February 3, 2009

Infinity Tower Two: "Starting From The Mid $500,000s" This Weekend

A whole host of plugged-in tipsters note that Infinity’s second tower officially opens to the public this weekend. 42 stories, 285 new condominiums, and as every tipster so far has pointed out: "starting from the mid $500,000s." Additional details soon.

Infinity Tower Two Sales Announcement (And A Buyer’s Translation) [SocketSite]

First Published: February 3, 2009 1:30 PM

Comments from "Plugged In" Readers

Using say 550k if T2 offers the same floor plans as Ts I do not think there are any studios in the building. Infinity site shows studios only in the tree tops at 500-580sf so that would be around $1k psf.. If that price range is for 1 bedrooms which the site notes a min. sf of 700 for T1 would be around $785psf min. in T2 and up.
Anyone know how this stacks with T1 pricing, I only tracked 2 and 3 bedrooms in past.

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 1:49 PM

Wonder how Tower One owners are going to feel about Tower Two starting in the mid-500s. If I remember correctly, Tower One boasted "Starting in the mid-800,000s" [for two-bedrooms], and that wasn't even the tower. That was pricing for the midrises.

Posted by: PotentialInfinityBuyer at February 3, 2009 1:52 PM

Don't get too excited. Starting in the 500's mean studios and a handful of 1 bedroom on the low floor facing the courtyard with no views.

Midrise units are still asking for $700k on a low floor facing Folsom.

Good prices @ Infinity but nothing too much lower than what was offered in Tower 1.

Posted by: anon at February 3, 2009 1:56 PM

Infinity Tower One Pricing:

Studios: from 500s
One BR: from 600s
Two BR: from 800s
Three BR: from 1.8
Luxury homes & Penthouses: 2M+

Posted by: PotentialInfinityBuyer at February 3, 2009 1:59 PM

gwtf, did you go to the sales event on the 29th for the current infinity owners?

Posted by: viewlover at February 3, 2009 2:35 PM

At current sales rates, seasonally adjusted, 285 new condos represents an additional 18 months worth of D9 condo inventory being dumped onto the market. No worries, I'm sure they'll be able to sell off all these units at near Tower One prices. ;-)

Posted by: anonm at February 3, 2009 2:43 PM

As far as we know there are no studios in Tower Two (i.e., that's one-bedrooms starting in the mid $500,000s).

Posted by: SocketSite at February 3, 2009 2:45 PM

No but I wish I would have. If anyone went, what happened?

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 3:04 PM

So I back into asking prices around $750 per square foot. Pretty similar to what I saw in tower 1 a few months ago. And too high given the current clearing level in Soma is around $650 - $700 per square foot.

Posted by: Dude at February 3, 2009 3:10 PM

although I think that the developer has bungled this seriously... it does make sense to open up sales now if their intent is to sell.

the infamous Super Bowl was 2 days ago, so the post-SB rush is on.

that said, one of the headwinds for Tower 2 is that Tower 1 isn't sold out.

i think that Tower 2 impeded Tower 1's sales as many prospective buyers waited for Tower 2. But now the sparkle of Tower 2 is somewhat dulled by the fact that there are a fair number of unpurchased units in Tower 1.

I'd be interested to see what happens with Tower 2. My guesstimate is that a few choice units will sell very quickly. other nice units will sell, but more slowly. And the non-prime units will just sit there, just as in Tower 1.

but once they close on those prime units then they can firesale the rest of the unsold inventory depending on what their margins are.

regardless of how it sells, Infinity is a welcome addition to the SF housing stock IMO.

Posted by: ex SF-er at February 3, 2009 3:16 PM

Dude that is what I got too give or take. When you say $650-700 per is the typ in Soma - your talking a used unit right?

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 3:17 PM

GWTF - If you check the floorplans for just T1, between 500-999 sf, the only 1 bedroom that comes up for floors 4-18 is 804 sf. Assuming T2 has the same configuration, which I thought was the case, that would put the starting price for a no view unit at $684 psf, assuming a $550k price. However, I'm sure 'plugged in' readers will say that's too high, and $350k is what they are worth :-)

Posted by: huh? at February 3, 2009 3:17 PM

Huh? Your being more gratious than I was. $684 is more than fair in my opinion especially for a new unit, prime location, and more security than most other buildings in being able to bank on the "up and coming area" factor (if one plans to be in the hood for some time).

Having lived here for some months I don't look back and regret anything about buying here.

Does anyone know the count remaining on T1 available units (including both mid rise)?

Interesting thing that could jack the mix up are resales. From what I know a lot of units are coming up on the date they are allowed to sell. I think the developer still has right of 1st refusal for another year (could be wrong?). Assuming Tishman has enough to worry about, and they don't take up the resales will the resale price points cause issues with T2 sales? The current resale price point for the 9th floor unit is pretty low. This could all play down to how many current owners are willing to sit tight and ride the market out for some time.

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 3:30 PM

Sorry editor.

I meant there are some studios for mid $500k up to $650k. They are in the midrise and NOT in Tower 2.

I think these and the low floor 1 bedrooms in Tower 2 are the cheapest in the entire complex.

Posted by: anon at February 3, 2009 3:41 PM

I took the tour last Thurs. A 2bd D unit on the 27th floor with a killer view is going for 1.7~1.8, I believe.

Posted by: itchy at February 3, 2009 3:42 PM

Itchy do recall the square footage?

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 3:59 PM

Itchy I think I found the info in my past notes. I show a D unit is facing east towards the water and bay bridge on the corner with about 1317 sf does this sound right? If so the quote I found 03.29.07 (from outside sources) same unit T1 was close to but lower than the 1.7 mark most likely because you also saw T2 in the horizon. This would put these units around $1275 and $1375 psf. I know I will get killed for saying it, but I think that is fair for what you get.

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 4:16 PM

Regarding resale lockup and first right of refusal, there was a glitch in the contract that wasn't caught until mid-2008. The sale lockup & builders 1st right of refusal is only 1 year COMBINED... not 1 year each. I know, because I caught the glitch.

The builder told everyone that it was 2 years (1 year for each) but admitted I was right. So everyone who signed a contract prior to mid-2008 actually only has a 1-year combined lockup & first right of refusal period... not 2 years. Although, I suspect none of them know it... until now.

Posted by: sfyoda at February 3, 2009 4:25 PM

Went to the sales office last week and got a tour. Just how do they expect to sell any of the Tower 2 units at prices higher than Tower 1 prices? The market is now 20%-30% lower, everyone acknowledges that. My guess is that their strategy is to put up these "fake prices" on Tower 2 to try to first clear out the Tower 1 unsold inventory at (what they can characterize as) bargain negotiated prices. Then, as soon as that happens, they will reduce the prices on Tower 2 to market levels.

Posted by: Robert at February 3, 2009 4:26 PM

This would put these units around $1275 and $1375 psf. I know I will get killed for saying it, but I think that is fair for what you get.

That puts you in the Millennium Tower territory; can the sales team justify that?

Posted by: unearthly at February 3, 2009 4:27 PM

"Huh? Your being more gratious than I was. $684 is more than fair in my opinion especially for a new unit"

GWTF - I agree with you ... but I'm sure there will be others clamoring for absurd additional price cuts. Starting pricing now seems fair, but it does depend how many units fall into this category. At any rate this a significant departure from what the sales office was quoting earlier this year and during most of 2007. Accordingly, those that purchased during that period may perceive these as fire sale prices, as they may be well below what they were induced to pay.

Posted by: huh? at February 3, 2009 4:35 PM

Guys, what do you expect? It's a Grand Opening, complete with fanfare, banners, politicians cutting ribbons, etc. Wonder if Gav will be there to break a bottle of PlumpJack '01 cab over the bow of this thing?

You can't beat free publicity. The sales office makes a lot of noise about the event, sends out flyers, boasts similar (or higher) pricing to tower 1, it's holding value, etc. Local blogs and papers feature it in articles, and traffic temporarily increases. I'm sure a few emotional types will fall in love with units this weekend, and contracts will be signed. You sell the sizzle, they buy the steak. Mission accomplished.

Once the trumpets go quiet and the confetti is cleaned up, they'll go back to cutting and negotiating prices to move units. Just like everyone else.

Posted by: Dude at February 3, 2009 4:42 PM

sfyoda - wow thanks for the heads up. strange, looked at my contract, initially signed in 2007 and it is 2 years, but I closed in 2008 and it was ammended to only 1 year (in the escrow docs); guess this is good to know even though I plan to stay put.

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 4:48 PM

"This would put these units around $1275 and $1375 psf. I know I will get killed for saying it, but I think that is fair for what you get."

GWIF - This is where we greatly differ. Although the starting prices may be in the ballpark [$684 psf] these higher level units continue to be absurd. The D unit with the 1/4 circle glass living room, can't comfortably fit a 48" table with 4 chairs as well as a 72" couch that positioned to watch a flat screen on the wall. This was discussed at length on the #9E thread. Do you really think a unit with this cramped configuration, at 1317 sf, is really worth $1.7m? If so, I'd be willing to sell you the bridge that you can view from this unit ... at the same price.

Posted by: huh? at February 3, 2009 4:53 PM

huh?, I don't think you know what you are talking about. They have NOT lowered prices in Tower 2, repeat, NOT lowered the prices. So no one will consider them to be "fire-sale" prices. Everyone will consider them to be unrealistic prices 20% to 30% over market. What are you basing your comments on?

Posted by: Robert at February 3, 2009 4:54 PM

Robert,

On the #9E thread, a poster named SC was debating between a unit at the Palms and one at the Infinity in 6/2007, both priced at $1000 psf. I figured that this person, as a potential buyer would have the prices correct. The unit at the Infinity was a 5th floor, no view unit. Accordingly, $684psf seems like a bit of a discount to $1000 psf

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2007/06/another_readers_dilemma_and_chance_to_play_armchair_ana.html#comments

Posted by: huh? at February 3, 2009 5:02 PM

yeah yeah yeah i recall the crazy conversation about fitting tables in - personally don't agree and don't get why so much time is spent discussing a units value relative to fitting a round table in it. People, all people buy for different reasons. Anyhow not sure I get what you are saying about selling me the bridge at 1.7m but if there was a way I would take you up on it and turn around, sell it for more and make a killing. To answer you, yes I think the unit is worth 1.7m. there is a significant difference between that unit and the units around $700 psf.

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 5:07 PM

ORH 1802 with very nice bridge/water view was last listed for $999k and found no buyer. Is this Infinity unit D really worth $700k more? I doubt it. I was gonna visit them this weekend, but with this kind of pricing, I think I'll spend my afternoon for something more productive.

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2008/12/one_rincon_hill_425_first_street_secondary_market_stumb.html

Posted by: jj at February 3, 2009 5:10 PM

I hate to say it given I have tracked many many psf costs on the Infinity since it's conception but who ever says they were quoted $1000psf for a 5th floor Infinity unit is a sucker, they mis-understood quotes, or they are pulling our legs. I am pretty confident no 5th floor no view unit at the Infinity ever went for $1000 or more psf.

huh? Have you ever been to the property?

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 5:10 PM

Here's my simple economic formula for pricing comparisons b/w the Infinity Towers...

If u in 09/10 > u in 06/07 then

p for T2 < p for T1

u = unemployment
p = prices per unit

The sales team @ Infinity can advertise whatever they want but unfortunately the can't get around fundamentals. There will of course be a few exceptions to the rule but I think this very obvious thesis will hold up pretty well over time.

[Editor's Note: How to use a 'less than' sign in a comment: HTML Character Entities.]

Posted by: Willow at February 3, 2009 5:38 PM

Just because T2 may cost less than T1 doesn't mean it was a bad decision to buy in T1.

Posted by: Foolio at February 3, 2009 5:49 PM

GOWITHTHEFLOW - read the lockup language carefully in your 2007 document. It circles around and basically results in a 1-year period for both lockup and 1st right of refusal. The definitions aren't correct. Maybe they changed things in the escrow in 2008. Interesting.

Posted by: sfyoda at February 3, 2009 7:26 PM

44yo hipster says it best in the Argenta thread:

"If they get a good deal, this wcould be a good buy/hold/resell in a few yrs when housing mkt returns. Dont forget, when the mkt returns these guys will be out the gate selling vacant units, while other developers will be fighting SF planning dept for permits on their optioned parcels."

Ditto for individuals that can get a decent to fair price on the Infinity units"...

Don't wait too long. Yes as a poster above stated months of inventory coming on the market soon but that same inventory will be the only inventory available for quite some time.

There is no way to perfectly time the market.

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 8:12 PM

"There is no way to perfectly time the market."

Fine. I'll settle for adequately timing the market. It doesn't cost $1000/sqft for the developers to build. They'll be able to undercut people who bought at the peak for quite a while.

Posted by: diemos at February 3, 2009 8:19 PM

there has been a lot of discussion on whether/how much longer to wait (for price to come down).

If I am buying to live in, I will go in at 30% off the initial price, or 10% more from today's level.

If I am buying to rent out, I will wait a lot longer, to pick up the absolute bottom price, even if that means the most unfavourabe floor plan / floor etc.

Posted by: ester at February 4, 2009 8:12 AM

"personally don't agree and don't get why so much time is spent discussing a units value relative to fitting a round table in it."

GWTF - I assume you are pulling my leg. You are kidding if you believe that the lack of living/dining/entertainment space has no bearing on whether a unit is worth $1.7m? Different people have different priorities indeed, but I do believe that having a workable layout is pretty important in determining a property's value. JJ's point about #1802 is valid - $700k is quite a spread (unsustainable in my view) for units with similar views ... plus 1802 has a decent sized living/dining space.

I have never been to the 5th floor unit that was supposedly $1000 psf in 6/2007. Again, I made an assumption that the person considering buying the unit would have an pretty clear idea of the cost. Some tart in the sales office could have quoted that absurd price to him/her ... a price that no units actually sold for. That may explain the discrepancy.

Posted by: huh? at February 4, 2009 11:27 AM

huh? All I am saying is your idea of what a workable layout is may be very different from another persons. For example I know some people in SF who have a formal dining space and actually use it as a library.

As for JJ's point about #1802, yes it is valid. Not my type of property and I would prefer to pay the higher price for the Infinity unit but yes, just like the table argument - to each is one's own.

Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 4, 2009 12:05 PM

"I would prefer to pay the higher price for the Infinity unit"

A slightly higher price may be one thing, but the $1.7m asking is 70% more than the $1m asking for 1802. To me, around $1300 psf for 27D
seems a similar scenario to $1000 psf for the 5th floor - one where prices are destined to crater, as has happened to the latter. But, as you say, to each one's own.

Posted by: huh? at February 4, 2009 12:38 PM

gotta love the resurgence of the table topic.

Just a hunch, but I'm guessing huh? is a close friend of denis, denise, and denisrodman, all echo'ing the same sentiment anytime there's an Infinity thread. As another Infinity resident and someone who's spent a good amount of their life on the other side of the real estate spectrum (smallville, KS), I have to echo GWTF's sentiment that value is relative to the buyer.

It'd be good to know where huh? is coming from: agent, prospective buyer, owner, dining room table sales rep :-)?

Posted by: sfjhawk at February 4, 2009 2:05 PM

I think huh is coming from a point of reason.

Posted by: viewlover at February 4, 2009 3:48 PM

sfjhawk,

I don't know any denis ... hopper or otherwise, no denise ... richards or otherwise (sadly) and don't know denisrodman ... gladly. However, apparently we share similar views :-)

If I was in dining room table sales, I'd probably be out of luck with my wares at the Infinity - no room for any such foolishness :-) Seriously though, it's less to do with table types and more to do with living space for someone that likes to cook and have friends over for dinner/drinks. I guess if you don't have many visitors or use your unit part time, the spacing will be fine. Definitely different priorities for different people but for me the living space is embarassingly small for the asking prices. Perhaps the Treetops units are better in this regard, as GWTF has alluded to.

Not an agent or realtor and a buyer if I find the right parameters ... but (from the department of redundancy) I am particular.

Posted by: huh? at February 4, 2009 3:59 PM

The lack of deeded parking at Rincon is a no go for lots of folks. The Infinity has a much better location. Whether thats worth 700k?

I think that 27D might go for $$$ than the same unit on the other side of the building with a view partially blocked by T1.

The Infinity corner layouts (1317') are fine for lots of people. These units are probably pretty much sold out in T1. I think the smaller 2bd (1163)' is more problematic.

Posted by: itchy at February 4, 2009 4:43 PM

people, you really think paying over $1200/sqft for a view is worth it? we're still drinking the coolaid. With some units probably selling in the 600/sqft range now, your talking roughly 2x simply for a view? were headed to fundamentals now. a place to live, a place with space will take far more priority over the intangibles like a view. A view is an amazing ammenity to have, it offers mood, peace, etc. def worth paying more for, but lets focus on where the socioeconomic status of many peple are headed. Everyone needs to get from point A to point B. Two years ago more people were doing it with a Ferarri, now, they aren't. Same applies to these overpriced ammenities. watch, the premium for a unit at the top and bottom of buildings will begin to contract.. already happening in commercial RE leases.

Posted by: anon at February 4, 2009 7:56 PM

"watch, the premium for a unit at the top and bottom of buildings will begin to contract."

Anon - Exactly right!

Posted by: huh? at February 5, 2009 8:18 AM

view is an amazing ammenity to have, it offers mood, peace, etc. def worth paying more for, but lets focus on where the socioeconomic status of many peple are headed

Not a point to really make about a luxury tower, IMO. There are plenty of other places to live in SF for cheaper. Much, much cheaper. Go get a single family home with a great view on Bridgeview street in Silver Terrace near the 3rd street line for 350 a foot or something.

Posted by: anonn at February 5, 2009 8:41 AM

"Anon - Exactly right!"

Huh?,

I should have been more clear. Both top and bottom units will and are contracting in pricing - obviously. But the DELTA/premium between top (ex penthouses/bragging units) and bottom units will also contract, implying that the premiums paid for views will fall more than those with no views.

Posted by: anon at February 5, 2009 4:14 PM

Anon,

I agree with your 4:14PM assessment. Units such as #9E at 687 psf will probably not lose much more value in percentage terms, I believe. However units like 20B, with views, that purchased at $1345 psf have only one way to go, and the percentage downturn will be dramatic. The 2x premiums at T1 between the higher and lower units definitely seem excessive and will narrow.

Posted by: huh? at February 5, 2009 5:09 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:

« The Scoop: Archstone-Smith Negotiating To Acquire Argenta (1 Polk) | HOME | New Designs For Dwellings And Retail At Market And Sanchez »