151 Alice B. Toklas #702

Purchased for $1,400,000 in November 2004, returned to the market this past March asking $1,800,000, and reduced to $1,365,000 in October, the sale of the Stanley Saitowitz re-designed Marquee Lofts (151 Alice B. Toklas) #702 closed escrow on 12/18 with a reported contract price of $1,330,000 (5 percent under its 2004 value).

Once again, the 2,300 square foot loft starred as Keanu Reeves’ character’s apartment in the movie “Sweet November” and features a “custom designed steel audio cabinet” by sculptor Kyle Reicher (and wenge wood bookshelf by Robert Croutier).

16 thoughts on “A Not So Sweet December For Marquee Lofts #702 Five Year Hold”
  1. Whoa. (obligatory)
    What’s with all these recent listings that were in movies/on TV (Party of Five, Twins, etc.)?

  2. Three words: “Retaining wall problem.”
    Wow, you were very willfully ignorant at 7:59 a.m., Mikey Q. Hater.
    This sale shows a 70K loss for a Van Ness condo. That’s better than a lot of condos have done recently. Why you want to put it into a context of an SFR that had a lot of unfortunate events surround it is not known.

  3. Maybe not thin-skinned, but what about obesessive?
    Some random stats: last 5 threads, 110 total comments, with 31 from anonn. So nearly a third of total comments here from just one person. And most of those complaining about other people’s comments.

  4. Well, you say obsessive, I say responsive. You try arguing with six people all with slighly varying opinions of how wrong you are, directed straight at you, without five or six posts. Let alone a naked bait.

  5. I mean, you, Legacy Dude, might have come back in that thread about the Hyde st property yesterday. After you beat your chest wondering about where all the bulls were. Before you learned the actual mitigating factors of the back story. You might have come back and admitted erro. But you didn’t. You showed up here jumping in on somebody else’s query of me. Look man, if people stopped thinking B.S. + bearish CW = critical thinking, I wouldn’t have all that much to say. Look at that loan mod thread. It’s a laugh. People skim articles, see six buzzwords, and think they’ve got something.

  6. Gotcha. Just seems odd that you’re the only regular poster here who seems to consistently and repeatedly squabble with almost every other poster here, regular or newcomer. Why is that? I guess everyone else here must be an idiot, thus prompting you to be “responsive” at 1AM on Saturday, for example, as in the Hyde property thread. But good to hear you’re not obsessing about people’s anonymous web musings, or trying to run somebody else’s blog. Thanks for clarifying.

  7. Posting at 1 a.m. is not something I do regularly. My home office happens to be in my front room and it was on that Socketsite page, where six people were coming at me wrongheadedly, as usual. Yeah, that was lame by me. As to your other points, are you truly such a pure and chaste soul whose privacy is so coarsely and intrusively invaded that you need to seek the refuge of sarcasm? No, you’re not that dainty. It’s more like the last refuge of the imaginatively bankrupt for you.

  8. Jeez, Ken. I read yours and others comments regarding a particular sale and formed an opinion. That I disagree with you at some level on a particular point does not make me “willfully ignorant” or a “hater.” Moreover, my comment wasn’t even directed at you but rather RE apologists who are unable to view either anecdotal or aggregated price declines as anything other than anomalous or “special.” In short, it ain’t about you.
    Rather than going all Bill O’Reilly on everyone over a light barb, what you ought to be concerned about is type of persona you’re projecting online. You may want to apply at least a modicum of professionalism to your responses – most of us know your full name and where you work, after all. Would you want to do business with you knowing only of your posts here?

  9. I wouldn’t do business with you, Mikey. You’re not true to yourself. Why would I expect you to be honest with me? Pardon me for thinking the very language that others were erroneously arguing with me about was directed at me.

  10. Yeah right^^^^ “It ain’t about you”, I just happened to bring up retaining walls. I was disagreeing with a point you made, even though I have the first post in the thread

Leave a Reply

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