March 26, 2010
Apples To Apples For A
Hip "Cool" Noe Home: 728 Duncan
The self described "Noe Valley modern cool" home at 728 Duncan is on the market and asking $2,550,000. According to the MLS the property sold in August 2007 for its reduced asking price of $2,475,000 (tax records suggest a contract price closer to $2,448,000).
Take that Mission 'hip.'
∙ Listing: 728 Duncan (4/3.5) 3,350 sqft - $2,550,000 [MLS]
First Published: March 26, 2010 4:30 PM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
I remember that place. They made you take your shoes off at the open house. The funny thing was that the stone floor below decks was uneven (maybe they didn't use gauged?) and it totally hurt walk without shoes :-).
Posted by: Jeff at March 26, 2010 5:36 PM
This is hands down a stunning home...I am looking forward to taking the tour ... wow, the views, kitchen, media room...wow
Posted by: Lori Wechsler at March 26, 2010 10:39 PM
Stunning, absolutely killer views, super cool, great space, really love the photos and looks much better than in 2007!
Shoes on...shoes off...totally worth it!
Posted by: [Lori Wechsler] at March 26, 2010 10:44 PM
So are Lori and lstefani the owners or are they working with the realtor? Such effusive comments about this home. I guess I'm missing the wow factor here. Since I live in the Mission, maybe it's just not hip enough for me. "Super cool" maybe, but definitely not very hip.
Posted by: toadie at March 26, 2010 10:57 PM
This is my friend's house. I have been in there and it is absolutely stunning and unique. The oversized kitchen, the handsome deck outside of the kitchen and all bedrooms with a gorgeous view of the Downtown SF and that one of the kind steam bath/spa downstairs...it's perfect for relaxing and entertaining guests. I was one of the lucky ones. Love the house.
Posted by: Jason at March 26, 2010 11:31 PM
This is a fabulous space because it can be decorated in a modern, unique way, and has a stunning view of the city. It's truly a one of a kind.
Posted by: Nicole at March 27, 2010 5:45 AM
Ugh. Low ceilings everywhere. I agree that I don't see any "wow" factor at all. I do love the listing comment: "Vanity Fair meets Dwell Magazine!" That's a criticism not a compliment. Sorry, for that kind of money there are about 20 better places on the market.
Posted by: anon at March 27, 2010 7:32 AM
I would have said DWR meets Room and Board. I could almost name the catalog pages for all of the furnishings. It's an interesting house but isn't Noe becoming too homogenized with all the "interesting" modcon houses?
Posted by: shewolfe at March 27, 2010 10:19 AM
This looks like another house that someone turned a too-wide hallway into a dining room, requiring visitors to walk over your living room furniture to get into the rest of the house (photo 2), and leaving an insufficient space for the "dining area", which you can see in photo 8 is not even big enough to put chairs all the way around the table!
That and the late 90s decorated condo-sized multiple-canned kitchen isn't doing anything for me either.
You can always tell when people come on here gushing over some place, that they are somehow connected with the sale. They always think they are being so clever, like we can't tell that someone with no posting history suddenly feels the need to say how dreamy some place is.
I'm sure it will sell, but it's nothing special, has some problems and the small kitchen is in need of an update.
Posted by: tipster at March 27, 2010 10:21 AM
Just viewed this place -- absolutely stunning. Pictures don't even give it justice. ★★★★★
Posted by: Joel G at March 27, 2010 10:22 AM
^^^Oh brother. The open house isn't til TOMORROW!
The good news is that you'll be able to meet all these favorable posters at the open house. They'll be exclaiming loudly "How far over the asking price am I allowed to bid!" Then they'll each pull 5 disclosure packets.
It will then go contingent in 5 minutes, way over asking, but don't worry: they'll be looking for "back up offers"
Posted by: tipster at March 27, 2010 10:44 AM
Ha. Like properties don't get shown before open houses. Gee, you think the guy who openly said "This is my friend's place" was trying to fool everybody? Whoa. So sinister, that.
Go see a property once in a while, Tipster. You're way out of touch any more.
Posted by: anonn at March 27, 2010 10:52 AM
C'mon Anonn, Lori Wechsler even posted twice, the second time under a different name (which the editor was nice enough to "correct" for her in brackets) 5 minutes later to make it look like yet another gushing endorsement. At least the friend volunteered that he was, it's true.
This reminds me of an appointment-only showing that I had during the currently unwinding bubble. During my appointment, the owner had a set of family friends posing as my "competition" literally run through the house screaming how perfect it was!
It was over priced by at least $500K, so I passed. Apparently so did my "competition". It took more than a year to sell. Nice try, though, but it was so obvious who these phonies were, that it kind of turned me off. A second set of potential buyers that just had to see it during my own appointment? Really?
The gushing effort on this place yesterday and today seems more desperate than is warranted. Huge turn off.
Posted by: tipster at March 27, 2010 11:07 AM
Tipster, I agree, so desperate and a huge turn-off. And what's with the ★★★★★....please! What's wrong with people this weekend???
Posted by: toadie at March 27, 2010 11:25 AM
The phtos in the MLS do not do the house justice. Look at the 2007 listing pictures to get an accurate sense of the scale design and views.
Posted by: kathleen at March 27, 2010 1:02 PM
North facing decks: cool and shady a lot of the time.
Low ceilings: cheap condo feel.
Living room as hallway: bad planning
Not an oversized kitchen: condo sized.
New walls that butt up to the ceiling with no trim or crown moulding: cheap condo feel, cheap detailing.
Overpriced by probably $500-750k: thanks realtor.
Posted by: noearch at March 27, 2010 1:22 PM
People or the commentator of this site need some serious anger management or psychotherapy. Don't you have anything better to do than criticizing things that are not even your house or of neighbor's house. Besides, making comments on photos that are not even in 3 dimensions. Let's see your own house posted on here. So shut up and appreciate or keep the negative comments in your own psychotherapy sessions. This is so annoying reading about people complaining like bitchy queens and comments sounded like sour grapes. If you can buy a property in SF, just be quiet and get a job to pay the rent.
Posted by: [Jason] at March 27, 2010 3:27 PM
Correction: If you can't afford to buy a property in certain parts of SF, just be quiet and get a job to pay your rent. If you are jealous of other realtor's listing, OMG....You need a big time therapy or work harder on your own listing.
Posted by: [Jason] at March 27, 2010 3:32 PM
I hope your car has a good solid parking brake, because the 700 block of Duncan could be converted to a ski jump.
Nobody with kids or thoughts of them would even consider an offer on this place. That hill will make you squirm when you consider even trying to walk up or down it.
I hope when I sell my house I can get all my friends to shill it on the web like this one.
Posted by: Jimmy C at March 27, 2010 9:29 PM
^ There's an app for that.
Posted by: diemos at March 27, 2010 9:40 PM
That's right you don't have to like it and not everyone will. On the hand, there are people who will like the house and like it a lot. That's the fact about real estate in San Francisco. I happen to like my friend's house and there is nothing wrong with the house than it is fabulous. I can't afford it but I learn how to appreciate it and I don't find opporutnity to trash people just because they got something and I don't.
Posted by: Jason at March 27, 2010 11:20 PM
Oh shit, it is a ski jump! I don't think I've seen a steeper block.
Posted by: tipster at March 27, 2010 11:53 PM
Actually, the posters to this board do play nice when they like a house. But, I do think it would be a bit more fair if they refrained from harsh comments unless they have actually seen the house in person.
On another note, I don't remember seeing a David, Kathleen, Lori Weschler, Jason, Nicole ever posting on Socketsite.
And...to put my two cents in...I have not seen this house and plan not to see it because it is on one of Noe's steep slopes.
Posted by: Pumpkin at March 28, 2010 7:54 AM
Ha. If one type of hate won't get it done, try another type of canned hate, eh Tipster? You've fallen off. Like the good rappers used to say to the washed up bad ones.
Posted by: anonn at March 28, 2010 9:07 AM
Hey Jason, you shouldn't be so sensitive. Nobody here (at the moment) is "trashing people".....some of us just don't like the house as much as you do....get over it. And you shouldn't make insulting assumptions. There are many, many homes that are presented on this site that I couldn't afford, but I will definitely appreciate the nice ones....and state it almost as effusively as you and your friends have about this home. Also, I bet some of us here probabaly could afford this house if we really wanted it. Truth is, we just don't.
Posted by: toadie at March 28, 2010 9:37 AM
From the virtual tour, the place looked cold, not cool...maybe it is wonderful in person but my basic reaction was it may be time for people to start thinking in terms of a bit more coziness when these places are staged...less modern and stark, mix in the mid-century modern with something traditional...and that may be true too when architects and developers are remodeling all these noe homes. Remember it is a "home"....sure is a lot of money, though... and the open house notice in today's paper is not really accurate when it says "close to 24th Street"! Thank God for them the #35 still runs even if it is only every hour or so.
Posted by: noe mom at March 28, 2010 11:27 AM
"Ha. If one type of hate won't get it done...bla bla bla"
Likely wrong on the first comment, contentless insult on the second. What's that about being washed up?
Posted by: anon at March 28, 2010 2:56 PM
Maybe the friend can tell us why the owners are selling so quickly?
Nice place to be sure; but as people say this hill (which I drive down often) is killer steep.
Posted by: sanfrantim at March 28, 2010 3:05 PM
Did its neighbor, 744 Duncan, get into contract yet? anyone know?
Posted by: sanfrantim at March 28, 2010 3:08 PM
Well, if you must be so nosey as to inquire why my friends are selling, the owners and a few others of us are moving to NYC to start a new type of advertising agency to post fake favorable product reccommendations on web sites.
You know, just because you aren't in good enough shape to walk up and down ridiculously steep hills such as this one doesn't mean everyone is. Or isn't. Oh crap, I'm getting so upset I can't even talk right. There is nothing wrong with the house than it is fabulous. Oh wait, I already made that ridiculous nonsensical statement above...
Posted by: davidjasonlorinicolebutreallytipsterthistime at March 28, 2010 3:39 PM
Likely wrong on the first comment, contentless insult on the second. What's that about being washed up?
Assuming you're the same "anon" who always says stuff to me, you might think about picking better spots. Here we find you getting Tipster's back. Rest assured he won't return the favor. He just likes to say careless things. Oh. Wait a minute. Carry on.
Posted by: anonn at March 28, 2010 3:44 PM
Oh goodness. People: furnishing your house from a DWR catalog does not make it "cool", just as buying groceries from Whole Foods doesn't make you a good cook. This place looks like an ordinary home, outfitted by some folks who had very, very recently come into a little money.
And if this place goes for near asking, then it's official, the Great Recession is over!
Posted by: Joshua at March 28, 2010 3:59 PM
Bad towel rack strategy in pic #28.
Posted by: midcentfan at March 29, 2010 7:39 AM
OMG, this thread is frickin' hilarious!
Diemos, where's that app?
Posted by: 45yo hipster at March 29, 2010 9:09 AM
for the sake of balance, i notice that some posts get flack for criticizing certain aspects of the property without having viewed it in person first, but the posts offering praise do not need this prerequisite.
Posted by: condoshopper at March 29, 2010 9:51 AM
Yeah this thread is great. For the record, even a lowly nobody like me has toured a house before the open house, but if this house were as fab as some people above seem to think, it would have had an offer before the open as well.
Posted by: Rillion at March 29, 2010 9:55 AM
Whoops forgot the disclaimer that I have no actual knowledge of this house and for all I know it could have gotten an offer before the open house, but I doubt it as it is likely that all the people that loved it were too busy gushing about it here to get their offer ready.
Posted by: Rillion at March 29, 2010 9:57 AM
Saw this place on Sunday open house. It is way over valued and barely finished. The stain on the lower deck was still tacky. The back of the house was seriously overlooked so your neighbors will have a great view of you in the shower. The 'media room' was a room with a TV in it.
There was another house open a few doors up that was in many ways nicer and only $1.1 million lower in price.
Posted by: SL@Noe at March 29, 2010 12:31 PM
I post comments all too regularly on socketsite. I sometimes get barred from commenting because I post too often. I do not have, nor have had in the past, any connection with the sellers or the brokerages handling the sale of this property. Perhaps you may recall my really long bad poetry for which I may be dismembered? My long ode to a house that did not sell posted in Janaury 2010. There was my nod to John Denver "Western Waller" for 568 Waller. Many people found my long gilbert and sullian inspired The very model of a modern edwardian home for a 2nd Avenue insipid. Though I did like my Hal Riney tribute. My latest ode, apologies to Sir John Carr, is tribbute to house near lands end, a house that is built for they way we live now.
Your socketsite Troy McClure, Kathleen
[Editor’s Note: For the record Kathleen has never been "barred" from commenting on SocketSite (although it’s entirely possible for a rapid fire succession of comments to trip an automatic spam filter and cooling off period). And we happen to be fans of her wit and (for the most part) prose.]
Posted by: Kathleen at March 29, 2010 2:26 PM
I have to admit, I did chuckle out loud at this thread as well; from six stars, and a new app all the way to responses from Jason that make me think about the old saw about protesting a bit too much...
Back to the topic of real estate though -- the $760/ft² seems in the ballpark on the high side for the ask, but one does have to wonder why anyone would pay more than the '07 price -- yes, I understand the seller's want to get out whole...not sure I see the appreciation there, but I might be wrong. I figure this goes for $2.5 again.
Posted by: Geo at March 29, 2010 4:45 PM
I think this seller is dreaming. I only see 10 Noe sales at over $2 million in the last year, and those all look to be really big, knock-out places. This house simply does not compare. I like noearch's read on the place. I don't know if the 2007 price was reasonable for the market then (wasn't really paying attention then); but it looks to me like they overpaid even at that bubble-peak time period -- winner's curse.
Posted by: A.T. at March 29, 2010 5:00 PM
If a condo in SF is priced at over than a million dollars, a well constructed single family home in SF with a land, yard and parking (and no HOA fees) relatively priced over one or two million dollars or more is not unreasonable and not out of reality. I am a home owner in SF and I have different opinions from some of commentators and I believe some houses on the market are actually way under priced by homebuilders and unethical RE professionals - signs of desperation. Remember the home price is determined by a serious buyer and the seller in mutual agreement - not by any of us. Instead of making all these negative comments or opinion, let the free market does its job. A carton of milk may seem expensive to some of us but may be necessary and reasonably priced for others. Move on if you are not happy with what you see because others will always disagree with you. As a SF home owner, I want my home and my neighborhood home price to become stable or increase. I don't appreciate negative comments made about SF homes on this site. Is this site all about ANTI-SAN FRANCISCO or what? Some cities are already recovering from the economy, it's about time that San Francisco prospers.
Posted by: [Jason] at March 29, 2010 11:41 PM
Someone said it Jason, if you want to be in Noe and have $2.5, you have better options, including buying the house three doors up, gutting it and spending $800-900k to build something better, it will take a few years, but you won't be living in someone elses mistake.
Posted by: Jimmy C at March 30, 2010 9:24 AM
For this price one could have had 2921 Jackson, just closed at about $2.7m. Some problems in that it started life as two flats.
Posted by: Conifer at March 30, 2010 9:45 AM
Jimmy- perhaps you have not seen both houses. Apple and orange that your comparing. Gutting the house and rebuild it to something better will cost you more than you describe with major headache for several years. As I have and seen, some of the nicer homes in San Francisco are way under priced relatively to the price of condo or TICs. A nice home is a nice home. As long as the buyer enjoys the house, your or my opinion of pricing does not matter.
I don't understand the strategy here for some real estate professionals for trashing properties. Let the buyer be the judge in his or her own mind. Why is there a need for propaganda or brain washing here by competing realtors or builders? It is really nonsense by steering buyers one way or the other.
Posted by: [Jason] at March 30, 2010 1:06 PM
What are you really seeing tho? You think you see real estate professionals bashing stuff on here. But you actually see people who follow real estate as a hobby bashing stuff.
Posted by: anonn at March 30, 2010 1:51 PM
Jason - sorry, but you couldn't be any more wrong. Would you rather buyers go out into the market w/o any kind of an education on what makes a house worth what it's worth? SS provides that. It's an excellent resource if you're a buyer (or a seller) for evaluating properties in SF.
If you have any kind of rebuttal to the criticisms levied at this property, then let's hear them. If not, then that's just tough. The posters here shouldn't shut up simply because you're unhappy with some of the things being said about this property.
Posted by: Fishchum at March 30, 2010 2:11 PM
Nice neighborhood. Coming soon: 1420 Douglass. Bought for $1.3million in 2006. A kitchen remodel added 'substantial value' and it was resold for $1.9million in August of 2007 (financing by WaMu!). I think you know the rest of the story...
Posted by: EBGuy at March 30, 2010 2:41 PM
Jason - I could be wrong, someone may pay $2.5 for this like your friends got suckered into in 2007... but I really doubt it.
I bought Pfizer stock in July, 2007 for $23/share... Just like your friends will find out, the market says that to sell now I'll need to take a 20% haircut as will this house.
Posted by: Jimmy C at March 30, 2010 2:48 PM
JimmyC, have you ever gotten a SFR call correct ?
Posted by: anonn at March 30, 2010 3:18 PM
Just to splash a little love on this property : very nice that the designers chose to include a deck with usable depth on the front. This street carries little traffic so this would make nice sunny place to relax. Plus front decks enhance safety on the block, providing a measure of informal surveillance towards the street.
OK, now back to the regularly scheduled hating...
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at March 30, 2010 3:31 PM
Some of you don't like or appreciate my critical commentary here, as an architect, with over 20 years of residential design to my credit. You don't have to agree with me. That's ok. When a project is great, I tell you. When it has flaws, I try to point them out. Get used to it.
But, as I've said before many times, if buyers would develop a critical eye toward solid construction, good floor plans, quality of materials, good lighting and finishes, they would become better buyers and get the most house for their money.
Posted by: noearch at March 30, 2010 4:28 PM
Are the people in this thread who have their names in brackets [outted] by the editor?
Hysterical how the mapjack link has the 2007 for sale sign. Date: 16 May 2007.
Posted by: eddy at March 30, 2010 6:15 PM
Noearch, you wrote some critiques, went out on a limb with your price guess, and then dropped a superfluous realtor slam. (For the folks keeping score at home.) If the price was actually 750K off, it's likely the realtor would be at least halfway clued in to that. And in that case the pricing would probably have been seller driven. Cue Cindi Lauper "True Colors" outro.
Posted by: anonn at March 30, 2010 7:10 PM
Like I said fluj; get used to it...like plenty of other commenters here, we don't like dishonest and/or disingenuous realtors. There are some good honest ones, and plenty of not so honest ones.
Certainly you don't believe that a realtor would actually try to convince the owner to lower the price of a property by say.....$750k..do you?
My goodness, wouldn't that seriously cut into their commission? just saying.:)
Posted by: noearch at March 30, 2010 8:24 PM
EBGuy. Re: 1420 Douglass.
A remodel causing a 600K markup? Heard that one before. Unlocking "hidden equity" or reckless run of the bulls?
Aaahh, 2007. Good times...
Posted by: lol at March 30, 2010 10:44 PM
Editor: hint, hint. It will soon be time to revive this older thread as soon as EBGuy can dig up more juicy bits on 1420 Douglass.
Posted by: lol at March 30, 2010 10:54 PM
noearch - If lowering the price gets the place sold then it *is* in the selling agent's interest to convince the seller to discount the asking price.
5% of (X - $750K) is greater than 5% of $0
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at March 30, 2010 11:55 PM
Fischum: Your argument starts out with a complete fallacy. Educating buyers is to giving them general information about real estate and allow them to make their own judgement. You are assuming that most buyers can't use their own judgement in SF. You are wrong. Most buyers in SF are savvy and have preconceived homes that they desire. They don't need your opinion about the house they already know what they are looking for. What they need is an education about wise lending and knowing what house they can afford or not. Picking out a home that does not seem to fit your own taste does not help educating any buyer but only impose your own judgement on someone else. Sorry, I do like my friend's house more than you do and your opinion means nothing to me. I am an adult and capable of gathering neutral information and make wise judgment on my own. Who needs biased opinions about a house? This is just propaganda to steer or to scare buyers. Some comments sounded more like religious preaching than educating buyers to make their own decisions based on facts and not heresy.
Posted by: Jason at March 31, 2010 5:29 AM
Would y'all STFU, you're scaring away my buyers!
"Most buyers in SF are savvy and have preconceived homes that they desire." If that's true then postings on some obscure blog aren't going to make any difference now are they?
Posted by: diemos at March 31, 2010 6:17 AM
A blog is not so obscure when a "savvy" buyer will Google the address and SS pops up. That's a big deal for a very important factor in sales: perception.
Posted by: lol at March 31, 2010 7:29 AM
Jason - yes, there's a line between outright bashing and critical comments, and often some posters on this blog do cross that line. However, I've found the critical comments on this blog useful in determining value of a particular property (particularly some of Noearch's comments).
If you love the property that's great - but you shouldn't be admonishing people just because they post something that isn't in step with your "love" of this place.
Posted by: Fishchum at March 31, 2010 9:10 AM
"Sorry, I do like my friend's house more than you do and your opinion means nothing to me."
Clearly it does if it requires so many posts for you to defend your "friend"'s house.
Posted by: anon at March 31, 2010 10:43 AM
I think Jason's premise is entirely wrong. I wish someone would do a study of the selling prices of homes featured on SS relative to comparable other inventory. If such data were available, i'd wager there is a small but statistically significant premium for SS-featured properties over other comparable homes.
Posted by: sanfrantim at April 1, 2010 8:20 AM
Why would a real buyer care what a person who hasn't even set foot inside a property thinks? Don't worry about it Jason.
Posted by: anonn at April 1, 2010 7:25 PM
anonn, there are negative posts here from people who went to the open house.
Posted by: Shza at April 2, 2010 9:34 AM
Kenny does get hyper defensive every time a Realtor or their (cough, cough) sales tactics get criticized.
Is it because, as a Realtor, he takes personally any attack on said species?
Or, is it because he fancies himself as a "mother hen" who needs to protect any and all members of said species from attacks on SS?
In any case, one just looks foolish trying to defend the perpetrators (whether they are connected to the Realtors or the sellers in this case) of the clumsy hype-job in this post.
Posted by: nnona at April 2, 2010 12:13 PM
Catching up on some edifying reading back in beautiful SF:
Why would a real buyer care what a person who hasn't even set foot inside a property thinks? Don't worry about it Jason.
Posted by: anonn at April 1, 2010 7:25 PM
Let me follow the logic one second:
Premise 1: "Real buyers" do not care what uneducated bashers say on a blog.
Premise 2: anonn/fluj has been spending a good part in the past 3-4 years of his precious time rooting out what he calls out as untruths or straight blind bashing.
Both premises lead to one conclusion: anonn/fluj has been wasting his precious time. If this bashing has no influence on "Real buyers" then what's the point in debunking it?
Posted by: lol at April 4, 2010 12:47 AM
Very cool pad.
Posted by: jared at April 20, 2010 9:07 AM
Premise number 1 is definitely true. Premise number 2? I have wasted a lot of time on here, true. But as for this one, I just thought it was weird that one guy said he was a neighbor, first thing, and everybody piled on. I mean, he admitted bias from word one. But yeah. Lots of people on here bash realtors in the same breath as they say dumb things without even going to properties or knowing what they're talking about. Clearly.
Posted by: anonn at April 20, 2010 9:52 AM
[Reduced to] $2,385,000
Posted by: eddy at April 21, 2010 5:39 PM
The list price for 728 Duncan has just been reduced to $2,295,000. Once again, According to the MLS the property sold in August 2007 for $2,475,000 although tax records suggest a contract price closer to $2,448,000.
Posted by: SocketSite at June 24, 2010 5:31 PM
"I want my home and my neighborhood home price to become stable or increase. I don't appreciate negative comments made about SF homes on this site. Is this site all about ANTI-SAN FRANCISCO or what?"
I'm confused - how is discussing home prices, the housing market, and working to educate buyers "anti-san francisco." Are you admitting that you want people to be kept in the dark so that they buy overpriced pieces of crap? It sure sounds like it. I think THAT is very anti-San Francisco.
On another note, ew that blue-tiled bathroom is fugly! Especially the ones on the sink. It looks like a smurf threw up in there...or they ran out of money for the reno...or maybe got them on sale from a motel on Lombard Street.
Posted by: Gigi at June 24, 2010 9:49 PM
Interesting contrast to the 2 mill home on Linda in the Missin that just closed... although folks sure called this one right that it was WAY overpriced and not all that...
Posted by: curmudgeon at June 25, 2010 9:03 AM
This home has a number of flaws that make it a tough sell. Bad layout, tiny yard, yard a floor below the kitchen, steep block. A house with lots of flaws is a tough sell in Noe, where people tend to buy there because of its family-friendliness.
And anyone buying now has to realize that they are essentially trapping themselves in their homes for years with no way out except a suitcase full of cash. You'd better like the place, a lot, when you move in because you may be staying there awhile.
The flaws with this place will get old fast. When the current buyers bought, the flaws were no problem: you could move out at any time for a huge profit and so who cared? Now, buyers scrutinize more carefully: can I really live with these problems for ten years?
For the right price, everything sells. But the right price as prices are rising in a bubble is very different from the right price as prices are falling.
Posted by: tipster at June 25, 2010 9:35 AM
Clearly "Jason" was right - all that trash talking on SocketSite has diminished the value of his property. I mean, his friend's property.
It's a pity we are all so "ANTI-SAN FRANCISCO" and require "serious anger management or psychotherapy". If it weren't for us, property values here would be heading up, up, up.
Posted by: Po Hill Jeff at June 25, 2010 12:46 PM
After reading the shameless shilling from "friends" of the seller at the top of these comments, I've got to say that I'm glad to see the sellers are going to lose hundreds of k's here.
714 Duncan - 3 doors down from this place - had to cut almost 23% from its '08 sales price in order to find a buyer in '09. 728 is only down a little over 7%. Enough to saddle the sellers with a 300k loss, but not enough in my book. Looking forward to the next price reduction.
Posted by: El Bombero at June 25, 2010 12:47 PM
OMG, this thread is a classic. Jason, I hate to break it to you, but while a sale is indeed a transaction between 2 private parties, the price the buyer is willing to pay the seller is absolutely determined by the overall housing market (i.e., the "free market", if you will). And this encompasses all negative and positive reactions to the property, including those expressed by the most negative of naysayers on Socketsite, as well as the most blatantly self-promoting positive opinions of the owner and his "friends", such as yourself.
Posted by: Sarah at June 25, 2010 2:05 PM
this thread should be required reading for all realtor haters out there. "jason" was a typical buyer. he wanted a home, he felt he knew better than everyone else about the value of home ownership, where the economy was headed, what makes a great home, etc, etc. And now that he is a homeowner he is a non-stop cheerleader (and believer) that RE will only ever go up. He even believes that the haters on here are Realtors, and that RE professionals are in collusion keeping some homes under-valued. He even includes his own economic theory in this thread. all classic stuff.
So.... did a realtor "make him" do any of the above? That's a constant theme on SS so i think i'll be linking to this thread in the future :)
Posted by: hangemhi at June 25, 2010 5:05 PM
Hey-o, I've pointed out several shady practices of realtors on SS, but to turn it back on you, besides maybe tipster, who are these mythical people who blame every single thing on realtors?
No doubt some of Jason's attitudes could be attributed to realtors. Jason probably reads all those lovely media reports that parrot NAR and CAR press releases telling us there's never a bad time to buy and prices never go down. Ever seen David Lereah's books in a bookstore? Ever seen Lawrence Yun telling us month after month that we've hit bottom?
But other things he believes probably game from his parents or other sources. I know my parents have always bugged me about owning in the periods of my life when I haven't.
I think it's hard to deny that there is a mythology of buying that involves these factors, and that some percentage of this mythology has come from realtors and their publications. Certainly efforts by liberal organizations to help working class people have focused on home buying in order to build wealth because of the belief that prices don't drop.
Posted by: sfrenegade at June 25, 2010 5:31 PM
Is it getting hot in here or what? The home at 1420 Douglass (around the corner) went back to the bank on June 7.
Posted by: EBGuy at June 25, 2010 5:41 PM
sfrenegade: re "efforts by liberal organizations to help working class people have focused on home buying" - interestingly I think both liberals and conservatives thought this was a good idea - see in particular George W. Bush's enthusiasm for it (remember the "ownership society"?). The fingerprints of both the left and the right are all over this one...
Posted by: Po Hill Jeff at June 26, 2010 9:51 AM
For the last several weeks, the "Open House" listing for this place read, "Price Upon Request." I thought that a rather lame marketing tactic. Guess the new price is out of the closet now.
I toured this place. It's very spacious, high-end, nice. Despite flaws (steep hill chief among them), it will find a buyer. It could not have helped that, for months, a slightly less grand place was for sale a few doors up the street, but for a million less.
I think it moves at right about $2 m, give or take 5%.
Posted by: sanfrantim at June 26, 2010 4:54 PM
Perhaps in an attempt to keep the 117 day old listing seeming fresh, the list price for 728 Duncan has just been reduced $10,000 (0.4%). Now asking $2,285,000.
Once again, according to the MLS the property sold in August 2007 for $2,475,000 although tax records suggest a contract price closer to $2,448,000.
Posted by: SocketSite at July 21, 2010 10:26 AM
It should be boring by now, but watching 2007 NV buyers losing money never gets old. Nice to see a reduction - big or small, prices going down is a good thing.
Posted by: El Bombero at July 21, 2010 11:40 AM
Thanks for the update SS. I enjoyed re-reading this thread; one of my favorites no doubt due in part to the misguided efforts by "friends" to use SS to talk up this property, which was so clearly overpriced originally that, when I so suggested to the listing agent during the open house, she kind of sort of agreed.
The price on this listing has a little further to fall yet.
Posted by: sanfrantim at July 21, 2010 12:23 PM
Looks like this property has fallen off the MLS. Look for it it to pop on again in a month or so at about $2 m.
Posted by: sanfrantim at July 29, 2010 1:49 PM
I was wrong. There is still an "active" listing for this property (though the SS link no longer works). My prediction remains, however -- the place moves at about $2 m.
Posted by: sanfrantim at July 29, 2010 1:54 PM
"interestingly I think both liberals and conservatives thought this was a good idea - see in particular George W. Bush's enthusiasm for it (remember the "ownership society"?)."
Po Hill Jeff, thanks for your comment. I'm one of the few people who actually does remember the "ownership society" and I actually trot it out sometimes when someone mentions makes an unsupported suggestion that "liberals" caused the housing crisis.
However, I was specifically referring to liberal public interest groups, and not the left as an entity. I don't know of any conservative public interest groups that assist working class people in home buying generally (there may be some that help people of a particular religion, for example). The idea is that what working class people lack is some way to build wealth and pass it on to future generations, and home buying is/was seen as a way to do this. What the organizations don't realize is that home buying can actually be a good way for the working class to engage in forced savings, but whether that builds "wealth" is another question.
Posted by: sfrenegade at July 29, 2010 3:30 PM