It’s a plugged-in reader that points out another apple ripening on the Noe Valley housing tree. Purchased for $965,000 on 8/4/06, 1024 Sanchez is back on the market today with a list price of $949,000.
Is listing below the last sale price simply the newest pricing strategy (“made you look!”), or is it actually another sign? And once again, it’s time to go on record with your pre-closing predictions.
UPDATE: We’ll add that it had been listed for $949,000 in 2006 as well.
i can’t speak on behalf of noe valley, but i can tell you that there is some funny stuff going on in the sunset. my clients have written 3 offers on 3 separate houses all of which they thought they could afford because there was a “6” as the first number in the aksing price. 2 of the three homes were in HORRIBLE condition and all three were on the market for 1 week, got 20+ offers and sold for 100k+ over the asking price. 2 of the 3 homes sold in the last 8 weeks. strange times out there, strange times…
Interesting.. I’m no expert on the sunset, but there are 16 SFH listed with 4 of them pending. There’s even a house listed at(gasp!)below $500k!
oops. forgot to add that there are 16SFH under $700k…
A quick reminder that selling for “over asking” speaks more to the pricing strategy than the “market” (which is why we do like them apples).
I think you all know what my prediction is, although it’s a TIC, so I’m not sure it qualifies as desireable 😉
Also, can someone with connections get the SF MLS to switch to interactive maps (google/yahoo/etc)?
[Editor’s Note: It’s actually a condominium.]
The fundamentals look solid, but the reality is that this is a lower unit, and suffers from a severe lack of light. I could see it going for less than it previously did, regardless of location, due to this. It’s also not been updated in some time.
Not-so-bold prediction: $899,000.
No pictures of the baths. Bad sign.
I think the agents are playing the bidding game, we recently sold our house in Lone Mountain for right around asking (we priced it accordingly to what we wanted to get). Now I see 2 homes on the market that were more updated than ours and priced I think pretty low.
http://www.zephyr-re.com/listingdetailmls.cfm?ID=92174
http://www.zephyr-re.com/listingdetailmls.cfm?ID=92192
The sales history makes no sense.
Sold Nov 2003 for $751,000
Sold Aug 2005 for $412,000
Sold Aug 2006 for $965,000
Anyone with better knowledge care to explain?
Hold on folks. I remember this one last couple times round. It’s nice and all, but it’s a very basic Noe flat. The last time it was listed at 949 and went for 965. The pricepoint indicates the agent may perceive a market plateau, if anything.
But shoot. They’re hoping it goes for a million, I’m sure. There’s a similar condo (1242 Sanchez) down the street with leased parking at 899K. 1024 also sold in ’05 for 950K after being listed at 799K.
Bet it’s in contract within 3 weeks, at asking.
xemdesign, where did you get your information? You’re probably looking at some part of a re-fi in the August 2005 figure.
ottoman – When did you sell your house?
I could be wrong , but I thought 300 Ewing Terrace was on the market before and failed to sell.
Garrett’s comments remind me of the market in Palo Alto during the dot com boom. The realtors would do a very careful and usually accurate market analysis — and then price every home at exactly $1M under comps.
That would incite huge bidding wars. The realtors would feign surprise and remark, “wow that one got 20 offers and sold for $1M over asking”.
Of course, in realty, it sold right at the comps, and the 18-19 offers were from suckers who wasted hours of time and energy “bidding” on a home on which the one or two knowledgeable bidders were going to bid the appropriate price.
The realtors were happy to even place the preposterously low bids for the uninformed, because that helped them claim the market was “on fire” and get the suckers, who were bidding at the joke of an asking price, or a laughably puny amount higher, to raise their bids on a later home.
The realtors never let on to this game to any of “their clients” because it was more important to get 20 offers so that it could be used to goose the market than it was to get your client the house – it helped all the realtors in the end. If they told people it was going to go for $1M over, no one but the one or two real buyers would have bid.
Another realtor tried to steal my business by calling me and telling me that ‘I don’t think THIS one will go for the $1M over’. I thought, “THE $1M over? Oh.”
Once I realized what was going on it was almost comical to watch the frenzy.
So here you are again, with at least some realtors feigning shock and surprise in an attempt to “put some fire under the market”. It’s always important for those realtors to feign that shock LOUDLY so that EVERYONE KNOWS HOMES ARE GETTING 20 OFFERS AND SELLING WAY OVER. because (sarcasm:) making sure that everyone knows that THE MARKET IS ON FIRE helps your own clients, so much!
A little education will go a long way towards keeping yourself out of the fray.
Buyer beware, at least in Palo Alto in the late 90’s, even “your” realtor may have other motivations that he might not let you in on.
The best point in your logive above tipster is the psychology of the buyer who loses out on 4 properties. Eventually, that buyer will over bid a propert to “Win” due to natural human nature.
Just watch ebay auctions. You used to be able to research the auction history which allowed you to see who bought what and bid on what. Anytime I ever auctioned something on ebay I would look at other similar items to see who was bidding on them. It used to be easy to figure out what a person would likely bid on your auction based on prior losing bids. Most people lost 2 or 3 auctions before winning.
I’d argue that any buyer agent using this tactic is pretty smart — which is basically why I loath the buyers agent. There is simply no incentive for them to get you the best deal. Another topic altogether.
tipster –
Your theories are funny. Please keep repeating them ad nauseum.
Admittedly, I’m pretty stupid. So your vast real estate agent conspiracy theories may be my salvation.
BTW – I heard that BJ Droubi totally killed JFK.
Back on topic, I’m guessing one of two things is going on here:
1. This is just a ploy to incite massive bidding wars. Because Noe Valley is the most desirable stretch of blocks on terra firma. All global tenets, secular and spiritual, would break down if anything in magical Noe sold for less than before, under any circumstance. My prediction: $1.5 million if TIC, $1.9 million if condo. All cash.
2. Noe was “hot” but is no longer hot. Sunset is now hot. An exodus is occuring, with people selling Vics in Noe to buy boxy dilapidated fixers in the fog belt. Then only $1.2 million.
Also, @ tipster, you forgot to mention that “those other 19 buyers are still out there!”
“I could see it going for less than it previously did, regardless of location, due to this [lower unit, and suffers from a severe lack of light].”
I disagree. Those attributes/characteristics werethe SAME the last time it sold. If it sells for less now, that is a data point arguing that the market has gone down.
About “grand realtor conspiracy theories”, I wouldn’t give them THAT much credit. However, it is silly to think that some of the realtors do not use basic behavioral approaches when trying to sell properties. I mean, you are dealing with high dollar (and high commission!) assets. The potential buyer pool consists of average people (you’re not talking about trading against rocket scientists on Wall Street here). That means the intelligence of the buyers – in the aggregate – is, well, average. THAT means some are below average, and some are morons. Unless ALL the realtors are morons too, at last *some* will figure out how to game the market and snare the most unsophisticated. Their cash is just as green as that of the most sophisticated buyer, so why not? A sale is a sale, and “always be closing (ABC) and all that. And so we get the many realtor games we are all aware of (DOM scam, $/sq ft disinformation, resetting price immediately prior to already-secured sale in order to raise “over asking” percentage, “pocket listings”, etc etc).
Just closed 3/5 for 1,160,000 (61 Stanyan). There was a listing on Ewing for around 1.5 at the same time, don’t remember the address. This makes it twice I lucked out (701 Minna being the other).
“1024 also sold in ’05 for 950K after being listed at 799K.”
Is this true?? If so, that would be rather shocking (assuming this place goes for around asking) – it would effectively imply that there has been zero appreciation in Noe Valley (at least for properties in this price range) since 2005.
fluj — I got sales history from Redfin. But you’re probably right that the ’05 figure was part of a refi.
So from ’03 to ’06 this property appreciated about 9% per year. If appreciation kept at that pace, then it should sell for about $1.1 mil this time. Let’s see what actually happens.
I think there hasn’t really been any appreciation in this price range in Noe (or anywhere for that matter) in the last three years. Prices city wide are basically flat in the past three years. However, for SFH in Noe there has been appreciation from $1.2-1.3M in 2005 to $1.5-1.6M for small houses from what I’ve seen.
xemdesign – Something strange is going on. Pull up the historical sales info. from property shark. It looks like sales in the last several years went to real estate firms? Looks like relocation firms?
Tipster, I do not see how your anecdote applies to this particular propety in any way shape or form. But I too get a kick out of your evil Realtor conspiracy theories, so please don’t stop on my account.
Any theory which posits that Realtors act in concert is fundamentally flawed. Far from it. Far, far from it. Unfortunately, most of my fellow Realtors would not spit on me if my head was on fire.
And Mike, yeah, it went from 799 to 950 in ’05. You can look at that any number of ways. I look at it like this. The 799 list price figure triggered a competetive situation which caused a very high (for a lower flat) sales price.
Was that “the market”? That’s the question here. I can say that in the past list prices for flats in Noe in ’05 and ’06 typically were not in the 9’s, but rather in the high to mid 7’s or low 8’s. Now it is common to see high eights, mid 9’s and even over a million. So what’s “the market” ? What people pay? Several of these sales were SHOCKED to see such big figures at the time. I can guarantee that.
This is a condo. Not a TIC.
Oh, I don’t think realtors always act in concert. What I think is that realtors act in their own best interest. Sometimes, what is in their own best interest is in the interests of everyone “in the profession”. That can sometimes be a coincidence.
Perhaps you can come up with some plausible theories as to this behavior: A realtor has some clients who have gotten outbid on the homes they want in the sunset. The way to help them would be to get them to bid the appropriate price while keeping other buyers from raising theirs. But instead of doing that, that realtor comes onto a public forum and, just in case anyone missed the overbids, makes statements on the public forum which will have the effect of encouraging others who are bidding *against his clients* to *increase* their bids.
It wasn’t any realtor who did that, it was a realtor with clients who are ACTIVELY LOOKING in the neighborhood he mentions (one that was different from the nighborhood of the thread).
Was that done as an evil conspiracy? No, but it sure isn’t helping his clients one bit.
I don’t think he shot JFK, nor do I think he is in a secret society to fleece buyers (you guys should keep reposting THOSE retorts ad nauseum), but, unless I am missing something, what he did was more in his own long term best interests than in the interests of “his” buyers. As others have said, the interests of the Realtors is sometimes vastly different from those of the clients.
Are there some who don’t play that way? You bet. But there are lots that do, and you can go up and look at post #1 on this very thread as proof. If I’m wrong about this, it won’t be the first time. But I sure looked the way I described it to me.
I’ll go with $899K as well.
I wonder how many times this condo has been remodeled since it sold in Nov 2003 for $751k.
The price in 2003 may have been for the TIC which included the entire building. The second sale at the $400K and change could have been for the one unit after it converted to condo and the appreciation would be from the 2005 sale, although not sure if you can convert that quickly, unless the process had already started.
Tipster,
It isn’t any sort of secret when multiple parties overbid on particular properties. Listing agents will tell selling agents. Selling agents will tell their clients. Whether it is a realtor or a buyer who divulges to a blog what happened during a particular bidding process is irrelevant.
ANd you know what? We are damned if we do, damned if we don’t. People always ask me candid questions on here. Usually I comply. Now you are saying that we should not! TOo much.
And man, are we supposed to prevent other agents’ buyers from writing higher offers? By coming onto blogs and spouting misinformation? Dude. Like that would really work.
Honestly, TIpster, you are completely out to lunch. Sometimes also breakfast and dinner.
Realtors NEVER act in concert.
Fluj, nobody asked him anything. He changed the topic to a different neighborhood and volunteered it.
Q. “How’s the weather in Miami?”
A. “I don’t know about Miami or the weather, but the real estate market in the Sunset in San Francisco is ON FIRE!!”
What? It’s the truth. Everyone already knows it. I was just being honest! Aren’t I SUPPOSED to be honest? I’m damned if I do and damned if I don’t!
How convincing was that? Not very. Go back and read his post.
Ha ha, nice try.
Oh, he changed the subject to the Sunset and you cry foul? Kinda like when I talked about Bernal Heights in a Noe thread, changing the subject, and you changed the subject to the historical vagaries of the Bay Area-wide MSA?
Just kidding.
I didn’t read that with any sort of import. I read it as merely someone talking about something they had experienced. Wanting to get something off his/her chest. Sure it’s the Sunset, but it was still related to “the current market.” Frankly, I read your incredulity as symptomatic of a contempt for all realtors.
You’re putting to much on blogs influence. Sure, lots of people read them. Lots of people also take what they read on the Internets with a grain of salt. As they should!
tipster–
i agree. it’s BULLSH*T that agents grossly under list property. first and foremost, it gets buyers excited that they actually may be able to afford a house (one that is clearly worth more than they have to spend on it) and secondly, it’s a complete waste of the buyers time, the buyers’ agents time and the seller’s time to review so many low offers. all that said, i’ve noticed with these three homes (the ones i was talking about above,1851 26th Ave, 16354 30th Ave and the latest of the three just took offers today, so i’m not going to reveal the address yet (not a good sample, i know, it’s only 3) all three sold for SIGNIFICANTLY more than they are worth in a SIGNIFICANTLY quicker manner than they would have if priced at the point where they actually sold. i hate it when agents use these silly tactics to show how amazing they are “look at me, i got 20 offers in a slowing market…” conversely, maybe they are doing a good job. their job is to sell the house for as much as possible for the seller, i’m of the opinion that the three houses i speak of would never have sold for as much as they did with a more traditional marketing approach.
Garrett, I agreed with you til I read your last line: “i’m of the opinion that the three houses i speak of would never have sold for as much as they did with a more traditional marketing approach.” If that’s really your view, then how can you criticize the agents and the homeowners for doing what they’re doing . . .
I think this tactic is BS because it manipulates people and the market and in the end DOES NOT result on average for highter prices for the sellers . . .
Garrett, didn’t your “29 offer” anecdote happen like 3 months ago on a property with a unique view? In any case, if your clients want Sunset fixers with 6-handles and views, show them this gem:
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/rfs/599292765.html
Now, we all know Sunset is WHITE HOT, but somehow this beauty has been on the market since May of 2007. I’m guessing 28 other people aren’t going to outbid them on it. They may even get it under 6.
eliot spitzer’s wife–
i don’t think i expressed myself correctly in that last line. i criticize those agents because that’s not how i work or would work, it’s silly. that said, i think that perhaps those agents actually did what their job was–get the highest price possible for the house in a short time. i think that if any of these three houses were priced at whatever they sold for (in the $800’s) that it would have taken a very long time for them to sell, if they ever sold for that price. instead, the agents created a freagin’ frenzy and a massive overbid situation.
Dude–
yes, the 29 offer thing happened a while ago. the other two JUST happened (one today and one 2 weeks ago). it’s just so strange to me that out in the sunset this tactic is being used. it used to be standard practice for the city, you don’t see it as often, but obviously it’s still happening.
dude–
by the way, that place on 44th ave that you suggested is pending…
Garret, thanks for the helpful hints on what sellers can do to get more money. *sarcasm*: I’m sure your BUYERS appreciate your looking out for their interests like that.
I could not have proved my point any better.
tipster,
you could have proved your point better because i don’t understand what you mean. my buyers (the same folks for all three places) are good friends of mine (have known them for 10+ years) and i’m looking out for thier best interest and would not let them over pay for a place that is falling apart in the sunset as i’m confident we can find something that is just as good that fits their budget. so, in other words, i’m looking out for their best interests–what the f**k are you talking about? there was mention of pricing very low to get a high bid (maybe more so than the house is worth) why the sarcasam? why are you a complete ass? why are you so sarcastic in a forum (text) that is difficult to hear tone? what is your problem? if you have one, please let me know and i’d be happy to give you my phone number so we can clear the air.
$965k
“by the way, that place on 44th ave that you suggested is pending…”
That was fast…only took 300 days. Did it also go for 20% over asking in a week with 20 bidders? OK, sorry for being a smartass, but we both know Sunset houses aren’t flying off the shelves at huge gains to sellers. Off on a Sunset tangent…
To speak to your anecdote(s), the same thing is happening in every neighborhood: perfect houses (or those with unique locations/bones/views) are still selling. Some have multiple bids. Some may even sell for more than they would have last year or in ’06. It just takes one person to fall in love with it, right? But I doubt that’s the norm for the market, especially out in Sunset.
Take the 44th street house. Sold in May of 2006 for $680K. Relisted by a flipper a year later and sold again for $686K. Second flipper relists and, at one time, that house carried a wishing price of $769K. Today it’s priced at $650K as a short sale. Below the 2007 price. Below the 2006 price.
Now, if it is pending, let’s say it hypothetically sells for $651K. I’m sure some agent could say, “WOW! This place flew off the market, over asking, with multiple bids!!!” But is that an accurate reflection of the market as a whole? No. Are Sunset homes, speaking generally, worth more today than they were at the peak of the market? No. But your initial comment implied that. Which is probably why people took issue with it.
Look, I like Sunset as well. That neighborhood has a handful of great places, but a lot of unspectacular places. A lot of it is basically like Daly City, IMO. And prices in Daly City are already down 10%+ and still falling. I think that’s a better proxy for Sunset/Parkside in general than 2 anecdotes.
dude–
very well stated; thank you. i also happen to agree whole-heartedly with you. perhaps it’s the lack of tone here, but i did not mean to imply the sunset is the hottest place for real estate right now. conversely, i was trying to figure out why this was happening–it makes no sense to me! the three houses i was speaking of are not even solid homes. they are all original (super outdated) and 2 of the 3 needed to get rid of the constant moisture in the home. obviously there was a misunderstanding (probably due to a lack of me taking enough time to re-read my comments to make sure they are clear and to the point). so, in whole, i was just saying under listing, multiple offers, over asking have yielded some huge returns in the sunset over the last couple months. it’s true, other districts are seeing it too, i’m just surprised to be seeing it out in that part of town is all.
Ok fellas..prediction: $1,050,000 to $1,125,000.
Why?
– saw the place on Sat. It’s nice, clean. 2 bed 2 baths with an office and a little backyard. Again, simple, clean.
– it’s in Noe, and access to the highways is always good.
– its a condo, and the dues are low.
– it’s in a GREAT spot of Noe..this is probably the best part. It’s not windy on this street, it’s fairly flat, fairly quiet (it’s not like Clipper, for example), and it’s a stone’s throw from 24th w/out a big hill. People *love* that. See that place on Noe that sold for a lot over asking recently – similar closeness to 24th.
– it’s springtime and people are starting to look in earnest.
– it’s got a parking spot, side-by-side (no moving another persons car). Storage downstairs too.
– and the wall between the dining room and kitchen is begging to be pulled down (leave support columns) to make a great room like feel.
– negatives are the baths and closets are small, and the kitchen could use a new counter, but that just really isn’t that much to deal with. Maybe some new paint.
I talked to the realtor there and he (no surprise though) did say they expect it to go over the list. but that’s the realtor speaking to someone looking at it during a showing, so i don’t put value on that one.
anyway, that’s my prediction. Actually won’t be surprised if it goes for more.
I can’t tell you how happy I am that I can read a discussion on Noe Valley property without some booyah moron offering an unsolicited correlation theory between the price of Google and NV housing.
Keep it up!!!
800-850 max. I’ve been looking at 2 brs in dist 5, and they are not going for above this! Remember folks this is a tic and only a 2 br.
something really really similar–but bigger–sold for 850K about a month ago over near church/market–and it was a condo!
oops–just lost any credibility I might have–it’s a condo. I still say 850K
Jimmy C, if Google’s stock was going up you’d likely be delighted to discuss it. I can’t tell you how many times I heard from a Realtor that a googler had bought a house. No one ever mentioned when some insurance company executive bought a house. Our noses were rubbed in that for so long (more feigning shock and surprise, but doing it LOUDLY: “can you believe it, someone from Google bought that house. Did you hear me, I said Google. Ha ha ha google.”), that it’s quite fun to be discussing its downfall. I’m sure you would like it to stop, but trust me, you reap what you sow.
And Garrett, my point is that your talking up the market in the sunset (which Dude seems to have refuted) and discussing strategies for sellers to get higher prices seems counter to what most people think should be your goal: to get the best price for the people who have hired you. Instead you loudly talk up the market in which they have been looking, discuss strategies for sellers to raise their prices, which seems to help YOU in the end, but to the detriment of your buyers. They can’t afford the homes they want and how do you look out for their interests? by doing everything you can to try to get prices UP.
That’s fine, screw the buyers, you are looking out for numero uno: yourself. I’m not in your industry, but I do have clients of my own, and I would never, ever, encourage competitors of theirs to bid higher, or even signal that a particular segment is receiving a lot of interest, or discuss ways for someone on the other side of a deal to get a higher price WHILE I was representing someone. But you are doing that here openly. Your first post encourages buyers to bid higher, and your second post sort of starts out negative on it, but then turns strongly positive on underpricing.
I’m not discussing any specific property, I’m discussing your signaling buyers to bid higher and sellers to try to get more, at the same time you have a client whose interests will be harmed when people do either. That’s what shocks me. If I had someone as a client whose interests would be harmed by such statements, whether they were true or not, right or wrong, I’d just keep my mouth shut until the end of the representation.
Before you get out your dueling pistols, I think we need to say that we are merely in different fields which have different moral standards and leave it at that. I look out for my clients interest because they will use me more frequently if I do, and flee if I don’t. I don’t have the once every 5-7 year thing you have to face with your clients, and so perhaps I have the luxury of looking out for my clients interests at every turn, and I’m more sensitive to it as a result.
“…read a discussion on Noe Valley property without some [extremely insightful commenter whose reasoning cannot be rationally debated] offering an unsolicited correlation theory between the price of Google and NV housing.”
@Jimmy C — in fact, I offered my usual correlation theory above, sorry you missed it — scroll up, its worth it! 🙂
So far, it’s holding up better than any other analysis I’ve seen!
Let’s remember where the Google analyses came from. As I remember, there were two (distinct) schools of thought/themes.
The first looked at the direct effect of Google stock wealth. That is, were Google employees actually using their wealth to purchase specific properties, thereby driving prices higher? Most people seemed to acknowledge that this effect had been small – although perhaps it was notable in Noe Valley. One of the posters pointed out that a Google employee had bought his house in Noe at 20% over the next highest bid. Of course, we have no way of verifying this, but it sounds plausible.
The second theme concerned Google as an “engine of hiring”, replete with breathless comments about how tech was on fire, Google would be hiring, Apple is expanding, VMWare is going gangbusters, etc. Now that the whole sector has been taken out and shot by the stock market, those comments are largely gone. The Yahoo layoffs seemed to be the turning point. If you look at a Google 10-K, the most prominent statement is the one that says 99% of its revenues – 99%!! – in 2005, 2006 AND 2007 were derived from advertising revenues. Whatever they are working on, they have yet to monetize anything else. Google layoffs are coming, you can be sure.
But I think there is another unexplored theme relating to Google. That is, the price of Google stock as a proxy for the generalized “exuberant foolishness” that seems to grip certain areas, and to which the Bay Area seems particularly susceptible. Whether intended or not, I believe dub dub’s patented indicator falls within this last theme. I mean – show of hands everybody – how many foolish retail investors ran out and bought some shares of Google as it blasted through $500, $600 and then $700 – almost ALL of which rise happened AFTER the beginnings of the credit wipeout last August (remember we are talking about an ADVERTISING company, basically)?? That naive belief, that “tech” would escape the deflationary spiral that the US is falling into – and the coordinate belief that the Bay Area would escape unscathed as well – now appear to be fading. Hence, the hostility to the highlighting of Google’s recent plunge (from $747 to $440ish in about 3 or 4 months) – it must appear to some to be an indictment of the very SF-SV zeitgeist!
About Google and its impact on the market – I think that there is a real impact from their hiring and relocation packages that has driven demand in many of the more family oriented southern SF areas (Noe, Potrero, Glen Park, Bernal Heights).
I’ve been looking at housing after being relocated for an employer in a different field, and there are definitely a lot of anecdotal instances where GOOG employees have outbid both to buy and rent.
Until these relocated people exercise these packages (I’m assuming that they’re similar to mine and may include sizable forgivable 0 or low interest loans, cost of living bonuses, to be used within a year of hire), there will be a high volume of buyers capable of sustaining prices for the more highly desirable properties. Many of us are still trying to weigh the benefits of buying near the peak with throwing away these expiring benefits.
I don’t know what layoffs will do, but I presume it won’t be good… However, it may take awhile to impact housing prices significantly since I still see significant pent-up demand and limited “attractive” (subjective of course) properties coming to market due to these types of buyers and people that have been waiting years for a correction.
As for this property – I haven’t seen it in person, but I have been looking in the neighborhood – I’m (not so) secretly hoping it would go below asking but I don’t think there’s a chance it will given the reasoning spelled out by “Dan” and the demand I keep seeing everytime I see a worthwhile property.
And BTW, I’m not a realtor, and quite convinced that the market’s dropping / going to drop further (I’m quite pessimistic really), but there’s still some crazy multi-bid over-asking sh** going on with nice properties in most desirable neighborhoods in SF (with very limited DOM, offer dates after 2 open houses)…
Tipster, I disagree with your opinion that Garrett was “talking up the market in the sunset”. His initial post didn’t say the Sunset was hot, he said “funny” things were happening and that it was “strange times”. For you to translate that into him working against his clients interests is quite a stretch.
Satchel and relocated,
My $0.02 on the GOOG story…
The reason housing bulls are so vulnerable here is not the specific market impact of the few Google-naires living in SF, it’s the notion that has prevailed in SFRE for the better of the last 3-5 years, that, despite market and pricig indicators to the contrary, “SF Is Different” because of the near-endless supply of stock option money flowing north up the 101.
So Tipster, we are to believe you have overheard and seen dozens of anecdotes from Realtors talking up Google employee purchases?
fluj –
I actually am working with a relocation service that is trying to help me find either a rental or a house to purchase, and several employees from my company have been outbid on rentals and purchases by Google employees. “Name-dropping” at least on rentals was encouraged by MY company to show that employees we were a good risk (I assumed that Google employees were doing something similar).
Again, I think that these relo packages are helping to hold up the market for prime properties and that you won’t see a drop in their value anytime soon. I wish that prices would soften here, because then I’d feel more comfortable buying, but I honestly don’t think that they will until someone (not necessarily Google) is forced to layoff a significant number of employees that are not absorbed by any of the multitude of companies in the Bay Area. I am not convinced that anyone will have significant layoffs (not even Google, despite what others on this board think is imminent). For example, my company continues to hire quite aggressively (but not a tech company).
I also think that the impact of the reset of non subprime mortgages is overstated due to what you have pointed out in that most properties have risen (in non-subprime areas) over the last few years. These people will be able to refi at relatively reasonable rates, particularly if they were prescient to do it a few months ago, when 20 yr fixed could be had for 5 7/8.
I sincerely appologize for bringing Google back into the mix. The brain dead analysis that GOOG supporters like tipster offer up is facinating… no really… it is. Tell me what Cramer says about TYCO next.
GOOG employees may have over paid with their stock option wealth, but they are a small piece of the bay area money puzzle.
Let’s please move on and get GOOG out of the discussion, it has really very little to do with the overall stock/real estate/commodity/food/fuel/taco price index anywhere.
The Bay area has millions and millions of people and there are only a few thousand GOOG employees, and you needed to be working there three years ago to be considered a partial millionaire.
tipster is a moron.
saw this place on the way home tonight – location is phenomenal. It’s a nice place. Supposedly the seller took a job on the other coast and wants to sell quickly. I think it will go fast. We’ll see – I’ve been wrong before.
Closed for 991K. Apples to apples 2.7% gain from the avowed peak market of summer ’06. Yes we all know what the real cost breakdown will look like.
[Editor’s Note: That’s annual appreciation of 1.5% over the past two years (and we’ll feature it tomorrow).]
in this market!!!!
kinda makes the bear’s growl sound more and more like hot air…
So it went for $991k? ok, so I was off a fair amount – went for less than I predicted.