CFAH

943 Church Street #2: Bedroom
On the market last August asking $2,395,000, the list price for 943 Church Street #2 (once known as “B”) was reduced down to $1,950,000 before being withdrawn in December.
Back on the market for $1,895,000 in January, it’s a plugged-in reader that notes the list price has been reduced to $1,795,000 (now 25% under its original original asking). And at the same time, the lower unit (943 Church Street #1) which was once in contract when asking $1,995,000 has been reduced to $1,595,000.
UPDATE: As noted by another plugged-in reader, 943 Church Street #2 is also available for rent and asking $6,500 a month.
∙ Listing: 943 Church Street #1 (3/3) – $1,595,000 [MLS]
∙ Listing: 943 Church Street #2 (3/3) – $1,795,000 [MLS]
It’s Friday, So Insert Cheeky Comment Here (943 Church Street #B) [SocketSite]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by tipster

    Anyone buying now is an idiot or extremely impatient. When all you need to do is wait to save nearly half a million dollars, it’s pretty hard to justify buying anything right now.

  2. Posted by feskone

    Im with tipster 🙂 Im waiting on hold. Im patient enuf to wait till the condo of my dreams will fall down to affordable price. And I mean “affordable”. I dont think high 700 000 for teeny-tiny 2bd are affordable like in Towers! So Im with u on patience tipster!

  3. Posted by LMRiM

    I don’t totally agree with tipster here. Not everyone who is buying today is an idiot.
    However, anyone buying should understand that he is paying way above fair value for these assets (in almost every case – certainly for “retail” buyers in The Real SF), and should be prepared to suffer large value declines. If he expects to sell within 5-10 years, he should expect capital losses, which may be very large. With those caveats, the stability of owning a particularly desirable property may outweigh the detriments of paying so far above fair value.
    However, anyone “retail” buying now with the idea that it is a “good investment” is a fool and if they get all huffy about their beliefs, I’d even call him an “idiot” 🙂

  4. Posted by unearthly

    Also renting with an asking price of $6500/month (Craigslist).
    It’s always fun to watch these rental prices drop like a rock, like this place on Laidley which started around $7500 and is now begging for a renter at $4950.

  5. Posted by pianist

    Chopped pillows

  6. Posted by Scott

    “If he expects to sell within 5-10 years, he should expect capital losses, which may be very large. With those caveats, the stability of owning a particularly desirable property may outweigh the detriments of paying so far above fair value.”
    Sounds like something an “idiot” would do….

  7. Posted by viewlover

    between this and the unit at infinity for 1.7, I’ll go with this, if I could afford it.

  8. Posted by 154 DOM

    How come Unit#1 could have fallen out of contract. At these prices, it should be mostly cash, right? How can you fall out of contract when a loan is probably not the issue? Did the buyer renege and decided to give up on his deposit (or found a loophole not to) or did the Realtor jump the gun a bit too fast when declaring it in contract?
    Anyhow, I do remember a lot of us were in disbelief at the “in contract” statuses after a few days on the market. Is there a way someone can “overstate” an “in contract” on the MLS? Not claiming that it was the case here. Just trying to understand how the (imbalanced) game is played.

  9. Posted by gowiththeflow

    Viewlover you better change your handle if you prefer this to the Infinity. Just kidding, but do want to ask – would you not mind the commute to downtown or to get on the freeway?

  10. Posted by jlasf

    I had thought that the big price drops were only hitting mediocre properties. But this place looks great. Modern, tasteful, and great views. If this can’t sell with a 25% reduction, what does that say about the rest of the real estate inventory that’s out there? Yikes!

  11. Posted by Trip

    You can find dozens, maybe hundreds, of examples of this type on the MLS. Redfin shows that about half of everything on the market is at a reduction. The crash has moved upmarket. While places in in less desirable areas have dropped by 50% and, by definition, are now closer to the bottom than to the top (but still going down), nicer places in nicer areas still have a long way to go, and the picture is becoming pretty stark. $1.8M for a condo in Noe Valley? It is not 2007 anymore.
    And Redfin indicates over 200 new listings in the last 24 hours — approaching 1900 listings. And about 130 sales last month. It is pretty obvious that there are far more sellers who must sell than there are buyers who can or will buy. All these listing and sales trends are magnified at the $1M-plus pricepoint. Tipster and LMRiM have it right.

  12. Posted by fair value salesman

    LOL at “It is not 2007 any more” being in the same thread as “Tipster and LMRiM have it right.”

  13. Posted by viewlover

    GWTF, I used to want to live at the Infinity when they were first offered for sale. I never went to see them but at one point I heard that all the two bedrooms were already in contract. THis was true for ORH as well. I’m sort of bitter because I really wanted to live in either one of these buildings, consequently knowing that these buildings were not really sold out pissed me off.
    Seems like you did pretty well with your unit. I’m sure the entire project will be a great place to live.
    The finishes on this place are pretty nice, great shower and views from the bedroom. Just having so much light come in is great imo. I have fancy shower now but it only has 4 heads, I don’t use it much because my partner thinks its a waste of natural resources and apparently I have a horrible carbon footprint. Who knew.

  14. Posted by commuter

    great looking property, but you gotta notice that the J-church runs through its backyard…try getting sleep with that beast coming by every 15 min

  15. Posted by fair value salesm

    How come Unit#1 could have fallen out of contract. At these prices, it should be mostly cash, right? How can you fall out of contract when a loan is probably not the issue? Did the buyer renege and decided to give up on his deposit (or found a loophole not to) or did the Realtor jump the gun a bit too fast when declaring it in contract?
    Anyhow, I do remember a lot of us were in disbelief at the “in contract” statuses after a few days on the market. Is there a way someone can “overstate” an “in contract” on the MLS? Not claiming that it was the case here. Just trying to understand how the (imbalanced) game is played.
    Dude, why do you talk so much on here? Really? You seemingly do not possess any knowledge at all. It’s so weird that you talk as much as you do. You have nothing. You can read all you want without displaying your ignorance.
    And again, why is the DOM in your asinine name icreasing again?

  16. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    I always thought that “# DOM” was Fronzi’s latest cloak. “Dude” is someone different.
    And congratulations, Fluj !

  17. Posted by Trip

    Second the congrats! And crossing my fingers on the closing (maybe it already has) as I expect the first round to be on fluj!

  18. Posted by EBGuy

    Third congrats! We are all pullin’ for seven figures (you didn’t give it away, right?). I put your basis at less than $900k, so let the party begin…

  19. Posted by huh?

    “I’m sort of bitter because I really wanted to live in either one of these buildings, consequently knowing that these buildings were not really sold out pissed me off.”
    Viewlover – I’m not sure your bitterness is entirely warranted. I get the impression that both buildings at one point may have been ‘sold out’ in that they had 3-5% deposits on all, or virtually all, units. Needless to say, come time for closing, a fairly significant number of these ‘buyers’ either had cold feet, or realized that they weren’t going to be able to finance with just 3-5% down. This is where a fair amount of inventory returned to the market, inventory formerly considered sold.
    One thing I won’t argue with is that neither sales office is nearly as smug as they once were.

  20. Posted by viewlover

    bitter was the wrong word as I don’t feel that strongly about it. I just don’t believe what the sales people say anymore, not that I doubt what you say is partially true. I guess I’ve come to suspect that sometimes the developer holds back on what is available and there is really no transparency in what is said by sales teams. I did want to live there but regardless, I’m not underwater on the place that I did buy where I probably would have been in either one of these buildings.

  21. Posted by Juju

    Who knew a house on Church Street is worth $5M+. I thought those kind of value only applies to houses in district 7.

  22. Posted by SecretAgentSF

    I heard the lower unit fell out of contract because the noise level from the upper unit was so bad that the prospective buyer decided to pull the offer.

  23. Posted by 45yo hipster ska Loverboy/Get Lucky

    Heyyyy….
    I just re-rented my mish condo in only 7 days w/out a rent reduction. Me happy.
    Me think listening to bad 80’s rock had something to do with it.

  24. Posted by Robert

    I saw these units today and was not at all impressed. The view is basically cityscape toward Potrero Hill – OK but nothing special. And eight foot ceilings for new “multi-million dollar” construction is not of interest to me – um that’s the way they built things in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s. The units just weren’t impressive at all.

  25. Posted by Mystery Realtor

    “I heard the lower unit fell out of contract because the noise level from the upper unit was so bad that the prospective buyer decided to pull the offer.”
    Not True. It fell out because the buyers had cold feet.
    M.R.

  26. Posted by anonn

    “I heard the lower unit fell out of contract because the noise level from the upper unit was so bad that the prospective buyer decided to pull the offer.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/09/MNOJ15F979.DTL

  27. Posted by unearthly

    I checked out both units this weekend and I have to say, I hope the new owners like climbing steps. Neither unit will appeal to anyone with kids, the bottom unit has one bedroom on each of three levels. Views are nice but not spectacular, finishes are solid, the garage is a bit of squeeze, and the J-Church is practically in your backyard.

  28. Posted by unearthly

    Now asking $5000/month for the penthouse…

  29. Posted by diemos

    the bubble taketh away rentals
    the bubble giveth back rentals
    blessed be the bubble

  30. Posted by 94114

    The upper unit is in contract.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Recent Articles