November 30, 2012
Great Pacific Heights "Appreciation" And Yet A Rather Poor ROI
As we first wrote about the Pacific Heights home at 2209 Pacific last year:
Purchased as a 4,960 square foot four-bedroom home for $5,150,000 in late 2005, and since remodeled to become a 5,900 square foot home with three bedrooms and seven baths, 2209 Pacific Avenue has returned to the market listed for $9,500,000 in 2011.
According to permits filed for the project and from which fees would have been billed, it was an estimated "$150,000" remodeling job, a budget that probably wouldn’t have covered the cost of the new kitchen, and perhaps not even the new theater below.
While the estimated remodeling costs per permits were "$150,000," according to the now live property website "close to $4 million dollars" in improvements have been made to the property. It's funny how that happens.
Having been reduced to $7,950,000 and then withdrawn from the MLS after eleven months on the market, 2209 Pacific Avenue was relisted as new this past July with "over $4 million" in improvements since 2005.
Yesterday, the sale of 2209 Pacific Avenue closed escrow with a reported contract price of $7,400,000, not bad "appreciation" from the $5,150,000 purchase price according to industry stats, which don't account for improvements, but not such a great return considering a total investment of over nine million.
First Published: November 30, 2012 9:30 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
"not such a great return when accounting for the over nine million dollars which had been invested"
Well, to be honest, we don't actually know that.
Posted by: R at November 30, 2012 9:57 AM
R - do you think the realtor was lying about the $4m?
Posted by: color-me-surprised at November 30, 2012 10:31 AM
Wow, this is awesome! Definitely a multi million dollar return for the owner.
2005 was actually a great time to buy.
Posted by: Linda at November 30, 2012 10:35 AM
@color-me-surprised: I didn't see the before, but I suspect if anyone was lying it was the owner.
Posted by: R at November 30, 2012 10:41 AM
They paid $5,150,000 for the house and sold it for $7,400,000. You have to tie yourself into a pretzel to explain how they lost money on this one.
Posted by: Unwarrantedinlaw at November 30, 2012 11:23 AM
It's really easy to overspend on these remodels. I think some people forget that it can cost someone who isn't a developer 1000k a foot to remodel an uber high-end Pacific Heights home. Believe me, I've seen people put 20 million into a 7k foot house just because they can. That said, that clearly did not happen here. I don't really understand the point of this thread either. Someone decks out their home with a bunch of expensive crap and potentially loses money on it. Is it really that different from buying a 200k Mercedes that in two years is worth 50k? Maybe they didn't buy expecting a great ROI, maybe they did. Who knows? A 7.4 sale price for a south side Pacific home is extremely good. I said 6.5 a year ago.
If anything, the real lesson here is DO NOT list your Pac Heights home with APR. It's almost always a losing strategy.
Posted by: Denis at November 30, 2012 11:44 AM
I won't go near this house until it gets properly remodeled as a 2-bedroom 11-bath.
Posted by: asiagoSF at November 30, 2012 12:58 PM
The point was that there was apparently 5.15 + 4 million invested in the property. The $4 mill is only a claim, so let's assume it was much less. But even at $2 million, they're close to break even. So it all depends on the investment, which is an unknown (but they apparently added 1000K of space, so it's got to be substantial).
But asiagoSF hit it. 3 BR's and 7 baths? That's crazy....
Posted by: curmudgeon at November 30, 2012 2:06 PM
Heck, an "even" sale in real terms would have required a little more than $6 million with inflation in the last 7 years. That's assuming no commissions, no maintenance, and no remodeling. They lost a good chunk of money on this one once you factor in all that. No way to spin out of that fact.
Lucky for them they bought a couple of years before the bubble peaked or it would have been worse!
Posted by: anon at November 30, 2012 3:54 PM
Anyway... What's up with 3700 Washington selling for $4300 per foot - 17.5 million.. Gah! Is this a real thing?
Posted by: Denis at November 30, 2012 5:01 PM
How on earth does is make sense that the remodel included expanding the square footage yet they sacrificed a bedroom? Do these architects not think when making these plans? Great, there are plenty of toilets for my guests but they have nowhere to sleep. Yeah, that makes tons of sense. Someone please smack the architect for me.
Posted by: Lori at December 4, 2012 4:04 PM
Well, I'm sure the architects were trying to please the clients who likely made this decision. I actually eliminated a bedroom in my house, because I wanted more open space instead of a tiny bedroom I'll never use. I don't have kids and I'm not planning on having any. And who has house guests anymore? Gag. There are lots of nice hotels in the city for that.. Or Airbnb :-) When and if I sell, the new owners add back an extra bedroom.
Posted by: Denis at December 4, 2012 5:26 PM