The tightly cropped photo from the listing:
2243 Greenwich: Listing Photo
A bit broader perspective from SocketSite:
2243 Greenwich (
And the close-up for those who might be more interested in renting:
2243 Greenwich For Rent (
UPDATE (2/22): From a plugged-in tipster: “Price was just reduced to 1,995,000 – agent remarks say it is now a ‘bank short sell’.”
∙ Listing: 2243 Greenwich (6/5) – $2,200,000 [MLS]

39 thoughts on “A Little Extra Perspective On The Listing: 2243 Greenwich”
  1. Interesting that the photos in the listing are exactly the same as when it was “Lender Owned”, had been “beautifully staged”, and sold in October, 2005 for 1.8M. Wonder how it actually looks?

  2. 2.2 Mil. for the ugliest house ever built – what a bargain!
    I think they should register this house with Guiness Books for Ugliest House Ever – the esteem may increase the value a few hundred k’s.

  3. “Ummm Honey, the neighbors are a little loud all night with those diesel engines revving and those sirens.”
    Actually I see nothing really deceptive with the tight crop unless the fire station was never painted yellow and the photographer “repainted” it a dull yellow. They even legally cropped out the parking permit sign unlike another property featured here that altered reality by removing a sign placed right in front of the house.

  4. Per property shark, last sold in October of 2005 for $1.8MM. So they’re basically targeting 9% annual appreciation at this price (if they get it). Looks like the buyer put a whopping 5% down.

  5. Re the Craigslist rental ad–“Cntpry 6bd, 5bth,2-lvl, rmd, 2-cr pk, sng fm hs, bst lc” Does anyone else find this ad utterly baffling? I spent 5 minutes trying to figure it out. Is it Wheel of Fortune rental ads on Craigslist these days (“I’d like to buy a vowel, please”)?
    Why someone would post an ad like this that is both confusing and alienating to its target market is beyond me.

  6. “Cntpry 6bd, 5bth,2-lvl, rmd, 2-cr pk, sng fm hs, bst lc”
    I love this stuff. Straight from the days of newspaper ads that charged for every letter.
    What would be fascinating would be to find out that the person who wrote this Ad is young enough that they never actually placed a want ad in a newspaper and this is some sort of real estate agent racial memory at work, passed down through the ages.

  7. The rental price is totally absurd, of course. What these delusional owners rely on are corporate relocation services, who can pass on to companies an inflated rental rate. Lots of clueless corporates out there who know nothing about SF, except that they’ve heard it’s super “expensive”.
    For example, there’s a failed flip out in my neck of the woods trying this strategy, and they are VERY aggressive on cl:
    And the same house from yesterday:
    They advertise almost every day on cl, for 3 months or so now…. The house (100 Garcia) was for sale for a while at around $3MM, but it failed to sell (owner is probably down to breakeven on his purchase, after holding costs and gut remodel cost is factored in).
    Wavro and Mazal (the service in this Greenwich street listing) seem to specialize in finding corporate “suckers”.
    And sometimes they are successful. Last year there was a big 4/4 (4000 square feet) on top of a hill in Monterey Heights. Commanding views of the Bay, the Ocean, the Marin Headlands, and perhaps even the GG Bridge. It was advertising locally for $4000 per month, and it was vacant for well over a year – maybe 18 months. Finally, Wavro got the listing and they got a corporate tenant at $4150 (advertised – not so sure what the actual price is)! But it may have been a phyric victory for the owners. Corporate tenants can be very picky I guess, and so far all the windows have been replaced, workers are there “working on the kitchen” they said (in Spanish), and there always seems to be two work-trucks out front.

  8. Satchel,
    I love your posts but I just can’t resist the urge to correct an excellent writer on a spelling error:
    It’s “pyrrhic” not “phyric”.
    I’m sorry, arggh, I’m sorry. I just can’t help it.

  9. missionite,
    No worries. I type so fast I mess up all sorts of stuff! I studied Latin and Greek in high school. A lot of good it did me! Poor Phyrrus is spinning in his grave….

  10. My favorite line in the Craig’s List ad: “Best location within Cow Hollow.” Hmmm…”best” would seem to be highly subjective. Best for being close to a firehouse, in case of a fire. Best for hearing sirens in the middle of the night. Best for ……well, you can finish this yourself.

  11. “Man, if I was a fireman with a 7 figure income who didn’t want to commute, I’d be all over this place.”
    Given their salaries, they’re probably a lot closer to 7 figures than most of us here.

  12. I guess there’s not much chance the FBs could get away with burning this down to collect the insurance. 🙂

  13. For as much debate as we’ve had on here about buying vs. renting equivalent/same property, I’m surprised nobody has done the buy vs. rent on this place yet. Doesn’t get more apples to apples.
    Any takers? By my math, a fully-loaded PITI payment on this place, at asking price, would be roughly $15,500/month on a 30-year fixed at 6.5% with 10% down. Given you can rent it for $5K less per month, what would the appreciation have to be over the next 5 years to make buying a better decision?

  14. When I saw this come back on the market, I knew Socketsite couldn’t pass up a post on the absurdity surrounding this property. It’s even more humorous than I imagined!
    However, I will say to Satchel that I’ve had to use both Mazal and Wavro before and it’s much better to have a third party show and rent your units. Yes, their fees are too high, but they can get you decent tenants fast. I’ve been screwed over one too many times by Craigslist to ever try finding tenants on my own again. It can be a colossal waste of time, energy, and money.

  15. Sleepiguy,
    No arguments from me. Those guys deliver, it seems. But as a landlord, you probably agree with me – it is tough to find good tenants, especially for SFHs. It seems like all the solvent people have bought houses. LOL, they bought two or three in my experience!!

  16. Actually, I just realized a benefit from having the fire station
    next door – it will drown out the noise of the people in front
    of Balboa Cafe, which is just two doors away.

  17. Might not be as bad as it seems. I lived right next door to a fire station in Oakland, and those courteous folks made a habit of not turning on the sirens til they got to the end of the block…though I have to say that after a while I felt really bad for the house at the end of the block.

  18. I have to agree with trxie. I’ve lived across the street from two fire stations and never had to deal with the sirens, but they did kick in around 1-2 blocks later… contrary I felt very safe.
    Still the owner is silly to mask their neighbors and even more silly for buying such a hyper-inflated property to begin with! What a dump for 1.9 MM? I wouldn’t pay more than 500K.

  19. What ever happened w/ this place?
    [Editor’s Note: Withdrawn from the market in April without a sale.]

  20. Redfin has this as foreclosed @ $1,345,500
    Meanwhile, the wide-angle lens on 2269 Greenwich isn’t just quite wide enough to capture the same fire station just a few doors on the opposite side of 2243 🙂
    Of course, no one ever accused Paragon of misleading anyone. Oh wait… 🙂

  21. This place is back on the market with the note, “Lender Owned” and asking $1,818,000. At least this time the photos disclose the firehouse. But seriously, this isn’t going to sell at almost any price. I’d say the best bet would be to set it on fire but that’s not really going to work in this case! 🙂
    If ever there was a case to turn a home into a parking lot this might be it. The best case would be to tear it down and build a 3 unit 3 level condo where you can find buyers that will compromise on the firehouse; but I suspect you’d have to sell this place for 750k for that to pencil out economically.

  22. I guess it’s too small for the Edward II idea….. but I could see this as a rental for a bunch of 20 somethings. Any thoughts on what it might rent for…. either by room or in total? I think that’s how this eventually sells

  23. Did this place really get foreclosed twice in a row?
    Wow. That 2001 buyer leveraged the hell out of this place, and walked away with over $1M in equity, which was brilliant if you ask me. The bank should have gone after him/her. I wonder what the 2005 buyer listed it for in 2006 — looks like they were looking for a quick flip profit and didn’t get it.
    Feb 13, 2001 Sold (Public Records) $1,050,000
    Mar 28, 2005 Sold (Public Records)
    This home was sold at a foreclosure $2,182,318
    Oct 21, 2005 Sold (Public Records) $1,800,000
    Oct 12, 2006 Listed
    Oct 19, 2006 Delisted
    Feb 09, 2008 Listed
    [listing history removed]
    Apr 01, 2009 Delisted
    Oct 29, 2009 Sold (Public Records)
    This home was foreclosed. $1,345,500
    Nov 08, 2011 Listed (Active) $1,818,000
    Is the market value of this place really below $1.345M? That means the 2005 buyer lost over $450K to money heaven, to channel Satchel/LMRiM, and deservedly so.
    [Editor’s Note: Close, but not completely correct: Déjà Vu This (More Tightly Cropped) Cow Hollow View Before.]

Leave a Reply

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