While you’ve probably already heard that one of the two top-floor (60th) penthouses is in contract for $11,000,000 (unfinished), and in total hard contracts have been written for roughly 60 condos (15% of the development), we offer up a few more sales facts about San Francisco’s Millennium Tower that might ring new.
∙ Hard contracts have been written on units ranging from $670,000 to $11,000,000.
∙ Majority of contracts for Grand Residences with an average price point of ~$2.5M.
∙ 98% of the contract holders are from the Bay Area (which doesn’t include France).
∙ 70% of the contract holders are planning on making Millennium their primary residence.
∙ The vast majority of contract holders plan on paying cash.
∙ No other penthouse units on the 59th or 60th floors are yet in contract (despite rumors).
The sales office remains “by appointment only.” And our favorite feature within said office, the scale model which lights up each individual unit to show its exact location in the building (along with virtual views and finishes projected overhead) as you navigate the development via a touch screen display.
∙ The Millennium: A Few Things You Might Know (And A Few You Don’t) [SocketSite]
The entire top floor has 9,500 sf at 11,000,000 translates to 1,157 psf, not quite the $2,000 that was projected, for whatever thats worth.
[Editor’s Note: Mea culpa, that should have read “an unfinished” not “the entire” (which puts it around $2,300/sqft).]
The vast majority of contract holders plan on paying cash.
wow… that is interesting. it is amazing the amount of wealth that exists!
However, given the problems in the Jumbo market right now, it does make a certain amount of sense. perhaps those who need loans are hindered right now, whereas those who can pay in cash aren’t. I wonder if Millenium will start selling faster if/when the jumbo market recovers…
98% of the contract holders are from the Bay Area (which doesn’t include France).
ROFL. A little snarkiness in the morning! I like it… I mean “je l’aime! c’est vachement hyper-drole”
70% of the contract holders are planning on making Millennium their primary residence
in other words, other places in the city may open up due to Millenium… I have always stated that the best way to improve SF affordability is to build new construction! Now about those trees…
“70% of the contract holders are planning on making Millennium their primary residence.”
Translation: 70% of the people have told the loan officer to give them the lower rate for primary residences, regardless of their plans.
tipster,
Based on taking the data at face value, I have to disagree. If “the vast majority” of buyers are paying cash, then I would assume that they have not filled out any type of loan documents where they would fudge the truth to get a “lower rate.”
70% are going to make Millennium their primary residence – that’s fabulous news! I hope they’ll join us in the Rincon Hill Neighborhood Association 🙂
A couple of amusing things about the interactive website (given that the actual view from almost all of the north-facing units includes the bulky office building across the street at Five Fremont Center, which at 600 feet is virtually the same height as Millennium):
1. Click on all of the units from Floor 26 to the penthouse and look at the “virtual views” – you’ll never see Five Fremont Center even if you look at the view from every unit all the way around the building – oops did the camera accidently point to the side or something?
2. Click on Unit “A” on Floors 25 and below – and finally you will see Five Fremont Center – but magically it has turned into a triangular flatiron building that barely obstructs your view!! Thank you Adobe, Photoshop is amazing isn’t it. And all along I thought Fremont Street was perpendicular to Mission Street, but now I see that intersection has a sharp angle! All of the other views seem honest, but this image has clearly been digitally manipulated. (Sorry I can’t send an actual link since the site itself is Adobe Flash)
Here is John King’s original article praising the building from four years ago – I agree with its sentiments – but wish that the interactive website were a bit more honest with regard to the northern views.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/12/21/MNG8H3RVSB1.DTL