Apples To Apples (To Un-Upgraded Apples) On Mallorca In The Marina

Property declines in the middle of a severe recession. So interesting!

Oddly (or perhaps not), $1.195 million would put this prime property at an early-2004 price, which is exactly what the top-tier CSI posted yesterday would have predicted. Question is whether it will even go for the current list price. Presumably it has to go for more than $1.195 million, because CSI is for the entire SF MSA, and we all “know” that the “real SF” is holding up much better than even the top tier of the SF MSA, right?

So only 95k off from 2000 prices? Given the pricing history and a few of the pics, my guess is that this is a less than desirable space. It looks a little dark for one. Has anybody seen it?

Worst economic crisis in our lifetimes and all we can find is an occasional property that’s down 20% from what everyone agrees was a bubble?

Looking at the photos, it looks like a very standard Marina Flat in terms of light. The kitchen is slightly larger than most, though I suspect the dining room is probably smaller than most Marina flats. Most of the 2/2 flats are about 1550 square feet, so to add a third bedroom in 1700 is probably a little tight. The bedrooms don’t look particularly small, so I’m guessing they got some square footage out of the dining room.
The street itself is quiet, and it’s in a fantastic location for the Marina, seismic hazards and all. The only problem is that the houses on that street have very small yards. I think a 3/2 with no real yard is probably a bit of a tough sell in the Marina.
But shell space at the peak in 2005 was going for $650 psft, so I would think something in move in condition like this at $700 psft will be seen as a good deal. It’s informative that we are UNDER 2000 pricing now for something in very good shape.

Worst economic crisis in our lifetimes and all we can find is an occasional property that’s down 20% from what everyone agrees was a bubble?
The recession is not over and it’s effects will last long after it is. Expect a 30% – 40% percent decrease in spending for 10 years. Savings will go up dramatically.
If somebody grabs this condo for list, they’ll be kicking themselves a year from now.

27 Rico Way. I just looked it up and I think the tax record is probably accurate. The tax records show 1264 feet, and it sold for 1.55M. Look at the photos, it’s smallish.

Price reductions (“improvements”, lol) on 228 Mallorca have been slow, which is typical when downpayments are involved. Property shark shows that $245K was put down in the first loss position back in 2004. Watching these sorts of listings for a while, it’s obvious that it takes time for people to make their peace with the idea that a good chunk (if not all) of a downpayment has been lost.
One can imagine that behind these moldy 90+ “days on market” listings are Kubler-Ross processes wherein the sellers go through the seven stages of grief over their recently departed dollars. Additionally, I’d imagine that a seller needs to reckon with the idea that one paid more to own it than to rent it specifically because he believed it to be a “good investment”. Thus, not only must the dollar loss be confronted, but the acceptance of having been so wrong must also be achieved.

As I’ve explained before: realtors will never lie, but they will withhold facts.
Lets look at 27 Rico way on a drive by from the street. What do you figure the chances are that it was sold for 1200 psft and not for the lot value as a teardown to build a $3M SFR. Look at the photo and decide. Apparently, we’re left to believe the Marina is “Hot, hot, hot” and 1200 psft is just the going rate.
http://www.mapjack.com/?LfFnWfjxbFwC
I just love the refreshing honesty of realtors. They never lie: their entire business model is predicated on withholding information.

tipster:
although I agree with you that this purchase MAY be a prelude to a reno, it’s still quite telling that someone is going to risk their money to try to buy and then reno a property!

Most homes in the Marina cannot be torn down, and expanding the footprint is a major undertaking requiring an appearance, to fight “DR requesters”, before the Planning Commission, populated at the moment with no than three (uber-liberal) members who would never vote for it, and others who rarely do.
Not that that justifies failing to provide true comps to a buyer.

This property seems to be 3 unit condo. Since 2 unit condo is “standard Marina flat”, I think it maybe the reason why you can not command higher price per SQF.

SNB,
I was just trying to compare it to other marina flats in that hood to get an idea of whether there was anything wrong with it. To get a large living room and a formal dining room for 8 (which most of these flats have), you need 1500 minimum.
Conifer, no one is paying 1200 psft in the marina to live in that same envelope. It may be hard to change it, but they didn’t pay that price to keep it the way it is. They probably intend to duplicate what’s next door. I suspect anonn knew full well that it wasn’t priced for its current square footage.

“As I’ve explained before: realtors will never lie, but they will withhold facts.
Lets look at 27 Rico way on a drive by from the street. What do you figure the chances are that it was sold for 1200 psft and not for the lot value as a teardown to build a $3M SFR. Look at the photo and decide. Apparently, we’re left to believe the Marina is “Hot, hot, hot” and 1200 psft is just the going rate.
http://www.mapjack.com/?LfFnWfjxbFwC
I just love the refreshing honesty of realtors. They never lie: their entire business model is predicated on withholding information.
”
Are you freaking serious with that nonsense Tipster? “Lies” “hot hot hot” and “teardown” ???? You by far the most dishonest person on this website.
And MarinaLocal,
I did look at the lower party room. I looked it up too. There was no permit. But if you look at the space in question, it not only seems to have decent head height, but it looks to have decent light + air. Now, go back and look at the upper rooms. They all appear small. And why 400 feet? Do you know for sure? But OK. Go ahead and call it 400 feet. The property still sold for 931 a foot in that case.

I think everybody who reads this site should pony up 500 bucks so that Tipster and FormerAptBroker can buy a piece of crap house somewhere in the city. Let alone a perfectly nice house in the Marina. They can buy something decreptit in the Excelsior. Then we can follow their attempts to get a tear down permit. Make a blog of it. LOL at some of the stuff that gets said on here.

Of course SFRs have more expansion and development potential. I’ll concede that Rico is a better block too, barely. Gee. Sorry for bringing up a noteable sale two blocks away. My bad!
Now how about that teardown? How about those year 2000 values? “Stupid”? I ? I think not.

“oversize lot as a sign of great strength.”
No, you said that.
Prime?
Hardly.
The property is very close by. The property indicates “year 2000 values” might not be all that fair of a thing to say.
The end.
“With great strength comes great responsibility” — Tipster.

Not to get too off topic, but speaking about “Year 2000” prices in the Marina, this one has been sitting for a while (61 DOM) without a reduction:
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/3520-Baker-St-94123/home/1963819
Listed for $3.5M, it was purchased for $3.35M back in early January 2001 (so, call it a “2000” price). I bet that after hearing what a great investment SF real estate has been (especially the “good seats”), and having seen Chomicle cover after Chomicle cover touting the ever rising median prices for years (those were the days, lol), the sellers are probably shocked to discover that they can’t even cover the realtor commission without digging into their pockets. And it’s not sold yet, so the financial damage could be much worse. Anyway, a good learning experience – all of us speculators/gamblers have been there….

“realtors will never lie, but they will withhold facts”
you’re talking to/hiring the wrong realtor bud.
all mechanics cheat you, until you find the one who doesn’t.
all lawyers are crooks – well, that one is true.

Oh, this is too good to pass up. The nearest potential foreclosure unit is at 3730 Fillmore — a 2 bath unit coming in at 1722 sq.ft. A Notice of Trustee Sale was filed on Feb. 24, 2009 for the amount of $1,047,818. The auction is scheduled for June 9. And I almost forgot, the owner, one Brennan J Newsom, (3rd cousin, or something like that, to Mayor Gavin Newsom). Thank you RealtyTrac, Zillow, and SF Recorders Office for that gem!

I should note, the property owned by Brennan J Newsom at 3730 Fillmore avoided the auction block last year (NOTS filed in May 2008).

That reminds me of what the one honest realtor I have encountered in my life once told me: “99% of realtors give the rest of us a bad name” 😉
That reminds me of the of the one retired millionaire former hedge fund trader who spends all of his time researching a real estate market of a city he does not live in, where he has no intention of ever purchasing. Huh. Come to think of it I have never met such a person.

You have to admit that bringing up the price per foot of a single family home (that can be expanded or torn down) with a garage on a lot in a better area of the Marina when talking about the price per foot of a flat (that can not be expanded or torn down) in the Marina is a good idea when trying to sell the flat…
Is anonn the realtor? Otherwise, this is just another out-of-context grasp by the Tipster, who won’t own up to being wrong on his dumb car analogy, and FAB, who throws all sorts of arguments with no context other than feable attempts at sounding like he knows rich people, yet doesn’t know anything about quite sales. Bunch of bitter phonies…just saying, and with that you can continue to ignore me.

I checked 228 Mallorca Way out. It’s done up well. No yard is a drawback, but that’s probably more than priced in here. Oversized bedrooms, and a walk in closet works. Nice overhead lighting and moldings throughout and good storage. And the third bedroom is not just an office nook – you could easily stick a full size bed and chest of drawers in there. Location is pretty sweet too if you are OK with liquefaction, 1.5 blks from the main drag on Chestnut St.

viewlover wrote:
> FAB, who throws all sorts of arguments with
> no context other than feable attempts at sounding
> like he knows rich people, yet doesn’t know
> anything about quite sales.
I think viewlover was trying to say that I was making a “feeble” attempt at sounding like I know rich people and that I know nothing about “quiet” sales.
I have mentioned in the past that my parents (who never went to college) ended up buying a big house on the Peninsula in the late 60’s after my grandfather (who had a stroke) came to live with us (and they had extra money from his pension and the rental of his house in SF). When I was a kid (in public school) most homes in our neighborhood were selling for under $200K. Now that most of my friends parents live in homes worth $3-5mm (and many have cabins in Tahoe that cost $50K and are now worth ~$1mm) I guess you can call all the people I grew up around “rich”. I have no idea why it is hard to believe that some Bay Area property is “listed for sale” but not “in the MLS” (and showing up on total property for sale reports) since the sellers want to keep the sales quiet (or as viewlover would say “quite”)…

actually, I’m saying that you don’t make any sense. I was on with tipster stating that I did not buy his conspiracy theory about realtors being able to withhold inventory in order to drive prices up. NOthing in those posts, mine or tipsters made any statement about none mls lisings being sold. His point again, in case you still don’t get it, was that agents discourage listings in order to reduce inventory in order to raise prices, a rediculous statement in my opinion. I’ve since gone on to explain the logic behind it. You stuck your nose in it with some comment about quite sales and some snobby church going person who stated that basically only trash gets listed on the MLS. And about how there are distressed properties in Atherton or wherever the hell you grew up. What the hell does that have to do with what I was stating? Other than you derailing the topic and trying to appear to make a point. I never said that some listings don’t go on the MLS, I know for a fact that some don’t, without getting to complicated, look at infinity, hello! Still you keep suggesting that I don’t believe that some listings never make the MLS by putting words into my mouth.
Since then I’ve noticed you make no sense other than try to sound smart.
For example: Bears can use list prices to show a market is soft, but Bulls can’t use list prices to use a market is strong (If a Bear points out that there are 25 “Princess Dianna” Beanie Babies on Craig’s List from 25 different sellers all asking $1 it tells you that the market is at $1 or lower. If a Bull points out that there are two “Princess Dianna” Beanie Babies on eBay and they both have a $100 minimum bid it only tells you that there are two sellers who believe in miracles)…
All this tells you is that listing prices don’t mean anything, basically mirroring anonn, but trying to be original. Nice try. What if someone bought or sold a beenie diana for $200. What if the 25 people on craigslist are selling fakes or false advertising. Find someone who has paid a dollar or more than $100 and it begins to mean something. Otherwise it’s just an empty comment, and then you throw in what LMIMr stated followed by what anonn stated and there is no connection. Sort of like your census from 1970 pointless point and the rest of that post. Then you argue every individual point, but still, you say nothing, you’re not making any conceptual argument, just a bunch of sentences and paragraphs that don’t say a damned thing. So don’t think about what I’m trying to say, just read it, over and over if you have to, maybe I’ll begin to make sense to you.

1.195 for turnkey 1700 sf in this area? i bet its in contract soon

3070 Fillmore
Should read 3730 Fillmore. Bought for $500k in 1999.