1800 Gough Street Penthouse: Library (Image source: pacificheightspenthouse.com)
The Penthouse at 1800 Gough Street has returned to the market $245,000 (4.9%) under its last list price of late last year (2006), and $1,100,000 (18.8%) below its original list price of $5,850,000 (months before that). MLS statistics now reflect three (3) days on the market for this property, and if it sells for $4,750,000, it will be recorded and reported as having sold for 100% of asking.
Regardless, it’s still a stunning property. And as some might say, hate the game, not the player…
∙ Listing: 1800 Gough #PH (3/4.5) – $4,750,000 [pacificheightspenthouse.com] [MLS]
A Second Round Of Luxury Home Reductions [SocketSite]
Resetting the DOM to sell “stale fish” [SFGate]
Sorry NAR, But No [SocketSite]

12 thoughts on “Speaking Of Relisting (And Reductions)”
  1. I believe this place has actually been for sale for years. I looked at it probably three years ago with a friend.

  2. What difference does it make what percentage of the current list price it sells for? It becomes a comparable property at the sales price, not the fact that it sold for 4.9% under the original list price. In other words, if it sells for the current asking price (or 100% of the current asking price) does it matter that it’s ACTUALLY much lower than the original asking price? Let’s look at the final sales price, not the percentage of asking.

  3. I agree with anonymous 11:37. Who cares what a (greedy, unrealistic) seller tries (and fails) to get for their property? The real value of a property is what a person is willing to pay for it. I think you learn that in Real Estate 101. So let’s see what this place sells for… eventually. Then we’ll know. Until then, it’s only speculation.

  4. Could this property have been staged differently? Or is this the actual furniture? None of the rooms or images says 5 million to me and the kitchen is rather ordinary for the price range. There was a lost opportunity with the penthouse deck and “bonus” or “entertainment space” on the upper level that could have made this property more “unique”. The Top Floor and Terrace could with a rather small investment turn into one of the most desirabele spaces in the city with only some imagination and design talent.

  5. In terms of a “comp” or “real value” I have to agree, it’s only the final sales price that matters. That being said, I do have an issue with the “percentage of asking price” statistic that I often see published as a testament to the strength of the local real estate market or even an agent. I always assumed that stat was biased, but now it’s starting to seem as misleading as “DOM”.

  6. So DOM is misleading and % of initial asking price is meaningless. Final sales price is the key factor.
    This property notwithstanding, what about the increasing use of incentives to sell property? For example, I buy a condo at the same price point as the most recent comp, but I get a free car and 2 years of HOA fees paid, along with closing costs and a granite luxury hardwood plasma whatever. So I actually paid about $80K less than the last comp, but the data is manipulated because agents want to preserve comps in a falling market. Lots of this going on in the east bay.
    Plus noboby was complaining when it took 2 days to sell a property, which went for 30% over asking. Can’t have it both ways.

  7. Condo’s around Lafayette Park in Pac Heights, and especially with a VIEW of Lafayette Park are rare and some of the best properties in all of SF and the Bay Area.
    Hate the game.

  8. I am not sure I agree that it doesnt mean anything. Afterall all the statistics I hear about how well the market is doing come from how many places have sold for over at least asking and over asking and the same people shout from the hills how non-frequently things sell for under asking. Even the MLS tracks closes as under and over asking so I do believe it makes a difference. Just the same it goes back to what I said about you cant honestly expect them to police their own customers….

  9. Those of you arguing that it is only the percentage of the last list price that matters are correct, and so are those arguing percentage of first list price matters. Both are correct.
    The statistic is intended to help both buyers and sellers get a sense for whether prices are headed up or down, and how far off the realtors are when listing.
    Example: realtor lists property A for 2M. After several reductions, the place sells for 1.7. That tells me the realtors and sellers are off by about 15% on the high side. If this happens a lot, it gives me a consistent pattern.
    So later, when a realtor lists property B for 2M, because I can only know in advance of an actual sale the initial list price (I won’t know the final list price until it sells), it might be a safe bet that the price is 15% too high.
    Realtors will counter that, with the new information, they will adjust the price to be accurate. But they muffed it with property A, and so they may be out of touch with the market.
    The other stat (percentage of final list price) gives sellers some sense for how close they need to be to get an offer out of a buyer. If properties sell for 95% of their list price, that tells me the realtor needs to be at least that close, or the place is going to sit. This information has some value to sellers.
    What is misleading is that it is only the second piece of information that gets published. This, as usual, makes it look like the realtors are withholding information that buyers need, and so the buyers wonder what the hell they are paying all this money for? And the buyers, as well as the sellers, thus have more ammo to get rid of the realtors.

  10. This condo is lovely, but I think people willing to spend $4.7, don’t want a Gough address. I’d rather buy something around the same price on a better street in Pac Heights.

Leave a Reply

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