1160 Mission Penthouse View
While the Craigslist post identifies this Soma Grand (1160 Mission) unit as #501, as a plugged-in reader notes, we’re pretty sure the penthouse level isn’t on the fifth floor. And the pictured “top floor” unit number actually starts with a 22.
If you like cityscapes and San Francisco’s Federal Building (which we do), however, the pictured unit is situated atop one of our favorite stacks in the building. But as far as we know it’s not currently for sale.
And don’t forget, only the top two floors at Soma Grand offer air conditioning (and gas).
UPDATE (2/6): The Craislist post for 1160 Mission St #501 has been updated to reflect the interior and views of #501 (versus that pictured above). The reference to it being a “top floor” unit has also been removed.
$800000 / 2br – OPEN SUN 2/7/10…SOMA Grand: 1160 Mission St #501 [Craigslist]
Soma Grand (1160 Mission) Resale Comp And Stack Reduction [SocketSite]
Soma Grand (1160 Mission): Status And Sales Update [SocketSite]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by bgelldawg

    No mention of the HOA dues in the craigslist ad.
    They must be afraid they will scare people off.
    This building always struck me as way too heavy on the amenities. Just about everyone who lives there is paying for spaces and services that they don’t use.
    Are the windows of this unit tinted blue?

  2. Posted by jeff2

    So if only the top two floors have gas stoves and air conditioning, I wonder if all the less fortunate who live below feel happy that part of their HOA dues goes towards supporting services only those at the top have. I am not talking about utility costs, but rather, the fact that the chiller plant will be maintained at the expense of all of the homeowners, even though they get none of the benefits except for in the lobby, and I would almost bet that the gas is not sent to individual meters for the top floor units.

  3. Posted by tipster

    I’m sure the extra amenities are reflected in higher hoa, jeff2. See the comment above yours.

  4. Posted by joh

    Are the windows of this unit tinted blue?
    The interior lights are a very warm yellow-orange. When correcting for that, the blue light of twilight outside is accentuated. The photographer could have chosen to warm up the photo to make the outside look more neutral, but the interior might look too yellow.
    There are ways to correct for both, but only lazy or incompetent photographers (or agent’s who think they’re photographers) won’t (or can’t) bother.
    The retouching job on these photos is horrible. Especially the bedroom shots, where the photographer tried to balance the bright outdoors with the darker interior. It looks like he/she tried to paint a fat transparent blue stripe across the window to make the sky look blue, but notice how the stripe doesn’t extend the width of the window. It also makes part of the bed blue. Horrible.

  5. Posted by RSVP

    Not only is #501 not on a penthouse, it is on the west side of the building in the middle of the 5th floor. It’s not a corner unit so doesn’t have this kind of view. It looks out directly into the side of the Trinity. Even if it were on the “cool east side of the fifth floor, it would look directly into the side of the lower offices of the Federal Building with no real view unless you consider being up close and personal with the Federal Building a view.
    It’s obvious that this photo was taken from the north east corner near the top of the building.
    But the most important difference – #501 is a different floor plan from the one in the photos. It also has a huge walk out patio big enough of patio furniture and landscaping. It is the length of the entire unit, not a cigarette deck like the one shown in the photos.

  6. Posted by RSVP

    I misspoke in the above post. It IS the same floor plan as the one shown but it does have differences. #501 is not a corner unit so it doesn’t have as many windows in the living room as the condo pictured and it has a huge patio.

  7. Posted by RSVP

    Here are the real photos of #501 or at least one of the west side 5th floor condos with the huge patio.
    Only the 5th floor offers this size patios.
    This condo does have a similar amount of windows as the penthouse version after all.
    You can see the views of the patio and the Trinity:
    http://www.climbsf.com/listings/san-francisco/1160-mission-street.html

  8. Posted by Mark Choey

    Sorry about the confusion, new Internet marketing guy posted the incorrect pictures initially!
    Feel free to flame me here
    Mark

  9. Posted by RSVP

    Mark –
    That may be true but about a year ago RBG used the photos of her #501 to market another property. How do I know this? I called her about the condo based on the photos because I had a client that wanted one of the 5th floor condos with the big patio her dog. She told me that she was using those photos as a ploy to get the phone to ring or get email responses and hoping that no one saw the patio because the condo she was selling was on another floor and didn’t have that kind of patio. Bad all the way around.

  10. Posted by spencer

    Mark, now that we know these were the wrong photos, are you going to let us know this is the wrong price to? i’m thinking the internet marketing guy might have accidentally made this 799K when it should have been 599K

  11. Posted by anon

    who is RBG? and why is he/she “bad all the way around”
    bad in meaning, bad as in good?

  12. Posted by RSVP

    False advertising. Enough said.

  13. Posted by tipster

    Ah, the old “new internet marketing guy” excuse!
    If I were a realtor, when my listing went live, I’d never look at it. Nosiree. I’d be just disinterested as all get out, leaving it to the “internet marketing guy” to look at. Yup. This is all so believable!
    This speaks volumes about the honesty of Realtors. Can you really trust anything a realtor ever tells you?
    Should you even bother showing up to open houses for listings made by a realty company who repeatedly posts photos of a much more expensive unit?
    Interesting questions to ponder while you ponder whether you, as a realtor, would review the ad posted for your listing, or whether you would leave it up to some random “new internet marketing guy”. Then you can decide for yourself whether this was deliberate, and just what kind of company this really is.

  14. Posted by Sambo

    LOL… it was a good post tipster. Well written, it actually had me laughing.
    Your criticism here is not unwarranted, but I do wish you wouldn’t lump all Realtors together though.

  15. Posted by polip

    wow
    ‘new internet marketing guy’
    excellent service, all for a small fee of $20-40,000
    I doubt this was intentional, but that actually makes it even worse.
    If this was my property, the commission for my realtor would have just dropped to 2%, or they would be gone.

  16. Posted by bgelldawg

    Mark –
    Did you “new internet marketing guy” also forget to include the HOA fee in the listing?
    Have you corrected that and explained what is and is not covered by that fee?

  17. Posted by Eddy

    Several comments: 1) none of the units have air conditioning – NONE – so the person who was going on and on about the “less fortunate” on lower floors was going on and on about something he/she knows nothing about; typical on this site. 2) not ALL realtors use false advertising, but the few mentioned here… we’ll let this thread speak for itself. 3) actually the amenities and services at Soma Grand are quite modest, affordable and well-liked, well-used by the residents. Recently the owners were polled as to whether they wanted to keep the Joie de Vivre housekeeping services in the HOA fee. At $70 per month for twice a month full maid service, the owners overwhelmingly voted to keep it. There’s no costly indoor swimming pool, no rediculous wind-swept rooftop terrace, no needless “business center”. Soma Grand’s amentities are just what you need: a perfectly sized club room, a comfortable outdoor terrace, a well equippoed gym, maid service, hotel trained concierge team whow really know there stuff (and of course all the regular stuff in a condo fee like hazard insurance, building maintenance, water, hot water, sewer, garbage, 24 hour security, professional management, reserves for future repair and replacement, etc etc. All for 500-600 month – pretty affordable.

  18. Posted by superbad

    Mark,
    Who’s the listing agent on this? Kevin Gueco? Chris Lim? Mark Choey? Never heard of Combs Real Estate before. I thought you guys were with Vanguard.
    I didn’t see your name in the add and was wondering what you have to do with it. Are you the broker at Combs Real Estate?

  19. Posted by killbotkondo

    Typical ClimbSF shadiness. Check out their “listings” at The Infinity sometime. Bait and switch BS. I’m surprised that this team has never been reported to the DRE. Oh, wait…

  20. Posted by curmudgeon

    Could someone explain the link between “ClimbSF”/Combs Real Estate and Vanguard?
    If you click on Combs Real Estate on their website, it takes you straight to Vanguard. But I don’t see the relationship explained anwhere.

  21. Posted by Mole Man

    No one who is seriously considering buying a condo in this building is going to be misled by any of this. Property shopping may begin on the internet with MLS listings, but actual visits to properties are the key to good purchases. Talk things over with the agents involved and they will be happy to show you the units and discuss exactly what feature they have. Last I checked they were offering to prepay HOA fees for buyers for substantial periods of time which helps a little bit with that. If you don’t want significant HOA fees for a bunch of amenities then this building is not for you.
    Mistakes are always unfortunate and unavoidable, but not treating MLS listings as gospel is a very important part of property shopping. Calling this shady or false advertising is a way of excusing unreasonable laziness on the part of property shoppers. No one is forcing anyone to buy these condos, and no one should every buy any property without thoroughly checking all relevant information about it in person.

  22. Posted by wow

    Mistakes happen, sure. People know better than take everything at face value, agreed too. But a big part of the work of any salesman is getting someone into the door to be in the position to sell your wares. No traffic, no sales.
    Same issue with square footage. Many listings have no square footage even when the value is publicly available and cannot be questioned. Why not display it then? To get people in the door even though they wouldn’t consider it based on the numbers.

  23. Posted by andypandy

    amen, wow!
    A. missing sq ft information
    B. missing or doctored or (in this case) completely deceptive photos
    C. misleading days on market / original list price statistics
    A+B+C = d’oh! why pay these people?

  24. Posted by dch

    Really, Mole Man? It’s ok to lie or withhold info because in the end nobody will rely on the lies? That’s what you seem to be saying. While this wouldn’t rise to the level of actionable fraud, it’s still despicably lazy and/or dishonest.
    Was it ok for mcguire to Photoshop a pic last year and make a home on a steep hill look like it was on flat ground? Seems like the same thing to me as what happened here–an easily detected lie that nonetheless drives traffic and piques interest.
    I can’t see any good defense or excuse for this ad.

  25. Posted by Fish

    It wasn’t a mistake. Kevin and friends have used the same penthouse pictures for other units before.

  26. Posted by killbotkondo

    Mole Man: You don’t understand this situation at all. These are not the agents representing the developer. These Vanguard/ClimbSF/Combs individuals have been playing fast and loose with the details of their listings for years. This is not a single mistake but a pattern of intentional inaccuracy and misinformation on their part. As a Realtor myself, I find this behavior undermines all of us in the profession. Every vocation has its share of sleazy liars and trustworthy professionals. Yes, its the consumers job to do their homework to determine which is which but it doesn’t end there. The California Department of Real Estate exists in part to license, regulate, protect and discipline licensees. If the type of behavior described above disturbs someone or causes them to feel intentionally misled they should report the individual(s)to the CA DRE so they can investigate and discipline as necessary.

  27. Posted by Mole Man

    If you have reason to believe that agents are doing bait and switch then don’t work with those agents. If you really want a condo that has a messed up MLS entry because the listing agent is under the influence of Satan, then don’t let that stand in your way. There are always alternative options to consider. Getting the owner to relist with a different agent or deal directly for a fixed fee is always something to consider. The assumption here is that buyers are completely at the mercy of unscrupulous listing agents, but nothing could be farther from the truth.

  28. Posted by killbotkondo

    Responsible citizenship entails speaking up when you encounter someone not playing by the rules so you can spare the next person from the bad experience you had. That’s what the Better Business Bureau is for as well as the DRE. Lied to, scammed or otherwise screwed? Report it. Just choosing to work with other agents as Mole Man suggests, leaves the field open for continued unethical behavior. An extreme example: How would you feel if your Doctor botched your surgery and come to find out, he’s botched other peoples too. But nobody felt it was important enough to report it before you spoke up.

  29. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    “If you have reason to believe that agents are doing bait and switch then don’t work with those agents. “
    I really don’t think that it should be up to the consumer to research the background of every listing agent encountered in property searches.
    In most professions, there is a vocation specific association that monitors and polices their members.
    A malpracticing lawyer can expected to be disbarred. A scientist who publishes bogus results will be publicly shamed. Bad medical doctors will be disciplined or be removed from practice.
    You don’t have to research every doctor to ensure you’re not accepting the care of the Illinois Enema Bandit. The AMA does a pretty good job of keeping its membership in line.
    Why can’t the real estate industry do the same ? Surely the majority of agents are honest, hard working individuals who would reap the benefits of weeding out their shadier peers.
    Was there any disciplinary action brought against the McGuire realtors who photoshopped the street to make it look level ? Perhaps someone can provide an example of a shady realtor meeting with justice ?

  30. Posted by sampras

    “I really don’t think that it should be up to the consumer to research the background of every listing agent encountered in property searches.”
    Nobody suggested that, Milkshake. If I were going to list my house with an agent, it wouldn’t be too much trouble to look them up on the dre website via their license number to see if they had disciplinary action. That would just be the responsible thing to do and would take about 30 seconds.

  31. Posted by hangemhi

    what am I missing here? we are talking about a craigslist ad right? is there an MLS listing that I’m missing that contains all of the so-called lies?
    from what i can tell this is a very bad craigslist ad – “combs” is meant to be Climb, and that $800k price has to be wrong since #601, presumably directly above it, sold for $690k. so i’m inclined to believe a new hire f’ed up the craigslist ad. but it’s more entertaining to believe they purposely wrote “comb” wrong just like they purposely used the wrong photo and price since that’s surely going to win them some business
    ahh, but what’s SS without misguided slander?

  32. Posted by huh?

    “It wasn’t a mistake. Kevin and friends have used the same penthouse pictures for other units before”.
    Assuming Fish is correct and that it is a pattern of behavior to deliberate use ‘high quality’ photos of a different unit to drive traffic to one currently on offer (classic bait and switch) then the realtors fully deserve all the flaming they get.
    Mark – any defense?
    Impressive to me was Milkshake going deep with his obscure, yet equally interesting and disturbing reference to the Illinois enema bandit. I learned something new today.

  33. Posted by a to the z

    Wow! I am thoroughly confused here. RGB, Comb, Kevin, Climb, Chris Lim, Choey, #501; are these top secret slang words in the industry? What’s going on? Can anyone give me the quick wiki definition?
    I do know that Climb is a respected broker and they do get a lot of listings on the South East part of town. Are people saying they are getting these listings because of unethical “bait and switch” tactics?

  34. Posted by OneEyedMan

    Bait and Switch listing
    Disciplinary action?
    Enema Bandit

  35. thanks sampras, I didn’t even know about the DRE lookup. It took me a little while to find the site, so here it is for SocketSite readers : http://www2.dre.ca.gov/PublicASP/pplinfo.asp?start=1
    Most realtor’s lookups contain the following text :
    NO DISCIPLINARY ACTION
    including the realtors infamous here for the photoshop-leveled street at 2221 Baker ! So I’m not sure what that means.
    Interestingly I did come across the details for one agent where in place of “NO DISCIPLINARY ACTION” instead this text appeared :
    H-10580 SF
    Anyone know what that code means ?

  36. Posted by joh

    Mistakes are always unfortunate and unavoidable, but not treating MLS listings as gospel is a very important part of property shopping. Calling this shady or false advertising is a way of excusing unreasonable laziness on the part of property shoppers.
    I HATE HATE HATE misleading listings. Why would I want to take time out of my busy schedule to tour properties that say/show one thing, but in reality is something else altogether? Am I lazy for not wanting to waste my time because an agent couldn’t list a property correctly?
    No one is forcing anyone to buy these condos, and no one should every buy any property without thoroughly checking all relevant information about it in person.
    Obviously.

  37. Posted by Mike L

    If I am not mistaken – the H.O.A must be included in the listing. Must have legal on retainer. Full Disclosure?

  38. Posted by tipster

    #501, now reduced to $699K, a shade under its 2008 purchase for $738. HOA: $655.

  39. Posted by UHF

    Climb is actually Chis Lim. The DRE revoked his license. he still operates Climb as a ‘ marketing director.’all of these guys are pretty vicious. I would avoid Climb et all.

  40. Posted by anon94123

    I believe only the top two floors of SOMA Grand have air conditioning so my question for any of the owners below those floors is, what is it like in your units today with this heat? I looked up this old thread because I remember some saying you do not need a.c. in S.F., but as California seems to be getting warmer and warmer, I wonder if that old rule still applies?

Add a Comment

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