632 El Camino Del Mar: Kitchen
Inside Villa Vecchia (632 El Camino Del Mar) after its renovation, a few new baths, and return to the market asking an even $10,000,000. And inside Villa Vecchia before when asking (and sold) for $7,950,000 in March of 2007.
∙ Listing: 632 El Camino Del Mar (5/7.5) 7,089 sqft – $10,000,000 [Byzantium] [MLS]
Inside Villa Vecchia [SocketSite 9/06]

20 thoughts on “After And Before And Asking 25% More: 632 El Camino Del Mar Redux”
  1. Can’t you buy this same thing in Belvedere for much cheaper?
    anyway, to quote Snark17, “a great place to watch your vast chinese shipping empire pass by”

  2. My brain is very upset by these pics- aren’t most of them CAD generated– esp. any of the ones in the living room? Or have I had too much coffee today… or not enough?
    [Editor’s Note: We can’t answer your question with regard to the coffee, but we’re pretty sure the photos aren’t “faked.”]

  3. Let’s see….I can buy a (to me) beautiful 5+ bedroom house with amazing views of the Golden Bridge for $10,000,000. Or I can buy an (to me) unattractive 2 bedroom house with amazing views of the Golden Gate Bridge for $11,000,000. Hmmm…let me think that over.

  4. Okay Ed- I’ll take your word for it, but there are some shadows, dimensions, depths, lighting that just don’t makes sense- even with additional coffee!
    Walkability to coffee stinks for SeaCliff so I am going to have to pass on this house.

  5. I agree with Katherine – some of those phots feel way fake. Of course, they aren’t as laughable as the pics from that 50-50-raffle-esque house that was posted here a while back (off topic – what happened with that?), but they are still pretty odd.

  6. jlasf – or you can have charming (to me, even if it needs some help with a paintbrush) six bedroom house with a a slightly less amazing bridge view for 5.6M, with a much better “walk score” plus a few more sunny days in the summer time.
    http://sfarmls.rapmls.com/scripts/mgrqispi.dll?APPNAME=Sanfrancisco&PRGNAME=MLSPropertyDetail&ARGUMENTS=-N688414632,-N233100,-N,-A,-N17881277
    I dunno, I just always feel like Sea Cliff is “way the hell out there.” Some days all that peace and quiet sounds like just what I’d like, other days I don’t understand paying premium “real SF” prices for suburban inconveniences.

  7. Speaking of shopped or not, 80 -21st Avenue (my current covet item) has a few awfully strange pictures.
    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/80-21st-Ave-94121/home/1012178
    PS – going even further off (or is it on) topic, here’s a potential appley apple:
    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/778-10th-Ave-94118/home/621650
    778 10th is on a block of the inner Richmond that has long been considered “nice” because there are lots of trees and it is close to the 10th Avenue playground. Sold in June 2008 for $1,950,000, now listed at $1,749,000. Hrm.

  8. 7.0 MIL?? to sell now?
    Its a nice renovation ( i didnt know the images were faked) and great views. at least you can make an argument about quality, unlike a silly listing down the block.
    however its a small floor plate and very vertical / too many stairs for this kind of price. and the sf areas looks overstated.

  9. kthnxybe, I agree. I’m not a big Sea Cliff fan: too far and too foggy.
    Just making the comparison with a neighboring house

  10. I’m the photographer who shot this place and the photos are not “faked”. It’s called lighting. You don’t see it so much with real estate photos as it takes time. It adds drama and preserves views (no blown out windows).
    BTW, I also shot 80 21st. Not sure I agree with kthnxybe’s “awfully strange” comment! My clients like my work anyway…
    [Editor’s Note: And so do we. Cheers.]

  11. The list price for 632 El Camino Del Mar has just been reduced by $1,000,000 (10%), now asking $9,000,000. Once again, purchased pre-renovation for $7,950,000 in March of 2007.

  12. Wow, another price reduction greater than the median SFH home value. Buy it now and have enough left over for that SOMA crash pad too. And a fleet of Segways.
    Even more amazing is a discussion on RE photo trickstery that I completely missed. Must have occurred during one of my 3 day tequila blackouts or something.
    Bob – nice photos there and it looks like you lugged a pair of strobes all over the place to balance the exposure through the windows. I can tell that your client gave orders to play up that view and you’ve relayed that well. Are you ever tempted to “cheat” and use HDR instead of setting up strobes ? This armchair RE photo critic would never cry “foul” on that postprocessing technique. I think it is fair.

  13. 778 10th mentioned above closed (see kthnxybe at April 8, 2009 3:51 PM). It looks like an apple (but was remodeled prior to most recent purchase):
    May 15, 2009 Sold $1,625,000
    Jun 06, 2008 Sold $1,950,000
    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/778-10th-Ave-94118/home/621650
    So, down just about 17% in almost 1 year and sold for about 7% under list. Assuming normal transaction costs, the sellers toasted approximately $440,000 in capital loss. Add in taxes and mortgage costs, and they probably spent about $50K/mo to live there. I hope they enjoyed it.
    I still can’t get over people paying those stupid prices as late as June 2008. Three months after Bear Stearns blew up! (And 6 months after I started posting on SS not to buy, lol.)

  14. Someone should start a running thermometer totaling the lost value on transacted properties. It’s getting to be crazy.

  15. running thermometer totaling the lost value on transacted properties
    Here’s another one from my neighborhood (when I moved here in summer 2008, they were trying to sell, starting at $3.5Mish in May 2008, redfin sales history follows):
    May 06, 2009 Sold $2,475,000
    Apr 30, 2009 Delisted *
    Mar 31, 2009 Relisted *
    Mar 31, 2009 Delisted *
    Feb 10, 2009 Price Changed *
    Nov 19, 2008 Price Changed *
    May 28, 2008 Price Changed *
    May 27, 2008 Listed *
    May 17, 2007 Sold $2,900,000
    http://www.redfin.com/CA/Belvedere-Tiburon/669-Hawthorne-Dr-94920/home/1291487
    $2.475M – 6% (sales commission, transfer tax, selling cost) – $2.90M purchase price = $575K capital loss launched into heaven.
    I actually think they got off pretty easy, and I am surprised they found someone to unload this on at that (still) crazy price. And it only took a year of open houses and looky-loos, or 50% of the entire time they “owned” the house.
    I always get a laugh how people initially try to get a sucker to take a terribly timed purchase off their hands at a profit. In the end, 669 Hawthorne followed the market straight down, and had to cut almost a million off their wish price. Typical behavior in markets where many of the participants and advisors are financially unsophisticated.

  16. 7+ months on market and $1M off original asking, but it could even be reported as 0 DOM and sold at asking in official statistics (since it got de-listed one month before purchase). How did this place compare to other high end properties featured on SocketSite?

Leave a Reply

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