Even if it’s not entirely accurate, it’s a good price point that gives us something to judge this sale on. I have a much easier time believing SS than any agent that clearly has something to gain by distorting the facts.

  123. Posted by tony

    shenanigans! sounds like we’re in need of a little investigative journalism around here. does SS have the resources or should we call in a little help?

  124. Posted by dg

    We just need to give this a little time, folks. The real numbers will start recording over coming months and we can see who really made out or got killed on these. I think ORH Buyer – as much as he can be an overly dedicated cheerleader – still got a great deal on his. Time will tell if we say the same thing about these guys paying over $1000/sq ft now.
    This thread is a nice anecdotal topic, but pretty much means nothing.
    And @ Sf anon @ 10:08am-
    Yes of course the neighboring “older” luxury high-rises now take a back seat to ORH and Infinity as the new kids on the block – bigger and better – and they will see declines relative to similar units in the newer, better buildings. The Met is no longer “the place to be” on Rincon Hill, and the Bridgeview was never that great to begin with.

  125. Posted by anon

    45 Lansing will be the real test of values at 1RH.

  126. Posted by sf anon

    Yep I remember 2602, I believe Marcus from S Beach R.E. was the agent and showed it to me. After a couple weeks on the market it was lowered to 1.299M, but I don’t think it ever sold.
    No doubt this current sale was either manipulated or a very, very clueless buyer bought it. Opps!
    dg,
    Good point about Met and Bridgeview. I guess the same will happen to ORH1 when nicer, newer towers go up the next few years.

  127. Posted by SpecuHater

    I’m not so sure 45 Lansing, or The Turnberry, will be the real test of ORH’s value. The Turnberry, as I understand, will have a very different audience. It’s more upscale and will feature more 3 and even 4-bedroom units (if I’m not mistaken).

  128. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    “The most comprehensive upgrade package that I’m aware of at ORH was $55K…”
    I’m not sure that we know that the upgrades were provided by the 1RH sales office. They could have been provided by a private contractor and if so the sky’s the limit on the upgrade value.
    Perhaps the “upgrade” involved bolting a $300K gold brick to the wall ? :-)

  129. Posted by fluj

    RORH Buyer,
    Stop while you’re ahead, man. These people are now trying to dissect possible remodeling costs and mentioning places such as The Bridgeview, etc. This is nothing short of an unqualified success.
    – Der Fluj

  130. Posted by dg

    Fluj, he was never ahead…. well, ok… maybe when he consumated the assignment of the unit he bought, but that’s it!

  131. Posted by view lover

    Isn’t that what counts as being ahead? Purchasing real estate at a good deal is being ahead. All else is just rhetoric between bears and bulls, and ends up being BS.

  132. Posted by toni

    2602 is back on the market with a $1.35M price tag even though it didn’t sell when it was on the market for $1.299M.
    http://sfarmls.rapmls.com/scripts/mgrqispi.dll?APPNAME=Sanfrancisco&PRGNAME=MLSPropertyDetail&ARGUMENTS=-N757633007,-N224129,-N,-A,-N14326510

  133. Posted by John

    Curiously, I could not find this unit actually closed in the recorder’s office. Maybe I just missed the date, the year? Maybe, as others have noted, it’s not a real sale?

  134. Posted by Original Cooper

    Just an FYI. The person posting as “cooper” is not me…altho I agree with what he said.

  135. Posted by cooper

    LOL–I confused this with an old post that was me. No wonder I was like–that cooper guy is really smart.
    I also note that Recnt ORH buyer called me a Buffoon and as usual socket site’s one sided editing policy showed it’s bias. i.e. as flakey and specious as this comp.

  136. Posted by San FronziScheme

    Yeah, there were a lot of words thrown around. We can thank the happy 1.3M #2002 buyer for making these exchanges a bit livelier. Money well spent!

Add a Comment

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