2011 Golden Gate Avenue
We can’t be certain that it started out as a “flip” (or more accurately a speculative remodel), but 2011 Golden Gate Avenue is back on the market and asking $1,995,000.
Purchased for $1,350,000 in July of 2007, according to its new listing the 4,356 square foot home has been “elegantly remodeled” since. And according to its permits, that remodel included the addition of a couple of new bathrooms as well as legal square feet.
UPDATE: As a plugged-in reader notes, we should have put that “new listing” in quotes. Asking $2,395,000 in October of 2008 and $2,200,000 in November. But only 12 days on the market according to industry stats.
∙ Listing: 2011 Golden Gate Avenue (5/5.5) – $1,995,000 [MLS]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by CV

    New listing? Ha. This thing has been on the market since the winter maybe even last fall. Even had a pending sign up at one point, but that obviously did not work out.

  2. Posted by Michael

    $1.995M – $100K for carrying cost – $120K for transaction costs = $1.775M.
    $1.775M – $1.35M = $425K
    $425K / 4,356 sq.ft. = $97 per sq.ft.
    If remodeling costs were over $100 per foot they’re going to lose money on what looks like a $645K “gain”.

  3. Posted by anonn

    The MLS shows precisely one 1.995M or higher sale for area 6-F, since 2004. It was 1652 Hayes, sold June of last year for 2.125M. In fact, you have to drill down to 1.5M and up in order to even get five. Two @ ~1.5M, and two at ~1.7M.

  4. Posted by tipster

    Note to photographer: if you’re going to stretch the hell out of all the photos to make the place look larger, the plates in photo 10 should remain round, and the bathroom sink in photo 34 shouldn’t look bigger than the bath tub!

  5. Posted by anonn

    Why did you factor the whole of such an older house for per foot remodelling costs, Michael? It was obviously not built from scratch. Much of it was likely only repaint + hardwoods.

  6. Posted by dvelop

    $2m for that hood? Yikes. I predict large reductions in the future.

  7. Posted by FormerAptBroker

    anonn wrote:
    > Why did you factor the whole of such an older
    > house for per foot remodelling costs, Michael?
    > It was obviously not built from scratch. Much
    > of it was likely only repaint + hardwoods.
    I have to agree with anon on this one, the guy probably has less than $250K in to the property (since most flippers do a lot of the work themselves) and he will make money if the property sells at the current list price (but as anonn pointed out in another great post there is not a lot of action at over $1.5mm in that area)…

  8. Posted by eddy

    Gotta love comps. 1612 Vallejo in Pacific Heights sold for $1.875 @ 679 psf. This is a nice home and very SF — but this is a stretch even at $1.5M.

  9. Posted by Jeffrey W. Baker

    Beautiful job on the remodel.

  10. Posted by Craig

    I have been in this place. It is nicely done and was sale pending for quite awhile, which is when it came off the MLS altogether.
    Not sure what it will go for. I know there is another SFH on Broderick that just went into contract after 1-2 weeks that was listed for 1.5M.
    But, check out the TIC and condo market in the area. Very strange how high $$ places are still going for in 6F. (3 TICs on Fulton in contract now (same bldg – 800K-1M range); 2 TICs sold for above 1M (I think) on Fulton (same bldg) late last year; 3-4 condos in same bldg on Hayes that sold all sold for over 1M late last year/early this year).

  11. Posted by sam

    “$2m for that hood? Yikes. I predict large reductions in the future”
    What’s wrong with that nabe? I visited open houses around Lone Mountain and the area looks very quiet and safe to me. Isn’t this house just two blocks from Lone Mountain? I’m a recent migrant to SF so I just want to get a feel for what’s wrong with “that hood.” Thanx much.

  12. Posted by abub

    I don’t think you can even begin to hypothesize on the remodel cost based on the information in the listing. It’s possible that they reinforced the brick foundation (sure hope so for that price), replaced the roof, evicted tenants, totally rewired all the electrical (also hope so for that price). It looks like they did a really nice job modernizing but retaining the nice Victorian elements. That neighborhood has been continually gentrifying and I don’t think the house seems unduly expensive unless it needs a new foundation….

  13. Posted by two_times

    Sam-
    Nothing is wrong with the hood, we live 2 blocks away from this place and it is a beauty. It is safe, quiet and a great location. However, it is not Pacific Heights and I don’t see them getting 2 mil for it. As someone else pointed out, it had a “sale pending” sign in the window for quite some time, but low and behold…..

  14. Posted by Buy High, Sell Low

    As cynical as I am about the market, this is a pretty nice place. It isn’t Pacific Heights, but it is 4356 sf going for $460/sf w/parking.
    And I’m in this neighborhood all the time, it’s fine…
    It sure beats the crap out of 925 Fulton trying to fetch $3M a few months back…

  15. Posted by Geo

    AS the old adage goes…Do you want to own the most expensive house in NOPA…
    I have to agree with anonn here, just in terms of relationship to the market profile.

  16. Posted by sometech

    When I looked at this property for my family as a fixer, I figured about $300k for the renovation. I remember it being listed at $1.2M though and thought that $1.5M would be a very nice price and worth the 6 months of headache. We decided on an investment property (8 months of renovating headache instead, yeah!)
    The house was really a mess and they have done a very nice job (except for the exterior paint.. red is just not a good color for me). If I were the agent, I would push for $1.8M right now and try to get some upward motion with multiple bids. It’s definitely worth it in my book. But… I’m not an agent… so what do I know. But when you calculate profit for the flipper, don’t forget holding costs including staging.

  17. Posted by sometech

    Oh nvm you included carrying costs….

  18. Posted by Trip

    I actually think this is an up and coming area, although the transit is not good from here IMHO (I don’t like the bus lines), but boy, it sure isn’t a $2M home neighborhood yet (if it ever will be).
    Here is a decent victorian condo nearby that has been reduced a few times and is now at about 10% less than the 2004 selling price. Looks like they may be including unfinished attic space in the sf (not sure), but still heading toward some reasonable pricing (although not there yet).
    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/907-Divisadero-St-94115/home/1209878

  19. Posted by Craig

    Wow, 750K isn’t too bad. But, it is on Divis and right next to a dollar store.
    The area of this condo is a bit shady though. Of course it was probably worse in 2004.
    But, look a block away up McAllister (and a hill) at the intersection with Broderick. Another condo in contract fairly quickly for almost 1.5M list price.
    In other words, the area changes fairly quickly from one block to another here.
    Will be interesting to watch the Divis condo though.

  20. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    They are trying to rent this place for $10.5k/mo now:
    http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/apa/1161154378.html
    The sink has the same weird dimensions in these photos too, maybe it really is bigger than the bathtub!

  21. Posted by Robert

    10.5K? So, they are expecting a 350K/year household to rent from them.
    One interesting thing about SF demographics, is that within the pool of renter households, as incomes rise, the amount of money spent on rent decreases as a proportion of income. This is in contrast with owner households.
    That is why, in all of SF, there are only about 500 households paying more than $2900/month in rent — at least in 2007. I.e. even though 45,000 renter households could conceivable afford to pay this much, only 500 of them do so.
    I guess we could speculate whether they are saving for a downpayment, or if they are planning to move, etc. In either case, the rental demand is not what most owners perceive, even adjusting for the misperceptions in actual earnings.

  22. Posted by Robert

    I meant, 350K disposable income. But, I guess at these heights, it doesn’t matter 🙂

  23. Posted by whenwillitstop

    This has a “sale pending” sign on it. Any insight?

  24. Posted by eddy

    In Escrow, “Now accepting back up offers. ” = contingencies.

  25. Posted by eddy

    Nevermind. Back to “Available”

  26. Posted by bird_man

    Another “sale pending” sign went up for this property the other day… that being said it was removed even quicker than the last time.

  27. Posted by LOL

    You have to love all these comments from people who are quick to judge without ever seeing the property. Just look at the pictures and start your analysis. Comparing this house to other houses not even in the same district. What in the world are you people thinking? And you know each other?? Hmmmm this place is west of Divisadero as opposed to Alamo Square Park or let’s see Pacific Heights. What is the average price per square foot in District 6 uhhh 450? What are you people smoking. This place is a bargain and go in the other Districts and the price per square foot is higher. You are buying a house NOT a condo. Condo’s are being built left and right, not SINGLE FAMILY HOMES!! Get real people!!!!!!!!!!!

  28. Posted by sanfrantim

    LOL, are you involved in representing this property? If so, maybe you can shed some light on the pending/not pending situation.

  29. Posted by Geo

    I did get a chuckle from LOL’s post, so I guess the nomme de guerre is apropos as they say.
    yes, on the surface $450/ft² seems relatively cheap, and you are getting a lot of house. On top of that, the remodel is nicely done.
    I did see the house, and in the end as anonn correctly points out, the price for houses in that area are much different from the current ask. Thinking someone is going to pioneer a new price level for any neighborhood, let alone this one, in this current market is an interesting concept to consider.
    Think about the buyers with the cash to buy a $2 million SFR, and where they will want to live…
    Soemthing to consider.

  30. Posted by tipster

    More to the point of all the sales and relists, you may need to be concerned with whether the house will actually appraise for anything near the list price.

  31. Posted by eddy

    -100k. $1.85; only -300k to go

  32. Posted by Geo

    I guess LOL’s “bargain” became even a greater one..
    Price discovery in an illiquid market is often difficult and painful.

  33. Posted by SocketSite

    As eddy notes above, the list price for 2011 Golden Gate has been reduced to $1,850,000.

  34. Posted by Greg

    Hi,
    I have discovered this site just a few days ago. Interesting idea. Nevertheless, it’s been quite interesting reading the participants’ comments. However, I’m curious if there are any buyers/investors/agents among you who post the comments for practical interests/reasons?
    Thank you all for your kind comments,
    Greg – 2011 Golden Gate Avenue owner.

  35. Posted by diemos

    Hi Greg, welcome to SocketSite.
    “However, I’m curious if there are any buyers/investors/agents among you who post the comments for practical interests/reasons?”
    As any of the regulars will tell you I’m a little slow on the uptake so perhaps you could just come out and say what you’re trying to imply?

  36. Posted by Greg

    Hi Diemos,
    Thank you for your welcome. Since you are talking to a slow guy yourself, and as a regular, maybe you could explain to me what practical purpose does this trhread serve and what would be the desired outcome for the participants?
    Regards,
    Greg.

  37. Posted by Trip

    Greg, I second the welcome.
    Speaking only for myself, the desired outcome would be to know the selling price when it sells, and (if you’re willing to provide it) know the costs of the remodel — which appears to have been done well — and the carrying costs. That way we can use this as yet another indicator of where the SF housing market is these days. That is really the primary point of this site, at least to my eyes. This site appears to be weighted toward properties in this price range, which is perhaps why the editor selected this place.
    If you’re interested, my general view is that prices in SF are falling rapidly, and places in this high price range are falling the farthest and the fastest. But I have no personal stake in any of this (I own a home but have no intention of selling), and I sincerely hope that you end up doing well with the sale. I think that those who buy places and fix them up are doing a great service for SF.

  38. Posted by eddy

    Greg, could you provide any insight into the question about about the property going pending and then out?
    Not sure what hidden agendas anyone could actually have on here with information being so public these days? I’ve always thought getting a feature on SS would be both a curse and a blessing. Bottom line is that a home priced correctly will sell quickly. A home saddled with owner “baggage” (i.e., unrealistic value expectations) are going to require more time to find a happy place.
    I’d also be curious as to why you choose the RE firm California State Realty, Inc. to list your property? Why not go with one of the better known agency/agents in SF? I wonder? That agent/firm has exactly one active listing in SF right now?
    This is the second owner comment in as many days. Interesting. Good stuff.

  39. Posted by diemos

    “maybe you could explain to me what practical purpose does this trhread serve and what would be the desired outcome for the participants?”
    In a single word: knowledge.
    All of the participants on this site share a common fascination with the SF real estate market in all of it’s details. What’s selling and for how much. What kind of remodels are going on. etc. etc.
    For some it’s business. Like realtors and developers.
    For some they’re in the market for a place and want to understand the market to get a good deal.
    For some, like me, the SF market is a manifestation of the larger macro economic forces that are at work and interest me.
    The only good advice I can give you is not to take it personally. This property is an enormous part of your life but to us it’s just case study #158937. You’ll find the comments much less polite than you would get face to face but that honesty can also be useful if you don’t take it personally.
    Good luck.

  40. Posted by eddy

    ^^ what he said.

  41. Posted by San FronziScheme

    Practical purpose?
    1 – Free flow of ideas. Before the Internet, information was “owned” by one professional association. Less and less so thanks to RE blogs. This rebalances the psychology behind the business. People are more critical, better informed and I think this is for the best.
    2 – Every market needs bulls and bears, longs and shorts. The market is made in between. In a bull monopoly market, everyone hyperventilates in unison, things get crazy and you have a monster of a market, way off reality. I became a bear in 2003 after 9 years of being a counter-current bull and an active buyer. Every deal I made was carefully calculated up to a few dollars of monthly payments. Speculators from 2003 on the contrary were moving with very huge brush strokes and that was crazy in my eyes. I wasn’t reading RE blogs at the time because they were a mostly a waste of time. Blogs started to move out of the doomsday theories to get some solid ground after 2004 and became really credible after 2006. Before that you had the crazies in log cabins posting almost worthless stuff. Many still do, btw. After 2004 the writing was on the wall for whoever with at least one foot on the ground. Now the giant RE Ponzi is all too obvious in locales like Florida or Vegas or Bakesfield, but many still deny we had a Mega-Ponzi in SF, simply because there’s more money here and places are still selling at a good price due to the cash oversupply still lingering in the region. Borrowed money + overpriced technology will meet reality one day. As a rental investor, I look how much I can rent a place, how much it costs to buy (and own long term) and I still see a huge chasm between owning and renting and I am staying put. Property value potential is the dream. Rental value is the reality. SF is still dreaming, imho.
    3 – For a seller, the posts can be very irritating. But you can learn why some sales go through and why some don’t. Nobody in real life will ever tell your flaws in your face. This blog can tell you what common flaws leave homes unsold why others fly off the shelf in a week. Heck, it might inspire a few sellers to revise their strategy. A hint for a few sellers: we have seen quite a number of sales that started at a low attractive asking and that ended selling way higher. I don’t think it’s your target segment though. Good luck on the sale.

  42. Posted by SocketSite

    The listing for 2011 Golden Gate Avenue has expired without a sale.

  43. Posted by Trip

    Well, let’s see if they try again after Labor Day. Nice place, and as I said above, I think this neighborhood is improving, but to sell it now I think they’ll need to put it at around $1.4M. Perhaps they simply cannot do that given the purchase, carrying, and remodel costs, and the check they’d likely need to bring to the closing. If they can, I think they should do it and cut their losses (they’ll do worse a year from now).

  44. Posted by Jingle Mail

    With all these poems, I thought I’d try my hand at a parody…
    Jingle Mail
    Flipping our new home
    In a one year A.R.M.
    O’er the comps we go
    Laughling all the way
    Chopped pillows on the couch
    Featured on Socketsite
    What fun it is to crash and burn
    Let the flippers mourn tonight
    ooooh, jingle mail, jingle mail, jingle all the way
    Oh what fun it is to default and simply walk away
    ooooh, jingle mail, jingle mail, jingle all the way
    Oh what fun it is to default and simply walk away

  45. Posted by Trip

    This place is back on the market at $1,799,000. 1 DOM! Nice looking place. Wrong neighborhood for that price.
    ‘Tis the season for the re-listings of all the recently withdrawn/unsold homes.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles