Purchased for $2,668,000 in June 2007, the sale of 611 Washington Street #2202 closed escrow yesterday with a reported contract price of $2,090,000.
Call it $1,172 per square for the 1,784 square foot Barbary Coast condo with Russian Hill to Bay Bridge views. Once again it’s still expensive, just 21.6 percent ($578,000) less so on an apples-to-apples basis.
∙ A Perch From Which To Watch Boulders (Or Condos) Roll [SocketSite]
∙ New York Basis In Nob Hill [SocketSite]
That’s barely a $700k loss w/selling costs.
At least the realtors got their cut!
All that money leaking out of Facebook, Zynga, Linked In, etc. via their early employees doesn’t make up for giving unlimited loans to everyone in the bay area with a pulse.
$700K is a LOT of money to lose on SF real estate.
Compare that to well run cities with good school districts and low crime rates like Palo Alto, where no one is losing one dime on real estate, and you can tell the declining cities from the good ones.
How this sold for $2.7 in 2007 is beyond me. Would be nice if some other comps could be presented from this building from around the same time. Seems $1500/psf is off the charts but who knows, things were whacky. Nina did an ok job with pricing this time around. This is a pretty good price. It still needs some updating.
I just did a little digging and this same place sold in 2005 for $1.8M. The renovations, from the pics at least, look to be little more than putting down hardwood floors (unless it was already there under carpet), and slapping up some wood over reflective surfaces. It doesn’t appear there are any other things touched. So not an ‘apple’ but pretty close if you ask me. I think the 07 is way out on the comp charts. Doesn’t seem the sellers cared much about the loss.
@eddy “how this sold for $2.7mm”…?
Insert any of these arguments from the buyer’s agent/friends/emotions:
– SF real estate only goes up
– Everyone wants to live here
– Buy now or be priced out forever
I hear the same arguments here in NYC, as I watch people continue to throw money away on real estate (while my equities portfolio gained 34% in 2011).
OK, mike. You know, there are thinks like non-arms length transactions, and other things that get in the way if a true comp. Sometimes its worth a litte digging when something seems way off like this one does.
A little more digging and this sale was way off the norm. Here is every MLS sale for this building that I could find (source cleanoffer) by psf:
Sale Date Unit Price SqFt $/PSF
6/26/2007 #2202 $2,668,000.00 1784 $1,495.52
11/8/2002 #2402 $3,177,500.00 2624 $1,210.94
3/14/2012 #2202 $2,090,000.00 1784 $1,171.52
11/27/2000 #2101 $4,100,000.00 3900 $1,051.28
3/16/2005 #2202 $1,800,000.00 1784 $1,008.97
3/4/2005 #2504 $2,195,000.00 2318 $946.94
10/19/2000 #2104 $2,195,000.00 2464 $890.83
11/2/2004 #2503 $1,850,000.00 2094 $883.48
2/2/1999 #2601 $3,995,000.00 5163 $773.77
5/19/2003 #2503 $1,600,000.00 2094 $764.09
12/14/2000 #2106 $1,795,000.00 2417 $742.66
9/1/2011 #2504 $1,680,000.00 2318 $724.76
12/6/2011 #2505 $1,335,000.00 1908 $699.69
7/7/2005 #2306 $850,000.00 1241 $684.93
9/24/2004 #2101 $2,595,000.00 3900 $665.38
5/9/2003 #2106 $1,550,000.00 2417 $641.29
6/12/2002 #2505 $1,200,000.00 1908 $628.93
10/8/2004 #2206 $685,000.00 1241 $551.97
9/23/2011 #2306 $655,000.00 1241 $527.80
9/13/1999 #2405 $930,000.00 1908 $487.42
3/25/1999 #2105 $1,390,000.00 2879 $482.81
4/19/1999 #2306 $545,000.00 1241 $439.16
10/28/2003 #2107 $750,000.00 1901 $394.53
1/5/1998 #2404 $825,000.00 2318 $355.91
12/19/1994 #2104 $790,000.00 2464 $320.62
Here the same data sorted by sale date:
Sale Date Unit Price SqFt $/PSF
3/14/2012 #2202 $2,090,000.00 1784 $1,171.52
12/6/2011 #2505 $1,335,000.00 1908 $699.69
9/23/2011 #2306 $655,000.00 1241 $527.80
9/1/2011 #2504 $1,680,000.00 2318 $724.76
6/26/2007 #2202 $2,668,000.00 1784 $1,495.52
7/7/2005 #2306 $850,000.00 1241 $684.93
3/16/2005 #2202 $1,800,000.00 1784 $1,008.97
3/4/2005 #2504 $2,195,000.00 2318 $946.94
11/2/2004 #2503 $1,850,000.00 2094 $883.48
10/8/2004 #2206 $685,000.00 1241 $551.97
9/24/2004 #2101 $2,595,000.00 3900 $665.38
10/28/2003 #2107 $750,000.00 1901 $394.53
5/19/2003 #2503 $1,600,000.00 2094 $764.09
5/9/2003 #2106 $1,550,000.00 2417 $641.29
11/8/2002 #2402 $3,177,500.00 2624 $1,210.94
6/12/2002 #2505 $1,200,000.00 1908 $628.93
12/14/2000 #2106 $1,795,000.00 2417 $742.66
11/27/2000 #2101 $4,100,000.00 3900 $1,051.28
10/19/2000 #2104 $2,195,000.00 2464 $890.83
9/13/1999 #2405 $930,000.00 1908 $487.42
4/19/1999 #2306 $545,000.00 1241 $439.16
3/25/1999 #2105 $1,390,000.00 2879 $482.81
2/2/1999 #2601 $3,995,000.00 5163 $773.77
1/5/1998 #2404 $825,000.00 2318 $355.91
12/19/1994 #2104 $790,000.00 2464 $320.62
So this unit holds 3 of the top 5 sales by sqft. Just seems odd.
Actually, eddy, I think you just proved the opposite. The 02 stack in this building is obviously by far the best one.
Look at your first two data points in the top set. To get #2202 at the beginning of 2007 for 24% more ppsft than #2402 sold for in 2002 was a screaming bargain. 2202 is much smaller than 2402 and smaller places usually command more on a ppsft basis, so give them 10 of the 24 on that basis alone. A 14% increase from 2002 to 2007 just seems very low.
Seems like the 2007 buyer did very well. Until he lost $700,000.00, that is.
I wasn’t really trying to make a point initially; rather, just trying to present some contextual data.
However, ignore the 2007 sale and you have a 2005 sale @ $1.8 with some basic improvement and 2012 sale at $2.1. There are not 300k of improvements from the 2005 sale. Obviously, it was the 2005 buyer who found the perfect buyer and timed the market fairly spectacularly. Congrats.
Speaking of making points, the current seller is a Senior Executive who works for one of the hottest tech firms in the valley whos stock has increased 600%+ since 2007. I think he will be OK.
Oh, and they bought a 12M+ home in Pacific Heights. Just another bubble.
Bought a 12M+ home in PacHeights? Fantastic. With their track record, when it comes time to sell the new place in a few years they’ll lose some real money.
Oh, and some realtors will come on here and talk about how they overpaid back in 2012….
“A little more digging and this sale was way off the norm.”
“I wasn’t really trying to make a point initially; rather, just trying to present some contextual data.”
Realtor: This houses asking price is way below the norm! Look at this Data! Great time to buy!
Mark: Great
[Time Passes. Mark loses money]
Mark: Hey! You said that the price was way below the norm!!!
Realtor: I wasn’t really trying to make a point initially; rather, just trying to present some contextual data
Man! If Only everyone had 20/20 hindsight!!
Actually, I suspect they did overpay on their Pac Heights home. So let’s just get that out of the way here in 2012.
” when it comes time to sell the new place in a few years they’ll lose some real money.”
Look You Troll!
Nobody cares about your so called “money”!
“Money”, “Retirement Saving”, “Foreclosure” are all internet-only things that nobody in the real world cares about.
The number one job of a Realtor is to protect their mark (errr client) from Princess Bride jokes!
And don’t you forget it!
What’s amazing is how quickly a realtor will tell you after the fact that the seller overpaid when he bought, yet those same realtors will be telling you to look at one or two sales as comps.
If people sometimes overpay, you really have to ignore a lot of the comps.
only so many
fake realtors in the world, trolls.
pick your spots better
follow the money
more important in R E
than stopping jokes or counting syllables
“If people sometimes overpay, you really have to ignore a lot of the comps.”
And a lot of people do just that.
@El Bombero, And their Pac Heights purchase was in 2010, btw.