October 17, 2012

Sorry Hipsters, You Can't Claim Zuckerberg As Your Own

Based on sightings of Mark Zuckerberg walking his dog and eating in neighborhood restaurants, a number of news sites have reported that the Facebook founder has purchased a pied-à-terre in "the Mission District."

Unfortunately for any Mission hipsters (or local agents) that have since claimed and re-reported Zuck as one of their own, those reports are all incorrect.

While Zuckerberg does appear to have bought a home in San Francisco, according to a plugged-in source and due diligence, the house in question is actually atop Liberty Hill on the non-Mission side of Dolores. The property was never openly listed for sale, for which Zuckerberg paid a premium, and Zuckerberg's name is not attached to the house.

First Published: October 17, 2012 4:00 PM

Comments from "Plugged In" Readers

Thanks for the puzzle, editor. A bit too easy though...

The ownership refers to an LLC which is based in Palo Alto.

Should I give the address?

[Editor's Note: We'd say no, the right neighborhood is enough.]

Posted by: lol at October 17, 2012 4:15 PM

All the articles I've seen say he bought a house near Dolores St. Which isn't technically the Mission according to MLS, but I think most people consider it the Mission.

Heck, his new place is a couple blocks from Dolores Park, which is definitely part of the Mission hipster neighborhood, if not the Mission proper.

Posted by: R at October 17, 2012 4:21 PM

double-lot, big views. I see no permits pending so far.

Posted by: lol at October 17, 2012 4:24 PM

If it is at Liberty and Dolores then I think it's actually closer to Noe Valley than Mission. Certainly no more than equidistant.

And if I lived in Dolores Park I;d be a bit annoyed if people kept telling me I lived in The Mission!!!

Posted by: NVP at October 17, 2012 4:47 PM

I don't think it is on Liberty. It's a bit higher, past Church. But you're pretty warm.

Posted by: lol at October 17, 2012 5:02 PM

Oh cool. We're almost neighbors. Maybe sometime I can chat with him about which parts of FB suck.

Posted by: futurist at October 17, 2012 5:08 PM

If you add the digits of the house # does it = 15?

Posted by: eddy at October 17, 2012 5:10 PM

How do you guys find out where he lives if the house was never listed? What website do you go to to see what was for sale and where? I can't find anything?

Posted by: New At This at October 17, 2012 5:30 PM

eddy, yes, this is the one I thought about. Small in square footage, big in price and views.

Posted by: lol at October 17, 2012 5:36 PM

He's gonna love the crazy Christmas house! Do you think he has any idea? Pretty funny...

Posted by: neighbor at October 17, 2012 6:22 PM

Definitely a nice property. The house being set back so far from the street made quite the difference, I'm sure.

Easy to find if you know who the taxes go to.

Eddy: Yes, adds up to 15.

Posted by: SFer at October 17, 2012 6:22 PM

neighbor: Ha! Good point. Didn't recognize it from the street view until now. I'm sure it'll be quite the surprise.

Posted by: SFer at October 17, 2012 6:27 PM

It makes sense for privacy and security for him to buy a house on a large lot, set back from the street. And great location. Might the house be larger than the official square footage, and thus not over $2000/SF?

Posted by: Dan at October 17, 2012 6:45 PM

Did Zuckerberg not have some crazy person stalking him a year or so ago?...I'm sure he will be thrilled about this post. Really SS, who cares?

Posted by: Willow at October 17, 2012 6:56 PM

Why is it interesting where prominent people live? Reminds me of LA star tours. Why do I care where Oracle, Zynga or the enterprise du jour lives? It's really tedious. What's next, bus tours of the homes?

Posted by: Invented at October 17, 2012 8:35 PM

The Mission doesn't end at Church, and the Castro doesn't end at Dolores. However Noe Valley Definitely ends with divorce. So if I were MZ, I would tell everyone I live in the SubMission.

Posted by: Stucco_Sux at October 17, 2012 8:37 PM

You guys are evil people, massive clues left here that anyone clueful with RE websites can figure it out.

I thought he actually bought the Duncan $5M house, but it was another early FB-er.

Posted by: someone at October 17, 2012 9:41 PM

@Invented, wealth drives real estate in san francisco. Young / working billionaires have massive influence on the real estate market both in terms of employing people and driving buyers to a certain area. MZ moving to this area is an important indicator. It also demonstrates that its really only a matter of time before MZ purchases something north of $10M in SF. Given the mission of socketsite; all of this is highly relevant; plus there are bragging rights for breaking the story. And bonus props for not overtly disclosing the address. I hope it stays quiet for a while longer. But it wont forever.

Not sure if there is any truth to the "Noe Valley Definitely ends with divorce." line; but it's pretty funny.

Posted by: eddy at October 17, 2012 9:47 PM

@someone, thanks for the additional clue. ;) that's one less bit of information to throw people off the trail. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if we're all actually wrong on the supposed house.

Posted by: eddy at October 17, 2012 10:25 PM

3523 21st St

There, it's out there now.

Posted by: Robert R at October 17, 2012 11:07 PM

366 Liberty. ;)

Posted by: eddy at October 17, 2012 11:19 PM

What are the journalistic standards here?

There are a number of well-known people who live in San Francisco, in varying degrees of the public eye.

Is this site intended to reveal their home addresses? I hope not. [Editor] prefers to keep a degree of anonymity about himself...and rightly so.

We're talking about real people with real lives...and more importantly sometimes families and vulnerable children.

Should this site also post glaring hints about the homes of Google founders, Hearsts, Fishers, Benioffs, Moritzs, Pritzkers, Thiel, et al? I hope not. I don't think this site was created to map the homes of the SF uber-wealthy.

BTW, if you want to know where many wealthy folks live, simply drive around after 9pm, and look for running cars positioned on street corners, some of which have "Pacific Heights Security" decals on their doors.

Please. Keep this about real estate, and don't make this about outing the personal, and sometimes very real security information, concerning individuals and families.

Posted by: Joshua at October 17, 2012 11:24 PM

Looks like he bought just a few houses below is on Liberty, on the same side of the street as us. I really loved that house since it got dolled up a few years back. AIA showcase house, right? if I didn't already own our place in the 400 block of Liberty I'd totally what his place.

Posted by: Wayneco at October 18, 2012 2:24 AM

I get all the comments about privacy and as far as I can tell there's no real searchable address out there.

We're still talking about the creator of a social network of 1B people who all lost one bit of privacy by giving various levels of personal information to a non-government sanctioned entity. Which sometimes gives me the chills...

Posted by: lol at October 18, 2012 8:03 AM

"plus there are bragging rights for breaking the story"

The story was broken long before SS came out with this.

Posted by: R at October 18, 2012 8:28 AM

Amen, lol.

Why should Zuckerberg, of all people, deserve privacy? Just because he can afford to buy some?

Posted by: moz at October 18, 2012 9:12 AM

Good grief Joshua: you're actually chiding some of us for publicly "outing" a very public persons address when that said public person uses the personal information of over 1 billion people to make money?

Seriously?

Posted by: futurist at October 18, 2012 9:12 AM

Points for futurist!!!! The irony of guarding Zuckerberg's privacy is pretty rich.*

*See what I did there, with the 'rich' part?

Posted by: soccermom at October 18, 2012 9:21 AM

You choose to provide your information to Facebook. As you do to LinkedIn, Google, Apple, and just about anywhere else you go on the Internet (heard of tracking cookies?).

Posted by: Joshua at October 18, 2012 9:26 AM

Joshua,

Your prospective employers will want to see you on LinkedIn. Your prospective landlords will Google you. Your dates will check you out on FB or Pinterest, etc... We all gave up some level of privacy and apart from troglodytes everyone is expected to play the game.

Posted by: lol at October 18, 2012 9:53 AM

366 Lib isn't anywhere near $2000 per sq foot, though.???

Posted by: NVP at October 18, 2012 10:25 AM

You're missing the point.

Social media sites are opt-in. You decide to participate, and you influence/control much of the content describing you.

The editor of this blog describes himself as a journalist. Therefore a set of standards and ethics apply.

What is the journalistic purpose of providing clues to someone's home address? Especially when this person has a well documented stalker problem?

If the information is related to a legitimate story, than it might be useful to run with it. Otherwise, it's an unwarranted invasion of privacy.

Some personal information, believe it or not, remains personal. Mainstream journalists do not run stories outing the sexual orientation of public figures. Why not? Because it's private information.

There's an ethical line here. The editor knows it, look at his response to the first comment.

Posted by: Joshua at October 18, 2012 10:28 AM

NVP. Not the one. If the address had been posted on this thread it would have been certainly edited out.

Posted by: lol at October 18, 2012 10:29 AM

Ouch. Lousy earnings at google. Down 9% and facebook following. Zuck may need to airbnb a few rooms to pay the mortgage!

Posted by: anon at October 18, 2012 10:35 AM

Joshua,

In the real world, you're expected to provide transparency. Otherwise people will not trust you.

As far as journalistic standards, every newspaper has shown pics of the homes of the rich and famous for a long time.

Posted by: lol at October 18, 2012 11:01 AM

The Mission was made for people like [Zuckerberg] who need to feel street and edgy when they get a cup of coffee, with their bodyguard.

Posted by: philipthemholes at October 18, 2012 12:32 PM

I realized the Internet had killed my privacy when a previously unknown cousin showed up on my frontstep a few years back looking for investors for his "exciting oportunity"!

Posted by: lol at October 18, 2012 12:52 PM

I think he may have bought a place on Fair Oaks.

Posted by: anon at October 18, 2012 1:48 PM

C'mon people, how can Mission Dolores not be part of The Mission? I don't really care where Zuckerburg lives but if I see him on Valencia Street I will try not to gawk.

[Editor’s Note: Liberty Hill isn’t within Mission Dolores, and neither is the house in question.]

Posted by: NoeValleyJim at October 18, 2012 1:54 PM

Joshua: Cities are also opt-in. There are plenty of places in the world where nobody knows or cares who he is.

Posted by: EH at October 18, 2012 2:00 PM

interesting how no one has named the right house yet, even though it is "so obvious"...

Posted by: mcarter at October 18, 2012 3:08 PM

mcarter, it's extraordinarily obvious, some of us just find it distasteful to post the actual address.

Posted by: R at October 18, 2012 3:49 PM

^ Indeed. Plus all the obvious clues have been removed by the editor.

One case comes to mind when thinking of publishing addresses:

2 years ago, a French journalist posted a story on the Chron about a house in the Castro that had been the source of a very popular 1970s French song ("San Francisco" aka "La Maison Bleue" (the Blue House)).

The picture was out there for all to see (the house was greenish now) and it took no time at all to figure out the address, which became public knowledge both in France and among local tour operators.

Less than year after the address was outed, a French paint outfit had subsidized the painting of the house in blue, a plate was affixed by the French Consulate and the singer and many articles circulated in the French press.

When I go for Dolores Park on WEs I often have to swim through throngs of middle-aged tourists all gawking starry-eyed at the famous house and taking pictures of each other.

There's an obvious loss of privacy and quiet for the residents, but I hope they embrace the (limited) celebrity. I'll bet some rich French person will buy them out one day ;)

Posted by: lol at October 18, 2012 4:15 PM

Sure Editor, Zuck's house might not be in The Mission, but I certainly think that Mission Dolores park is.

I figured out which one is his, but I will hold my tongue as well.

Posted by: NoeValleyJim at October 18, 2012 4:27 PM

Does anyonne NOT know where Ellison built and Gettys live? And further down the block and down the stairs is Diane Feinstein, big deal, people jog by all day without causing her problems.

So if Zuck decides to throw fundraisers and parties are we all supposed to now pretend this is not going on because it is not on Outer Broadway, and because he is in Tech, and not oil, politics, shipping, etc? (Of course Ellison and some other neighbors are in tech yet have even had their Pacific Heights residences published in various magazines, etc. without concern towards their "privacy".)

Zuck's fame may be more because of the SOCIAL NETWORK movie and book and his own behavior. I think Robin Williams did it right by hiding out in Sea Cliff though his driveway gate gives the home away.

Posted by: anon94123 at October 18, 2012 4:44 PM

"You choose to provide your information to Facebook. As you do to LinkedIn, Google, Apple, and just about anywhere else you go on the Internet (heard of tracking cookies?). "

No you don't. FB has a series of patents on new cookies. FB has denied that it is tracking users after they log out, while it was proven that they are in fact doing that. They own your face-- the biometric data to your face and an unbelievable amount of personal data about you.

FB has led the charge in having no bounds to privacy unless they are called out on it. Others have followed. It may seem innocuous-- a Yelp app that uploads all of your contact list from your phone. But everyone is trying to keep up with FB which hopes to own all of your information, package, and sell it.

For some reason, people in the US are just beginning to care. In Europe this has been a big issue including a court case where the plaintiff won and was provided with over a thousand pages of data that Facebook had on him.

Posted by: anon at October 18, 2012 6:34 PM

Why is there an issue here with keeping his address private. Almost all wealthy famous people live in houses that are publicly known to be theirs. MZ can't exactly live in a house and keep it a secret. We know where Nancy Pelosi lives. She's more important than he is.

Posted by: JHan at March 14, 2013 1:53 PM

Wait...what...the cloak and dagger show over!!?
3660 21st Street
Even the GOOG streetview matches the SS posting.
Close enough to the Mission to be a hipster today, but close enough to Noe to be a family guy if/when junior comes along. Perfect choice. Unless of course he ever has to push a stroller up that street...eeesh
And I'm hoping Zuck tries to compete with Tom and Jerry come December, that would be a show to behold!

Posted by: no_ vally at May 7, 2013 8:15 AM

D'oh!

Posted by: R at May 7, 2013 10:25 AM

Hey, what happened to today's article about the MZ home on 21st? Something about the existing home set back with two garages being replaced with a new home with a single two car garage and with permits pulled for $1M improvements. I was kinda looking forward to hearing more about Tom and Jerry.

[Editor’s Note: Facts challenged and our piece was pulled until we can confirm. We'll run an update on the property by the end of the day.]

Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at May 7, 2013 11:46 AM

Post a comment


(required - will be published)


(required - will not be published, sold, or shared)


(optional - your "Posted by" name will link to this URL)

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)


Continue Perusing SocketSite:

« On The Verge Of Being Un-Acquired. Again. | HOME | Five Teams Competing To Design A New Gateway To The Presidio »