September 23, 2009
Have We Seen This Marquee Lofts (#708) Movie Before?
As we wrote in July:
As a plugged-in reader notes, a fully remodeled and renovated Marquee Lofts (151 Alice B. Toklas Place) #708 has returned to the market asking $739,000 following its kitchen-less foreclosure sale for $580,000 in June of 2008.
Once again, Marquee Lofts #708 first changed hands on 9/30/04 for $607,500; sold on 10/05/06 for $865,000; and was bought back by Merrill Lynch Mortgage Lending for $708,933 on 1/9/08.
After 103 days on the market the list price for 151 Alice B. Toklas Place #708 has been reduced $40,000 (5%) to $699,000 and the listing now notes: "MOTIVATED SELLER!! Price reduction, make an offer!"
No word on how much was invested in the new kitchen, bathroom or rest of the renovation, but we'll be keeping an eye on Craigslist.
∙ Listing: 151 Alice B. Toklas Place #708 (1/1) - $739,000 [MLS] [YouTube]
∙ A Remodeled Marquee Lofts #708 Returns…With A Kitchen! [SocketSite]
∙ Change Of Heart, Cash Crunch, Or A Condo Sitter Gone Crazy? [SocketSite]
∙ From Foreshadowing To Foreclosure For A Marquee Loft Off Van Ness [SocketSite]
∙ Another Non-Comp Comp Along The Booming Van Ness Corridor [SocketSite]
First Published: September 23, 2009 6:00 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
I presume it's a lot harder to fake a video than it is to stretch photos all out of proportion to make rooms larger and stairways not as steep, so kudos to the Realtor for showing it like it really is.
Posted by: tipster at September 23, 2009 7:24 AM
HOA Dues $766.95. Too darn high for me...but I'm a poor dude.
Posted by: HOA killer at September 23, 2009 8:02 AM
WTF is up with those HOA dues? Does every unit come with a personal ball washer or something?
Posted by: Buy High, Sell Low at September 23, 2009 8:18 AM
I really like these lofts except for two things - the high hoa dues and the roof top deck that feels much more like a prison yard.
I don't know if the dues are high just because it's a small building or because they might have earthquake insurance or both.
If I lived there I would never have a desire to go to the roof deck unless it was renovated to include a view and had some amenities. I don't remember seeing any furniture up there. I can't believe something hasn't been done so residents would want to use it. It's a shame.
But the high ceilings and open space and big windows are wonderful.
Posted by: RSVP at September 23, 2009 9:02 AM
I love that they have a video of the unit. it lets us know in advance if we're even interested before going to see the place.
the renovation looks nice, it seems less cave like than the pictures used to a while back.
I'm not sure how they did it, but they really seemed to make 1200+ sq ft seem small. Partially due to that overly large entryway/hallway that really is unusable space. (the realtor mentioned putting a kitchen table or a piano there, but that just doesn't seem practical).
or maybe the square footage is incorrect on the MLS?
Posted by: ex SF-er at September 23, 2009 9:17 AM
The video was well done IMO. It has a bit of flair but is also functional.
So do people think it's worth splurging on a video, when selling a sub $1 mil place?
Any ideas ho much a good quality video would cost? (I may consider having one done for my next sale.)
Posted by: 45yo hipster at September 23, 2009 9:59 AM
"Any ideas ho much a good quality video would cost?"
I'm not sure though the production costs have dramatically dropped over the last ten years. Previously you needed $50-100K worth of gear to produce a video. Nowadays all it takes is a $300 personal computer, a $200 camera, and some software. If you've got time on your hands you may want to take a stab at DIY.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at September 23, 2009 10:10 AM
Perhaps the motivation is being provided by one of their neighbors. Unit #605 (1204 sq.ft.) was bought for $755k in 8/2005 with a variable $605K first mortgage and a fixed $113,250 second. A trustee sale appears to be scheduled for Oct. 8. Here come the comps...
Posted by: EBGuy at September 23, 2009 10:55 AM
"No direct sunlight" strikes me as quite odd given 1) the southern exposure and big windows and 2) the actual shadows cast by the window frame onto the sill as these words are spoken.
Does "direct sunlight" mean something different in real-estate-eese than it does in plain English?
Posted by: BobN at September 23, 2009 12:22 PM
Per Redfin, 4 units on the market...all seemingly chasing the market down.
Posted by: chuckie at September 23, 2009 12:51 PM
Was that a 70s Grand Turino parked out front? Awesome.
Posted by: lolcat_94123 at September 23, 2009 1:46 PM
Just down the hall from 708 we have unit 702. Must be a corner or penthouse, b/c it's twice the size as the others. Been on the market for 6 months, starting at $1.8 million, now marked down to $1.475. Unsold. Sold in 2004 for $1.4. It's a shame to think of 5 yrs of payments on that mortgage to live in the NW corner of the Tenderloin. Ouch.
Posted by: rabbits at September 23, 2009 1:56 PM
None of the 7th floor units are penthouses.
The 8th floor is the top floor. Two of the 8th floor condos that have deeded outside deck space that is fenced off from the rest of the common area "prison yard" roof deck.
Posted by: RSVP at September 23, 2009 3:19 PM
Unit #702 is actually a combination of #701 and #702.
Posted by: RSVP at September 23, 2009 3:49 PM
One other bonus (or detractor, depending on your tastes) is that at least a few of the ladies from the O'Farrell Theater have bought units in the building. I'm sure that makes for some great late night parties. Definitely wear a rubber though dude.
Posted by: anon$random at September 23, 2009 3:51 PM
Once the new PUC building is built, a view of it will replace the view of City Hall.
Posted by: flaneur at September 23, 2009 4:57 PM
@45yo hipster:
I have a friend who was doing video for a while that suggested about $600 including 20-30 still photos, although was unimpressed with this particular video. He stopped doing it because it was a pain to market video to agents who already have relationships with photographers. He also mentioned having problems with lighting, since quality video requires a lot more light than a still camera on a tripod. You can see it in this video where it switches between video and Ken-Burns-effect still pictures.
Posted by: meep! at September 23, 2009 7:32 PM
Hi all.. Monica Burns here, agent with Climb Group/Vanguard Properties, representing this one of a kind listing. Just thought I'd respond to a few comments. The HOA dues include earthquake insurance, which is quite rare with condo's in general. Also, the current reserves are plentiful, so there has been discussion among the HOA board of the dues possibly being lowered. Open House this Sunday from 2-4pm. Come on by and visit then, or by appt. Easy to show. Cheers!
Posted by: Monica at September 23, 2009 7:58 PM
^ possibly lowered to what, $700? $650 Maybe? Good luck with the listing, Monica.
Posted by: DD at September 23, 2009 8:20 PM
HOLY COW!!! If I owned in this complex and were paying $766.95 in HOA for zero, zilch, nada, nuttin' amenities, I'd be motivated to sell too!
The listing should read:
Known Short Sale: Not yet
REO: Not yet, but soon
Posted by: OMG at September 23, 2009 8:33 PM
"No direct sunlight" ??
You can see city hall from those windows which means they face due south. I wonder how warm that unit gets.
Posted by: diemos at September 23, 2009 8:41 PM
By my reckoning every 100/month in extra HOA is about 50k buying power lost. (4% interest and 25% taxrate) It makes a real difference to the buying equation when you do a budget.
Seems like this sold for 600k in 2004. Was it renovated since then?
Posted by: mac at September 24, 2009 8:51 AM
Nice cinematography, bad script. Trite Alice in Wonderland reference. When the unit door opens the first thing you see is a load bearing column. I was completely turned off to this unit right away.
Posted by: Lori at September 24, 2009 12:35 PM
With $700k & $766/mo HOA I get a $4400 monthly nut, $3600 not counting principal paydown.
Dropping the HOA $500 results in a similar $3600 carrying cost @ a $850K principal, so $100 of HOA is worth about $30K of carrying cost by my spreadsheet.
Posted by: Troy at September 24, 2009 4:25 PM
Troy
Ur correct. My math was wrong. However w the tax break at 25% it should get you to 40k, right?
Posted by: mac at September 24, 2009 5:30 PM
Unit #605 (1204 sq.ft.) was bought for $755k in 8/2005 with a variable $605K first mortgage and a fixed $113,250 second. A trustee sale appears to be scheduled for Oct. 8.
The trustee sale happened as scheduled. SFGate shows that #605 was taken back for $579,000. Here comes some more pent up supply.
Posted by: EBGuy at November 3, 2009 11:06 AM
Post a comment
Continue Perusing SocketSite:
« The Numbers Behind Perkins' Millennium Penthouse Purchase | HOME | The Begining Or End Of This (Or The) San Francisco Short Sale Story? »



