Let’s put aside any macro dollar per square foot analytics which would suggest home values in Bernal are down despite the alpha effects of the neighborhood’s gentrification and focus on a rather micro apple in the making: 82 Ellsworth.
Two blocks above the heart of Cortland, two bedrooms and two baths, and some views. Purchased in April of 2005 for $975,000, back on the market today and asking $899,000.
Keep in mind that under “normal” market appreciation of 4 percent a year, and not accounting for any gentrification or remodeling juicing, an asset purchased in 2005 for $975,000 should be worth around $1,158,000 today.
∙ Listing: 82 Ellsworth (2/2) – $899,000 [82Ellsworth.com] [MLS]
∙ Expectation Setting: San Francisco Appreciation [SocketSite]
2005!?!?! It’s listed under it’s 2005 price?
Please refer to these excuses by number:
1. It’s not the REAL heart of Cortland. (i.e. the house was moved when it sold in 2005 from the real heart of Cortland to a different location).
2. The house is missing a half bath. (i.e. one was removed from when it sold in 2005).
3. The economy is improving: it will get multiple offers and go way over. (It probably will go over. But the only thing that’s improving in a temporary supply decrease because fewer people can sell their homes and yet they can still afford to keep them off the market — for now. The suckers buying now are fools).
This place also changed hands in 2003 for $660,000. I don’t know if it got remodeled between 2003 and 2005–– no permits showed up on PropertyShark.
I hope the agent posts more pics. I have to believe the interior is nice if it sold for that much in 2005. Smart strategy to price it “low”, IMO.
Tipster,
That was snide and nothing more. Poor effort. But why do you even care enough to bother to be so snide?
Anonn, Tipster made a clearly satirical post. Why don’t you try some real arguementation rather than some ad hominem attacks? I do not seem to see you called out there – why so bitter?
Let’s keep in mind that the last transaction was apparently not on the open market.
Let’s also keep in mind that if it sells for asking it will be about a 7.75% drop from a peak-level sort of price. (Don’t believe that’s a peak price? Go look up what 2/2’s have ever done in Bernal. It’s beyond peak.) Hardly the big double digit falloff numbers that are so casually tossed around here.
Keep in mind that under “normal” market appreciation of 4 percent a year
“Normal” by what standard? Four years is not a long view. Really now.
In the abstract many of you like to say things like “list price doesn’t matter.” And “They were planning on the property appreciating.”
Well, list price did matter. This wasn’t on the MLS. I’d have counseled any buyer to steer clear of such a price in 2005. And many buyers wouldn’t have even considered it in the first place.
Nice cherrypicking, ed. Better luck next time.
Mr. E,
Why don’t you acknowledge that Tipster’s post was an ad hominem (which is net-dork for “apropos of little”) attack? His second point in particular singled me out, pal.
The listing agent has a lot more pictures on his page “property website” of the interior, which doesn’t look super appealing. They call this a Victorian but the exterior reminds me of some icky 80s house in the suburbs. The interior is not much better.
It also says that it’s currently off-market but can be shown or sold?
@ Anonn:
Really? The half bath? Is that due to the LBI? Is that yours? I thought that was merely a cute rule of thumb, another satirical ratio that while having some relation to reality, is taken out of proportion in terms of its importance.
Let’s get this man some coffee (not to mention a dictionary).
@Anonn,
It does me no point to defend my social life, although I do believe a quick search of our posting history will be revealing.
Regardless, you attacked tipster, personally. You did not argue against his points. You did not tell us how he is wrong. You just went after him.
Now, I for one would be intersted in hearing why he’s wrong. I don’t entirely think he is. But you could prove it otherwise.
Look – you’re a salesperson. That’s cool. I’ve worked that job too. But if you don’t have real data and theory to back up your points, don’t get pissy when people accuse you of simply engaging in sales speak.
Tell me what in Tipster’s post you found actual, or worthwhile, Mr. E. Then I will respond to what you think.
But “salespeak” ? Where?
Anonn, dude, that’s the satire. It’s satire on the sales boosterism by professionals on the site that attempt to justify prices that may be higher than purely rational market fundamentals would suggest. It was to be funny.
yawn. the bitchy banter on this site is getting old.
[Editor’s Note: With that we’ll agree and are removing the bulk of the anonn, Mr. E., and Jorge exchange from this thread. Now back to the apple at hand or at least the neighborhood.]
It wasn’t satire, OK? Satire is a literary genre. That was a series of sardonic quips. You view them as sarcastic and funny. I know the context of Tipster’s body of work and there is a distinct bitterness. What I find ironic is this. I said that I found them snide and nothing more, and why bother? Tipster himself would tell you that wasn’t one of his best efforts.
Now, again, what augmentation would you like to see? Which of Tipster’s sardonic quips do you feel is worthy of examination? I think you know that none are. He said them to be flippant and without real care other than to be disdainful.
It’s beyond peak.
I don’t think you understand what that word means…
Anyway, if tipster and his ilk upset you so much, why do you keep coming back? It’s almost like it’s pathological…
“Keep in mind that under “normal” market appreciation of 4 percent a year, and not accounting for any gentrification or remodeling juicing, an asset purchased in 2005 for $975,000 should be worth somewhere around $1,158,000 today.”
Why do the people that write for this site get so much pleasure from pointing out that real estate prices have fallen? So has the global economy, the price of oil, stocks, etc. Why are you pointing out the obvious? It’s like you are shaking your finger with an “I told you so”.
Who are you directing this at? I imagine everyone knows the price of real estate has fallen. Not just in SF but GLOBALLY!!!
Socketsite…our motto….death to people who buy houses! Your pain equals our pleasure.
It wasn’t one of my best efforts, and my second point WAS a direct dig at something he said yesterday. It wasn’t an ad hominem attack, it was just a little dig. But it was aimed right at him.
Annon’s a good guy (moody, but generally a good guy) and if he wants to harass me over it, it’s OK by me. If I dish it out, I have to take it, and my first post was aimed squarely at him. SO I didn’t have a problem with anything he said about it. Bonus for the term “net-dork”
So let’s move off of this – and talk about the BATH the seller is about to take. From 2005?! Woo hoo!!
Oh yeah, and Victorian my ass. Does the Realtor really think we can’t tell that it isn’t a Victorian. I suppose there isn’t a word for “cheap ass POS-looking facade for which we want 900 large”, so “Victorian” had to do?
And gosh! No photos! What could that possibly mean about the interior? Apparently, we’re all too stupid to figure that out!
Socketsite…our motto….death to people who buy houses! Your pain equals our pleasure.
Most homeowners benefit when housing prices go down. It lowers property tax assessments and it makes upgrading your home less expensive (i.e., your future home likely falls more in raw dollar terms than your current home).
“Normal” appreciation. Exactly. South Slope 2/2’s were supposed to reach ~1.16M? Actually, they weren’t, and saying so is pretty disingenuous.
It’s beyond peak.
I don’t think you understand what that word means…
But I do tho. I look at these things daily, often for hours.
Example. I will pick the year that (humorously enough, as they all said values were tanking at the time) the Socketsite bears in hindsight regard as peak, 2007.
2 br 2bas just like this one, OK?
There were seven sales in 2007. Six of them were well under 975K. Only one, 56 Aztec, was higher, and it had drop dead gorgeous downtown views.
In fact, only one other was above 900K, 527 Holly Park, which was totally renovated and went for 935K.
The rest were 695 to 815K.
Here’s how many 2/2’s have ever gone for more than 950K (let alone 975) or more in Bernal: Coincidentally it is also seven. And all but two of them were on the North Slope. In fact, one property, 180 Manchester a cool house at the very top of North Bernal, appears twice.
So, to sum up, picking this non arm’s length 975K sale and trying to talk about expecting 4% per year appreciation is pretty disingenuous. The 975K Bernal 2/2 dog never ran in the first place.
So was that a fair platform from which to utter such derision? “What, it’s under 2005!” “Same thing I said 20 times” “Jobs market coming back”?
Nope. Sure wasn’t.
Thanks Anonn – I appreciated that last post.
Boy, $975k for a fairly ugly 2BR Bernal place is the epitome of bubblemania. “Prime Bernal”? That 2005 sale is a “Real SF” price for a very unReal SF location and a smallish, unremarkable place. One can buy very nice places in good neighborhoods for this asking price. They may be able to sell it if they drop the price quickly and sufficiently so that the buyer can use an FHA low-down loan and nab the $8000 tax credit. But the clock is ticking on that option.
There is so much pleasure in pointing out that house prices have fallen is because it indicates that SANITY is returning to the market. Nothing “good” about a dual income professional couple having to spend most of their take-home just to purchase a fixer upper that one of their blue collar parents could have afforded on a single income a generation ago. Hee, hee, “Net-dork” was a score! I’ll be using that term.
But I do tho.
No, really, you don’t.
I will pick the year that (humorously enough, as they all said values were tanking at the time) the Socketsite bears in hindsight regard as peak, 2007.
There is nothing inconsistent with that statement. The first derivative is supposed to be negative to the right of a local maximum.
No. I do, and I displayed same twice, hater. This offmarket 2/2 south slope property got a record level price in 2005, a non peak year, and it shouldn’t have. Yet it was still framed in a manner that asked about 4 percent yearly appreciation never captured. It begs the question: why did you not take exception to that? The editorial intent was cynical. Typical that you would instead badger me, the guy who just taught you something about a particular market. But hey, hating is fun. Right? Buzz off.
C’mon anonn,
It was 2005 and the guy who bought it probably lost 15 bidding wars before that one and so he was willing to pay over after losing so many homes. And I’m sure he figured if he was over by 15%, he’d make it up the next year so who cared? Probably the first home he bid on had already appreciated by more than that, so if he had gone over by that percengtage back then, he’d be better off than he was. That WAS the market back then and it produced more than one high price.
It was stuff like that that started convincing me to sit on the sidelines of course, so it backfired and finally killed itself, but this seller wasn’t the only one and I’m QUITE sure that every Realtor in the area rubbed every buyers nose in it as a “comp”. “(Feigning shock) Did you HEAR?! That home went for $975K and never even hit the market!”
It was happening all over the city. Preemptive offers were almost the norm, and I was shopped a few off market houses myself. So it’s ridiculous for you to use today’s standards to state that it was an off-kilter sale. They all were. Tulip bulbs for everyone! That was the time, and if it was an outlier, the current seller probably was thrilled, so it became the market.
It was a different era and the current seller might have bought stupidly, but that was how it was back then. Either you competed against idiots or you sat it out. I finally gave up and sat it out. Friggin’ glad I did!
So I’m not buying this as an outlier. Someone was willing to plunk down at least a note to pay it, and they didn’t walk away (yet) so it looks like an arms length transaction to me. no one held a gun to his head.
As for 4% appreciation, I’m sure if you asked the current seller in 2005, he was planning on a hell of a lot more than 4%. If you had told him “only” 4%, I’m sure he would have laughed in your face.
Now I’m the one who is laughing. Me and a certain millionaire in Marin and about half the posters here.
As Barney pointed out: no point in trying to have a conversation with a dining room table. And fluj is the father/mother (who really knows) of all dining room tables.
high peaks low autumn
cherries picked beginning
unknown end fogs sight
Actually, in this case, both tipster and anonn are right. The person who bought this house paid more than the typical 2005 price for a Bernal house this size, so there are limits to generalizing on this one sale. But no doubt the 2005 buyer expected that prices would continue to rise.
@tipster (and anyone who talks about photos in listings):
“And gosh! No photos! What could that possibly mean about the interior? Apparently, we’re all too stupid to figure that out!”
There’s plenty of innuendo here that the lack of photos means the place is a dump.
Fact: many new listings don’t have photos; they get added a few days later. The reason: the broker often lists homes on Friday so they can be on the following Tuesday’s “brokers’ open” tour. Sometimes this means the listing goes in before the broker gets a chance to have photos taken of the place. It’s more important to make the listing active in the system than to have it be complete.
If you look at the listing now, there are plenty of photos.
I don’t really care about the home or its price. I’m just trying to keep the arguments honest, so readers have less noise to sort through.
Tipster, et al,
Talking about what you would have done in hindsight is one thing, and I believe you, but it’s not verifiable when it comes to this case, and these property parameters. What is verifiable in hindsight — even if they lost 15 bidding wars — is that no 2/2’s in that area were going for anywhere near 975K. Not then, not now, and not in 2007 either. So whoever bought it should have known that staying four years wouldn’t bring much appreciation. Everything similar was going for in the high 7’s at the time.
?
Hi
We are always flattered when our listing get picked up and discussed and we want to contribute to the discussion.
To help the discussion along, the reason we didn’t post ALL the pics right away is simply that we were awaiting their arrival from the photographer, however, we needed to post before the Friday Noon deadline in order to get it on for the weekend and the Tuesday brokers tour. The “proof is in the pudding,” so I would invite ALL of you to go to http://www.82Ellsworth.com to see this lovely single family home and would invite you to our first open house tomorrow, Sunday, Sept. 6th from 2-4:30PM. This house is lovely, no “smoke and mirrors.” It also has a full bath down.
Regarding price: The economics of our marketplace have changed and there are all kinds of ways to spin statistics, however, we think we’ve priced it fairly for the marketplace under the current economic environment and real world sales comparable sales.
Again, come see the home for yourselves and bring a friend. We intend on selling it successfully and we believe there is a buyer out there who’s going to love it and call it home.
Thanks for your interesting commentary and if I have turned an odd phrase or have a typo above; please remember we real estate agents are humans, too. 😉
Looking forward,
Marcus Miller
Well, you just misused a semicolon.
Anon – you’re right. That’s why I qualified it as “above” and not right after this word. Thanks for keeping it real. 🙂
Marcus
I am going to sit this one out. No point arguing about a market and one data point. Fingers are useless because you can’t do anything with a pinkie! So we’re all better off without fingers and avoiding the carrying costs of a pinkie.
Did anyone come by the open house today, to see it on the inside? Any thoughts about pricing, presentation or marketability?
marcus miller
Socket Site removed all the anti “regular” comments from this post.
This site is filled with all sorts of sad folks like tipster who can’t afford to buy, so they feel the need to flog the site with all sorts of bizzare data that shows nothing other than that they have 5k in the bank and nothing more.
At least we know where SS management stands.. with the regular dbags.
[Editor’s Note: Actually, we removed the following anonomous comment “Pricing: WFT, Presentation: OMG, Marketability: LOL” and the string of inane personal attacks led by “Jimmy C” that followed. If that’s the only value you can add, or all that you’re looking for, you’re in the wrong place.]
After 42 days on the market the list price for 82 Ellsworth has been reduced to $849,000. Once again, purchased in April of 2005 for $975,000.
75 Manchester 687K in 2005, 765K in 2009, 16K over asking, 15 day close, cash deal, 1000 legal square feet, 1000 foot lot.
75 Manchester 687K in 2005, 765K in 2009, 16K over asking, 15 day close, cash deal, 1000 legal square feet, 1000 foot lot.
We couldn’t find any recent sales records for 75 Manchester to confirm the report, but we did notice permits for a remodel of the house and decks in July of this year. When did the 2009 sale close?
I think it closed in mid September. The property was definitely cosmetically changed, I don’t know about whether anything structural was done.
[Editor’s Note: According to the permits, in addition to a couple of smaller fixes (which we generally just consider normal maintenance) the kitchen was remodeled with new cabinets, new countertops and a refinished floor, while the first and second floor decks were remodeled in-kind (although “less than 50%”).
In other words, we wouldn’t exactly call those two sales “apples to apples,” would you?]