As we wrote last month:
Purchased for $2,286,500 in June of 2007, the top floor condo with two car parking at 2041 Sacramento is listed for $2,095,000 today. A sale at asking would represent an 8.4% drop in value over the past two years for this remodeled Pacific Heights condo home.
On Sunday the list price was reduced to $1,999,000. Assuming it sells for its new asking, call it a 12.6% drop in value over the past two years for this Pacific Heights condo home.
∙ Listing: 2041 Sacramento #Top (3/3) – $1,999,000 [MLS]
∙ North To South (And Apples To Apples) From Atop 2041 Sacramento [SocketSite]
$1.7M
Per redfin, this place sold for $1.7M in 2000. Some of the most prime SF neighborhoods really saw tremendous run-ups during the dot-com bubble years (’97-’01), so these areas are likely candidates to return to 2000 prices first. The continuing crunch on jumbo lending is exerting additional pressure. Prices are still going to be high, but not as ridiculously so. Even at $1.5M, for a 3 BR condo, that is quite expensive. Hopefully, these sellers can afford the $400,000 hit they’ll take even if they get asking.
will be an interesting comp. nice reno, very good locn; outdoor stair entry is a bit of a downer, some adj bldgs not a nice as better PH blocks nearby
having lived in a very similar unit, i think theres a lot of smallish rooms, photo’d well.
agree w/ $1.5 – 1.7.
This place will see the courthouse steps long before it ever sees $1.5. A 2 unit TIC on California just closed for $2.1 and 100% redone and modern.
eddy, you clearly know this area well so I’m interested in your opinion. But I’m afraid I don’t understand the point you’re making. Is it that this place will surely go for more than $1.5M or it will surely go for less than that? I assume the former, but your comment could be read either way!
My point was that these owners aren’t going to take the loss required to sell this at $1.5. I also think that $1.7 is too big a hit for these people to take. At some point, walking away makes sense. No idea what is in the first loss position so that would have an impact. Personally, I think this is a nice place but a few recent comps really hurt it IMO.
The sale of a 2 unit TIC on California for just over $2.1 with a huge yard and totally modern doesn’t help. And a few SFHs for around $2M don’t help either. There was a similar condo on the south side of California that sold recently but it was for much less, $1.6 so that helps considering this is a much better location.
In 2007 this was a comp supported purchase. In 2009, at $2M you’re really close to owning a SFH.
$1.7 is a fair price for this place in today’s market. this one has a good location, nice view, big outdoor space, top floor, parking. if you are in the market for a condo and not a sfh this is one of the better listings.
eddy, what is the address/listing for the recently sold sfh you refer to?
eddy, thanks. That all makes good sense. It looks like we may end up with another of tipster’s examples of people being “stuck” in their underwater home waiting and praying for now.
$800 per day for 2 years to live in a condo. Idiots! Rent on this place would have been less than a fifth of that. People need to stop throwing away their money on non-rent! The next buyer isn’t going to do much better.
I’m already shocked they are going to take a $400K+ hit with realtor fees. They must have a significant downpayment, or they would have walked away by now, if they had half a brain.
@fancy renter
2679 Sacramento St was withdrawn w/o sale a few years ago for $1.5 and is now on the auction block for $1.3. No garage, but a 1800 SFH in Prime PH. As EBGuy points out in the other thread, these owners are in a world of pain right now despite having a loan balance of $1.3 on a 900k purchase price.
2912 Sacramento St recently closed for $2.075. Very prime, better location than this condo. I think this place was over priced, btw.
2675 Sacramento St, neighbor to 2679 above. Sold for $1.9 a few months ago. Super prime, parking.
2826 Octavia St. Sold for $1..8
2608 Sacramento St, sold for $2.5
2604 Sacramento St, sold for $1.9. Best buy of 2009 IMO.
2586 Clay St, sold for $1.85. One house down from Alta Plaza, big yard, 2 car s/s parking.
And 1930-32 California St. 3400+ dq ft, 2 unit TIC totally redone for $2.1 and $610 per square foot.
Is $1.7 a fair price? Maybe. The only people in the market for a condo are the ones that think they are priced out of a SFH. But as the comps above show, you’re not that far off from owning a SFH at $1.7, and certainly, at $1.999 you are well within home ownership. I think the $1.7M argument here is not relevant since the owners most likely cannot and will not take that kind of hit.
Also, is this one of the better condo’s on the market at $1.7? I’ll save that post for another day. I’ve left off several Lower PH SFH / Condos that are much better buys.
There appears to be quite a few condos in distress on Franklin and also a couple further up the hill. One I’m watching is 2040 Broadway St #301 (3 bed/3.5 bath 2,052 sq ft), which was bought for $1,850,000 in 2004. The owners appear to have refied a number of times and are under some financial duress, with a requisite lawsuit from a tenant trying to get back a $7.5k security deposit.
re; 2040 Broadway, just fell out of Firm Escrow and price raised from $1.9 to $2.049????
eddy, I guess the market is heading up, up, up. Note that a NOTS was filed on Nov. 13, 2009 for 2040 Broadway #301.
In related 94115 news, PS is showing 2103 Bush and 224 Presidio head for the auction block this week.
Interesting re: 224 Presidio. Looks like it was listed for $3.5. The old 2 unit as a SFH trick didn’t work here I see.
http://www.mcguire.com/listings/39801-224-Presidio-Avenue-San-Francisco-California–Single-Family-Home-Pacific-Heights-351751
http://statement.mcguire.com/200-15716.pdf
2039 on the market at 1.595
2041 never sold?
My secretary rents a very nice 2BR apartment on this block for $975/mo — granted, she’s lived there forever and seems to have more discretionary income than anyone I know!
2041 sold for 1.950. A “mere $300K loss” including transaction costs. Down about 15%.
“2041 sold for 1.950.”
I would also wait for the public records to confirm that info. The listing agent double-ended here.
“mere $300K loss” including transaction costs
You mean excluding?
Oh yes, you are right. Total loss was at least $336,500 + $97,500 in realtor fees and $14,625 in transfer tax, for a total loss of at least $448,625.
Exactly as I predicted nearly a year ago. Next, add up their payments (6% interest) and property taxes (1.2%) and multiply by 0.9 to take into account partial deductibility: 2.286*0.072*3.25years*0.9= for another $481K.
So we have 930K over 39 months, or about $24,000 per month for something they could have rented for $6000 per month. A premium of $700K over renting.
Another buyer with $700,000 less to use for a downpayment for their next home. And so on down the line…