December 19, 2008
The Newest Chelsea Park Comp: 3620 19th Street #28 Closes Escrow
The sale of Chelsea Park (3620 19th Street) #28 closed escrow on 12/12/08 with a reported contract price of $619,000 (including five years of leased parking). Listed for $749,000 (or 17% more) two months ago, we have reason to believe this two-bedroom was asking even more before (one-bedrooms were originally offered from $679,000).
∙ Changing Chelsea Park Expectations Versus Eleven Months Ago [SocketSite]
∙ The Latest Listing Verbiage From Chelsea Park: "Prices Slashed" [SocketSite]
First Published: December 19, 2008 11:15 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Dang, where are a certain realtors pouncing buyers when you need them to bid up prices? ;-) I know, it's still not the "real SF" (which seems to keep getting smaller and smaller). Though virtually everyone had nothing but nice things to say about the neighborhood on the original thread.
Posted by: anonm at December 19, 2008 11:40 AM
Aw man. Since I'm all over that thread, I think you're referring to me. Chelsea Park isn't the "the Real SF" ? The former church for sale at ~$10M a half a block away would seem to contradict that statement. (Not that I don't favor a further dilution of the zinger power behind "the real SF."
Well guess what? One of my clients pounced! I got somebody into something that even the beariest would approve. And more pouncing is gonna occur if prices continue to be negotiable/fall. Thanks for thinking about others in this holiday season, anonm.
Posted by: fluj at December 19, 2008 11:57 AM
I didn't place a buyer in Chelsea Park. In the original thread I said that the neighborhood is not the same as 20th and Florida.
No, what happened was, anonm @ 11:40, made a "pouncing buyers" paraphrase hyperlink, and linked to a thread that I'm all over. Apparently my comments about the market in general there were taken out of context and, by association of a paraphrase, applied to Chelsea Park.
I didn't realize that we were only allowed to talk about Chelsea Park. Forgive me. You can understand, surely, since I didn't talk about Chelsea Park in the first place?
I mentioned that I recently had a buyer recently, er, "pounce" on a price reduction. But your incorrect, snarky negative summation of my reaction to someone else's out of context dismissal was duly noted.
Posted by: fluj at December 19, 2008 12:26 PM
Good for you fluj, and it sounds like your buyer got a great deal. As sellers begin to capitulate, the market will start to thaw, and the sideliners will come off the sidelines.
As much as we like to harass you, no one wants to see you or anyone else starve. I'd actually like to see volumes in SF head straight up like Co Co County, which, of course, would mean that prices were heading straight down. But it seems as though that might be starting?
Your point on other threads about people who sell in only a few years should expect to lose money is well taken, but what if it's the other way around? What if there are buyers who were expecting to stay for many years, using the home like an ATM to make the payments, who are now being forced to sell *because* they are losing money and can't refinance like they thought.
Let's hope everyone has a prosperous new year. Realtors, and their pouncing buyers, included. Recessions suck.
Posted by: tipster at December 19, 2008 12:37 PM
fluj - I agree that Mission Dolores should reasonably qualify as "real SF." And, though it wasn't clear in my post, my interpretation of the original thread that I linked to was that you were one of the many people who agreed that it was a very nice neighborhood.
Posted by: anonm at December 19, 2008 12:46 PM
"What if there are buyers who were expecting to stay for many years, using the home like an ATM to make the payments, who are now being forced to sell *because* they are losing money and can't refinance like they thought."
Right. That happens too. Whether or not this will become very commonplace in San Francisco is not known. But here's a question for the assumption of that eventuality. How do you explain the lagtime behind much of the rest of California? The same loan products were available to buyers up and down the state.
Posted by: fluj at December 19, 2008 12:55 PM
Can i be the 1st to say that I do not think the purchase of a cheaply built 2 bdr new condo in the Mission for $620K is a "good deal"
I think this person will be a bagholder unless he/she satys in said unit for 8+ yrs. This kind of unit would easily rent for sub $2600/mo
Posted by: spencer at December 19, 2008 3:08 PM
There must be near-exact copies of this unit elsewhere in the building. Any one figured out how much they sold for during the initial bout of Chelsea Park enthusiasm?
(By the way, this is my favorite neighborhood in SF--and, in my view, one of the very worst new developments in te city.)
Posted by: cse at December 19, 2008 3:37 PM
From a more pedestrian perspective:
- the pricing of these units has not rhyme or reason-similar units are priced differently for no apparent reason, different units are priced similarly, and if you ask the listing agent, his answer is ambiguous at best "...I think".
- The quality of these units is very poor. Kitchen and Bathrooms are as high-quality as a new development from 15 years ago, somewhere is suburbia land.
Posted by: Compra at December 19, 2008 5:42 PM
Here's a duplex (3567 17th, 3100 sq.ft.) with TIC potential in the neighborhood (and more personality?) An investor bailed (backstory?) and the bank became the bagholder. Well, the first might be made whole ($1million), but the second ($300k) is going to have to suck it up -- don't worry, it's Chase, they'll manage. Sold in Aug. 2004 for $1.45million; foreclosed on August 11 for $913,750.
Posted by: EBGuy at September 1, 2009 7:45 PM
Thanks for your research on foreclosures, EBGuy. I'm not reading about them anywhere else, and I appreciate you doing the legwork... er... keyboard work.
Posted by: RenterAgain at September 1, 2009 9:55 PM
Homes that hit the auction block are posted a week or two later in the Real Estate section of SFGate. I try to "report" on the more interesting ones ($1million dollar, Real SF) and place them in a specific neighborhood context to get a sense of how the run up happened and what the "unwinding" will look like. My memories of the last downturn are vague, and consist of (south bay) water cooler talk about how folks were 'stuck' in their homes. Hopefully we can do better this time around...
Posted by: EBGuy at September 2, 2009 10:25 AM
Thanks for the link, EBGuy. I looked at 94105 (My zip) out of morbid curiosity. Looks like the wheels are falling off at Watermark (501 Beale).
Posted by: OneEyedMan at September 2, 2009 10:37 AM