Having further reduced its list price by $150,000 (now asking $3,199,000, 20 percent under its original list) and “restaged,” the sellers of 722 Steiner have just listed the legal two-unit building as two TIC’s, a one-bedroom for $549,000 and a four-bedroom for $2,750,000.
Apparently the parts of 722 Steiner are thought to be worth more than the whole.
∙ Listing: 722 Steiner #A (1/1) – $549,000 [MLS]
∙ Listing: 722 Steiner (4/3.5) – $2,750,000 [MLS]
∙ Listing: 722 Steiner (5/4.5) – $3,199,000 [MLS]
∙ 722 Steiner: Reduced Again (By Postage For 750,000 Postcards) [SocketSite]
∙ Postcard Row’s Postman’s Home Hits The Market (722 Steiner) [SocketSite]
1br + 4br ? I think that this wins the award for the most lopsided TIC. Or condo for that matter. Why even bother having HOA meetings ? The subordinate unit owner will just have to follow along with its master.
No way however that A+B=C
That wasn’t very smart, the top TIC is listed for $2,750,000 by now I’m sure they would take that price for the entire building. The victorian specialist must be wishing she was the modern specialist at this point!
@Nancy, maybe that is the strategy.
Milkshake,
It all depends on the TIC agreement. Some agreements with a 55/45% worth will give one vote for each tenant-in-common. Others will also stipulate that someone who owns 2 units counts only for one vote. But I am sure that an 85% majority owner like this one (rough guesstimate) probably kept the power in the building.
Maybe they will hire the buyer(s) of the 1/1 for gardening, upkeep, driving, cooking. That would makes sense. Someone who would agree to be the “under”ling in this deal probably makes a living receiving orders already.
I could not come up with a witty answer to this other than whatever unfolds will not be a classic TIC situation.
Perhaps a millionaire couple wants to upgrade but cannot do it without additional leverage provided by a stranger?
This speculator/seller is trapped in the bubble-era mentality and will most likely default.
In better words,
I could afford the cheap unit but am an honest working-class guy with great credit and a 20% down payment available.
Why would I risk my financial well-being on a few leveraged “millionaires” who need a TIC situation to upgrade???????
when the whole thing doesn’t sell, carve it into TIC’s. call me crazy but i could never imagine shelling out the amount of cash required to take down most TIC’s in this city. for a Mill plus you should at least own your studs in. seems crazy to me.
In this price range, there are many options on MLS for SFR…
This speculator/seller is trapped in the bubble-era mentality and will most likely default.
Talk about speculating. The owner bought the house in the 70s and lovingly restored it. And did a damn fine job, I must say.
“The owner bought the house in the 70s and lovingly restored it.”
Super! Then their 30yr fixed mortgage has been paid off and there is nothing to stop them from pricing it to sell.
Um …
Unless they’ve been “extracting their equity” recently.
So this is a two-unit TIC correct?
I don’t get why the owner just doesn’t do a legal condo conversion and sell it at market value -which would be much higher than as a TIC.
Two units are supposedly ok to convert in SF
Listing Agent completely missed this one…..
^not very likely^, as she’s been selling Victorians in that area for a very long time. It looks more like a case of a seller whose expectation needs to be gradually coaxed downward. If you see the property, you’ll know that it’s got some very funky elements (stairs down through powder room, anyone?) and that it doesn’t have much of the yard that all of its “sisters” possess.
The listings for 722 Steiner have been withdrawn from the market without any reported sales.