3730 26th Street
3730 26th Street is a single-family home on the edge of Noe Valley that was last touted as a neighborhood sales comp in June of 2004 when purchased for $1,250,000.
3730 26th Street: Kitchen.jpg
Now granted, there are more parking spaces (two) than baths (one a one-half), but the kitchen has been remodeled. And just like its location, none of these things have changed in the past five years. That being said, currently asking $1,148,000.
∙ Listing: 3730 26th Street (2/1.5) – $1,148,000 [MLS]

59 thoughts on “Some Will Call It Yet Another Anecdote, We’ll Call It An Apple To Be”
  1. Now, now. It’s not an apple until it sells. I’m sure they’re just trying to spark a bidding war. 😉

  2. interesting, but the many threads about overvalued Noe properties are getting a bit old. ok, there was a bubble there and it’s getting popped.
    there were a ton of open homes listed in Noe in yesterday’s chronical.

  3. “interesting, but the many threads about overvalued Noe properties are getting a bit old. ok, there was a bubble there and it’s getting popped. ”
    You have a front row seat if it’s the “popping” you wanna watch. If not, there’s nothing to see here.
    This house sold in 1999 for 480K, in 2000 for 729K, 2004 for $1250K. Will someone pay a million dollars or more for this 2/1? I can’t see why someone will even pay the 2000’s dotcom bubble price.

  4. Fron property shark, it looks like the sellers here put a $388,000 dowmpayment in the “first loss” position.
    Even if it sells here, they are looking at a loss of at least 40% of that downpayment, after standard commission and transfer taxes (assuming the prop shark info is correct).
    As hard as it is to believe, an investment in the S&P 500, made on the day they purchased this house to today, would have done better, down about 37%, not including dividends, or (very roughly) down 30% including dividends.
    If they had had a balanced portfolio of treasuries, stocks and gold, the losses from 2004 would have been much less, and of course had they just put their downpayment in CDs rather than buying in an obvious bubble, they’d be laughing right now.

  5. Better yet if they had used their downpayment to bet on the Tampa Bay Rays making it to the World Series and the Arizonia Cardinals making it to the Superbowl they would be jumping for joy.

  6. You guys are funny.
    Anyone want to make a prediction on what 3352 Washington will sell for and how quickly?
    It looks like it has had some major renovations (of the type that some people will oooh over, and some will think are a bit too trendy and already dated, but it does seem well done), and has a nice view from the roof and upper rooms.
    Is Presidio Heights outside of “the real SF” yet?

  7. While we’re dreaming, they could also have held their downpayment a couple of months, and invested in google’s IPO, in which case they would now be up over 200% (or is it 300%?)
    And that’s unlevered (albeit with a “trading card” stock which confers no voting rights whatsoever). Fiat currency has nothing on google common 🙂

  8. 3352 Wash will either sit for a while then be withdrawn. Or it will go for a high two handle, assuming seller is decisive. Say 2.85 MM. Not likely to sell. Well off folks are becoming aware that their investments aren’t coming back anytime soon. A better way to look at it, seller will pay about $75K per month in theta (time value) bal-year, if it sells at all.

  9. Rillion, perhaps you don’t understand the concept of risk…?
    – Betting on the Rays and Cardinals
    – Betting on a balanced portfolio of treasuries, stocks and gold
    See the difference?

  10. “Anyone want to make a prediction on what 3352 Washington will sell for and how quickly?”
    This Redfin listing shows the place was listed in Sept 2007 and apparently no sale. As far as the price, I think they are partying on as if it’s still 2006. I agree with the number the Red Pill puts on it.
    “Is Presidio Heights outside of “the real SF” yet? ”
    I think it all went micro a while back as in “It’s all very micro, bro”.

  11. It appears 2165 Jackson is a real listing. $481 psf for D7??? This is a great area–just two blocks from Fillmore.
    Is something wrong with this property, or is the seller just chasing down prices a little more aggressively than other sellers? With today’s market downturn, the seller almost looks prophetic.
    And if D7 ends up south of $500 psf, what does that mean for places like Noe?

  12. Beautiful home and great neighborhood, but I don’t think 2165 Jackson has a view? Or do the other amenities of the neighborhood make up for it? Not that 3352 Washington isn’t overpriced.
    One more that caught my eye – 106 Jordan. Again, very nicely maintained, updated… but are the days of paying more than three million dollars to live below California street gone – no matter how big and pretty the home?

  13. Don’t jump to conclusions. A two unit with a tenant paying 5000 or ~3000 feet on that block could be really problematic. The pricepoint indicates difficulty, sight unseen. IMO.

  14. “This house sold in 1999 for 480K, in 2000 for 729K, 2004 for $1250K. Will someone pay a million dollars or more for this 2/1? I can’t see why someone will even pay the 2000’s dotcom bubble price.”
    Well, I haven’t seen the house so I don’t know whether there are any glaring deficiencies in the house or on the block. But yeah, based on the pix, I’d pay $729K for it. It’s not going to sell for that right now. If prices really do go down that far, we’ll be able to get a nice SFR in a few years.

  15. sb, I understand the concept of risk. Perhaps you don’t understand the uselessness of using hindsight to cherry pick hypothetical past investment returns.
    “Gee, whenever I look backward and pick the better performing assets over the last two years I end up with a better return then if I look backward and pick the underperforming assets. So in two years I will be able to look back to now and know what I should invest in!”

  16. digressing, but jackson st will be interesting to see:
    – 2 units, gotta be at least 1 protected tenant at $5K/month
    – 4 kitchens, one on each floor???
    – questionable source for square footage
    – no pictures of kitchens and baths but a street scene of fredericksons hardware that’s 8 blocks and 500ft of altitude away from this house.
    – i know someone who bought a D7 2-unit with similar problems at the peak of the market for only 8% more/sqft. than this listing. it may not be that cheap

  17. 3352 Washington reminds me of the Fillmore street, $5M home in terms of finishes. It’s smaller, but it has a great view on an outstanding block. $4M is a stretch but an emotional buyer might scoop it up. I think it sells quick with a $3.x in the final price range. Hard to find homes this “done”.
    The Jackson street home should be gone before the end of the month. It has issues, but not as bad as you might think. No protected tenants. The floor plans are choppy but it presents a blank canvas for someone. Going to put pressure on the Pacific Street home that is gutted if it sells at 500k psf.
    The jordan home should sell quickly too. I think there are still some folks that have money to burn and will pay for a great home.
    Seems homes either sell or sit. Over 30 DOM is the Kiss of Death.

  18. “This house sold in 1999 for 480K, in 2000 for 729K, 2004 for $1250K.”
    In other words, in the year 2000 this house progressed from the Mission to the “coveted Noe Valley.” That’s when somebody convinced the buyer that the blocks east of and downhill from Dolores were in Noe Valley (nevermind the hill, folks, or your 94110 Zip code).

  19. Over 30 DOM is the Kiss of Death.
    I disagree wholeheartedly and so do buyers in this market. Over 30 days means a discount of some sort from the initial pricepoint is probably likely. It hardly means the kiss of death.

  20. Why is east of Fair Oaks on 26th Noe Valley? That demarcation is not doing anybody any favors. At least they didn’t say “the Heart of Noe Valley.” I guess?

  21. This is Noe Valley only according to the San Francisco board of realtors marketing machine in IMO. NV adjacent at best.
    The latest SFAR map even has the Castro a.k.a. “Eureka Valley/Dolores Heights” extending all the way to Valencia on some blocks. I hope they told the missionites that just rallied against American Apparel on Valencia that AA was just trying to open up shop in the Castro, and it was all one big misunderstanding.

  22. It’s actually an ideal location, close to the Valencia’s great restaurants & 24th. Love it! And you guys are harsh! The house is adorable. Would love to be able to afford it! It has everything I need and a usable garden off the kitchen.
    The house at 3352 Washington is done/done & well located. The property on Jackson is not a house, but units. Someone will have to deal with the city to make it back to a home, not an easy task, and spend 500K to a mill to redo.

  23. How ’bout them apples? 3730 26th just cut to $1.098M:
    12% under its 2004 price, and I’m pretty sure that whether this is the “Real NV” or not, 2004 was not the peak. Hold it for 5 years, paying a mortgage and carrying costs that were much higher than renting, lose $150K (so far) in capital loss, and then having to pay a realtor $50K+ to get it unloaded – SF real estate is certainly doing its part to destroy wealth.

  24. 3730 26th just cut again to $1.048M, now 16% below its 2004 sales price.
    If property shark is to be believed – $388K put down in the first loss position – more than 70% is gone. $265K (at least) up in smoke, not counting how much the carrying costs were on this 2 bedroom place, and it’s not sold yet. It would be very hard to find any broad class of investment asset that has done worse than this downpayment since the 2004 purchase (not even US stocks – and of course, foreign stocks are flattish to up since that period, especially after currency effects).
    As I wrote above, SF real estate is doing a great job of destroying wealth. It’s going to get worse next year imo.

  25. This illustrates a point I just made on another thread. Assume we did not have the 2004 sale to refer to. If this goes for the new list, some would say “Hey, up almost 50% since 2000! No weakness here! Real SF is remarkably resilient!”
    But, of course, we do have that 2004 reference price . . .
    LMRiM, I for one appreciate your digging to post the real dollar losses involved in places like this. I have no glee over things like this, believe me. But I think it is a valuable tool to assess the real risks of jumping in to a still inflated market. That evaporated $265k would be a fully-funded college plan for my two kids.

  26. That evaporated $265k would be a fully-funded college plan for my two kids.
    I already have a very large one for mine (as I’m sure you know, you can prefund $130K currently every 5 years, per kid), and heartily recommend 529s. The bonus is that 529s are bankruptcy-remote as well (once the normal preference period is passed). For regular folks who can’t afford real estate planning, it’s a nice “loophole”, as of course in theory the funds could just be transferred back to the grantor post-bankruptcy, and the only hit you’d take would be the small penalty on earnings. Small price to pay for the holy grail of getting the assets out of your estate and beyond reach of creditors and yet still retain control.
    Obviously, never trust random anonymous bloggers no matter how smugly confident they appear to be, consult your own adviser, this is not legal advice, etc.

  27. Yep, we have 529s for our kids. One other nice advantage for those with grandparents who are willing and able to chip in is that they can set them up and thus retain control over the accounts, but the funds are not considered part of their estate if they pass away (which matters again since the Bush estate tax cuts disappear after 2010).

  28. It looks like the owners of 3730 26th couldn’t make peace with the fact that their large downpayment has been sacrificed. Now, they’ll probably just keep paying the mortgage on a property they’d rather unload, and with each dollar committed they become increasingly wed to their poor investment decision. Bernanke and his banksters love this sort of outcome.

  29. Bernanke and his banksters love this sort of outcome
    So do you it seems. Why else would you go out of your way to elucidate things like this contantly.
    They also might just stay there another five or six years and profit.
    I’ll say it again, 26th street has had a lot of crime over the past year or so. That could not have been helping the sale. The neighborhood is still gentrifying quite a lot, so over time things might very well improve. If they were sold on it as being “The Heart of Noe Valley” then they got sold a bill of goods. But all is not lost.

  30. What sort of crime was happening on 26th ? Was it concentrated on the lower section of 26th ?

  31. What sort of crime was happening on 26th ? Was it concentrated on the lower section of 26th ?
    It’s not at all confined to east of Mission, if that’s what you mean. HOwever 26th does hold four or five blocks of projects that way. Do you know how to find that crime grid thingy? It’s on the SFgov website. Anyway, if memory serves, a whole lot — I mean a whole lot — of car and house break in’s. Several assualts. I don’t remember if there was a murder or not. There is also a TON of drug dealing happening on 26th between Mission and Valencia.

  32. Add to that list the “murder” of the 3730 26th Street downpayment.
    About the idea that they might stay there “another five or six years and profit”, lol. I doubt the area will be any better 5 years from now. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see the price on a place like this be less than $800K in 5 years, but I guess believing in the idea of a fairy tale ending is going to be crucial to making all those mortgage and tax payments on a little house on that crime ridden street.

  33. Like you knew anything about the area before I just told you about it.
    “800K in 5 years” ooooohhhhkaaaaaay then.

  34. Well, I don’t claim to be an “expert” on 26th street like the realtors who facilitated the sale in 2004 or the appraisers back then, but I sure knew enough not to get my good cash tied up in that folly, you’ll have to admit. $1.25M for a small 2 bedroom house on a crime ridden street – five years ago. Amazing.
    Once again, putting money down in the first loss position on bubble assets was just a financially naive thing to do. It still is, but at least from the sales volume numbers it appears that fewer people in SF are making that mistake these days.

  35. LMRim, who cares if you wouldn’t have paid 1.25 for this place in 2004. Its in the Mission across from a church near cesar chavez. Most people in 2004 would not have made this play; congrats for being in the majority.

  36. Why you choose to harp on a financial decision made by people who you have never met is beyond me. You made the same point like, what, five times in this thread? Why? Suppose they read the blog for a moment, OK? Make your point, one time. Sheesh.

  37. anonn, you, as usual, are the only one doing any harping.
    LMRiM first pointed out back in early March that even at the asking price the sellers are looking at a massive loss, correctly pegging the loss to the dollars invested rather than the home price. And this is in one of those “southern” neighborhoods that you have continually touted as undergoing remarkable gentrification and price increases! Guess you were wrong on that score, huh? Explains why you are now on the attack as one of your key talking points has been proven to be utterly baseless.
    Then LMRiM updated the status of the growing loss with the two price reductions. Important to understand for anyone considering jumping into this market with all the “bargains.” Then he commented that the sellers’ apparent refusal to just cut their losses and instead to continue paying on a rapidly depreciating home is financially foolish except for the lender. All perfectly valid points.
    Then in typical fashion you begin a series of ad hominem attacks. Once again, you are nothing if not predictable!

  38. Baloney, Joe. Read the thread. He said the same thing three times, yesterday. Did I say “five” ? My bad.
    I must admit, tho. Any time I scan “ad hominem” in a thread I stop reading. Nobody who knows how to write worth a darn uses “ad hominem.” It’s a goofy internetism. Folks need to lose it.

  39. “I must admit, tho. Any time I scan “ad hominem” in a thread I stop reading. Nobody who knows how to write worth a darn uses “ad hominem.” It’s a goofy internetism. Folks need to lose it.”
    Thats cos they’re always aimed at you. 🙂
    And I assume you think that Latin was invented in 1990s by Netscape?

  40. No, I sure don’t think Netscape invented either Latin or the Internet, mac. But let us not pretend that “ad hominem” is used in everyday parlance a la “ad hoc” though. Get real. It’s an internet thing and it’s real internetty.

  41. The term ad hominem is “internetty”? Whatever that means, it accurately reflected your poor logic skills. I think we can safely say that the term is not “real estatey” as realtors would not be likely to have a clue as to its meaning.

  42. Joe, when was the last time you said “ad hominem” in real life?
    “Out of the blue.” “Apropos of little.” — these are things people actually say.
    Come on man. I know you like to key-battle with me, but you’re in particularly lousy form today.
    And where does logic fit into my questioning of the guy harping on an individual property? It doesn’t. My logic was, “cut it out already.” LOL.

  43. I did. I didn’t really read what ole Joe had to say at first, having noted “Joe” + “Ad Hominem” at a glance. (Thank you Mrs. Murphy’s 10th grade SAT prep course.) I was pretty sure it was, “you’re dumb and here’s why.” Upon further inspection it was just that.
    And diemos, you cited a wiki definition of logical fallacies. Why? Ad hominem stands alone. Are you implying that the context precludes its proper usage? In that I would agree. LMRiM knows he bashed those poor folks three times the same way. So would ole Joey if he read anything beside “Anonn is arguing with LMRiM, I’d better say something.”

  44. Let’s revisit this thread in 5 years.
    For my part, I say that there is a high likelihood that 3730 26th Street will be worth less than $800K, resulting in a very large loss to the current holder (assuming that it hasn’t been sold in the intervening period). Clearly, the market value of this place is already down at least 15-20% since 2004, and so we’re about halfway there.
    Further elucidating my view, I think that not only will the entirety of the $388K downpayment be gone, but 10 years of property taxes (likely in excess of $150K, or $100K in after tax equivalent dollars) will be toasted, as well as any maintenance expenses over the 10 year period, which might be considerable.
    Who knows what the financing costs are on this place, but we are looking at a roughly $1M mortgage that likely cannot be refinanced now without putting more money down in the first loss position due to a dramatic decline in equity. Would it be unreasonable to assume a 5-6% blended interest rate over this whole 10 year period? If not, then that is an additional roughly $600-700K gone, or approximately $400-550K in after tax equivalent dollars, depending on individual tax profile.
    In exchange for that outlay of capital (the $388K downpayment sacrificed, the $100K effective property tax and $400-550K effective “rent” from the bank), the owners will have enjoyed living on a crime ridden street (anonn) across from a church that a majority of SFers wouldn’t have paid $1.25M for (auden). (BTW, I love the increasing numbers of ways that realtors are saying “overpaid” these days.)
    For anonn’s part, in between all the ad hominem attacks, apparently he is offering the reassuring prospect that “over time things might very well improve” and they “might just stay there another five or six years and profit”. I’m not sure what “profit” means in that context, and after looking at the cash outlays as a reasonably financially literate person would – which I outlined above – I doubt that even anonn is sure what he meant.
    As I said, let’s revisit in 5 years.

  45. “Ad hominem stands alone. Are you implying that the context precludes its proper usage?”
    Unless we’ve started speaking latin, “ad hominem” refers to the logical fallacy of attacking the speakers personal characteristics instead of their argument.
    “I think the Fed will raise interest rates soon.”
    “Yeah, someone as ugly as you would think that.”
    “LMRiM knows he bashed those poor folks three times the same way.”
    Is a combination of “argumentum ad misericordiam” and “ad hominem”. Attempting to divert attention from the argument by eliciting sympathy for the sellers and impugning the motives of the person making the argument.

  46. Yeah, well, if you knew the area you would understand the numerous changes already underway. Not the least of which is a significant increase in density due to the CC/Mission residential development. This density might very well eliminate quite a bit of blight. It often does. You’d also understand that there is a lovely little market on the corner of 26th and Guerrero that didn’t even exist (and likely couldn’t have existed) prior to the purchase of the property in this thread. I will certainly revisit my thought in five years. These are the sort of things I think about. Whether or not this forum and its cast of characters will exist is not known.

  47. Not to mention the Cesar Chavez greening, which I have hopes for. You guys are always on about “bull this” “realtor this” “ulterior motive that.” But I happen to live six blocks away from here, like the area, realize it could be better, and am optimistic.

  48. They also might just stay there another five or six years and profit.
    Will the Three Musketeers be employing this strategy if things go horribly awry?

Leave a Reply

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