As a plugged-in reader notes, the sale of the single family 2552 Hyde Street closed escrow today with a reported contract price of $1,385,000, 29 percent under its February 2007 acquisition for – and neighborhood comp setting price of – $1,950,000.
Film buffs might recognize the house as that which Arnold Schwarzenegger’s character called home in “Junior.” Although the walls (and exterior) have since been painted.
UPDATE (12/21): While still a valid data point and food for thought, in light of a retaining wall issue we’ve pulled our “apples to apples” tag for 2552 Hyde.
∙ 2552 Hyde Street Overview [monicaslist.com]
∙ Last Listing: 2552 Hyde Street (3/3) – $1,595,000 [Redfin]
∙ Junior [filminamerica.com]
It’s about time Russian Hill got kicked out the Real SF. We can’t just let any old neighborhood into that exclusive club. Pretenders.
I suppose we should caveat that it is on a busy MUNI line, however. Something called the “Powell and Hyde.” It’s some sort of new railway technology they invented that requires neither overhead trolley wire or an internal combustion engine…pretty sure it wasn’t there back in 2007.
Tsk. Someone didn’t get the memo that SF is only off 5-10% from peak.
Loss : 565,000
Realtors: 69,000
Interest: 270,000
Prop Tax: 54,000
Transfer: 10,000
Total : 968,000
$920 per day every day for over 1000 days! What fun that must have been to live there.
I’m thinking renting might have been the better option.
Pretty amazing numbers! Notably, the interest costs alone seem to be just about what the rental cost would have been, but then they would have been “flushing money down the toilet on rent.” Yes, I know, but it’s deductible. The $565,000 loss, however, is not.
The drop in price is directly proportional to the drop in the gubernator’s approval ratings. If this home were never featured in a Schwarzenegger flick, it would have maintained its value. Duh.
It’s a good thing for the seller that the home wasn’t a popular Schwarzenegger movie.
“Film buffs might recognize the house as that which Arnold Schwarzenegger’s character called home in “Junior.””
…and the tasteful may wonder: why pee yellow outside and poop brown inside?
Funny how you don’t see any of the zealots and chestbeaters on these types of threads, bleating about how resilient and special the market is.
“Where’s that big drop that everybody predicted? Guffaw!”
I’m not implying that the salt-in-the-wound bear antics are any less hackneyed. Just observing that it’s the properties priced within the bailout zone that seem to be steadying now that easy money is back. Just like a drunk stops shaking once he’s had his breakfast beer. But it ain’t exactly a picture of health.
^^^So are u sayin if they had painted it a different color they would have not lost a small fortune? Nice try. Are the real estate professionals now posting excuses for price drops?
[Editor’s Note: To us it simply reads like an expressed opinion on its interior (and exterior) design. Nothing more, nothing less, and nothing we’d get too worked up about.]
It could just be the angle or maybe in proportion to Danny DeVito, but do the windows in the living room look wider in the MLS picture than in the Twins picture?
Red meat to feed the wishes of the market collapse crowd.
Enjoy.
I doubt chestbeaters will take the offered bait or intrude on the fun.
Some of you who look at numbers purely, and don’t EVER visit a property really should just shut up and read what you’re SF r.e. bettors are talking about. It’s a funny little brand of skeptic around here, don’t ya think This sale happened pretty quickly considering how much under list price it sold for. Don’t ya think? Funny how nobody wondered about extenuating circumstances, isn’t it? Ha.
“Funny how nobody wondered about extenuating circumstances, isn’t it?”
Clearly, none of us want to speculate on that.
That’s what you get when the editor does what he does. He often feeds crumbs to all the squawking ducks without checking the contents of the bag. This house had a serious retaining wall issue. Look at the photo of its location. You think that might have posed a problem or two to a new buyer?
I almost bought this house in 2007, but wouldn’t go above $1.9M. Of course, now I’m glad that I didn’t. But let me respond to some of the negative comments: the current owners painted it yellow. It was white and grey before and looked MUCH better. In white, it had a Richard Meier feel to it. The yellow was a horrible mistake. As for the cable cars in front, the windows are double or triple pane, so there is no noise at all. In fact, it’s cool to see a SF landmark go gliding silently by the windows once in a while. It’s really a very cool small house. Bathrooms were a bit dated, circa 1980’s, but not horrible. The spiral staircase goes a full 3 stories and is quite striking – even though I’m not a huge fan of spiral stairs. Also, it’s not really a good family home, which may have cut down of the appeal. But still, a nice place in my opinion. A 29% drop is really amazing.
And did this alleged retaining wall issue exist in 2007?
And did this alleged retaining wall issue exist in 2007?
It’s not alleged. It’s a fact of this sale. Whether or not it was a problem in 2007 I can’t say. Ha. Like I didn’t know that was coming. They’re houses, people. View them as houses. Not mutual funds.
Funny how there is no mention of a retaining wall issue on the realtor’s site or listing. Can’t find any complaints filed by neighbors either. Assume it was in the disclosures, was it in the disclosures in 2007?
First listed in August? Not exactly a quick sale.
“Funny” ? Why advertise a defect? “Funny”? Get real. It was in the disclosures. Though it’s not known by you or myself whether it was an issue in 2007, or whether, if know, it was or was not disclosed, it’s apparently also not appreciated by you that things can possibly occur which alter retaining walls in two years time on hillsides. It sold very quickly after its last reduction, and for an appreciable amount under asking.
“They’re houses, people. View them as houses. Not mutual funds.”
Oh, my friend. Truer words were never spoken. But as houses and not endless ATMs they’re only worth 50% of peak value.
Busy street. check.
Ugly color. check.
retaining wall. check.
“It sold very quickly after its last reduction, and for an appreciable amount under asking.”
Somebody wanted out and had the manuevering room to price it to sell. I can only stand in awe of people who can casually walk away from $565K. I’m not sure I’ll ever have that much to walk away from. It’s about 3 times more than I want to pay for an entire SFR and I’m in the top 10% for HHI in SF. There is an amazing amount of wealth sloshing around out there.
But as houses and not endless ATMs they’re only worth 50% of peak value.
I think you skipped some stages along your if — > then equation, there. Some readers will be like, “Oh yeah. Diemos. The 50% off dude.” Newbies will be like, HUH?
If I were to guess here I’d say, retainging wall issue + somebody needed to move + didn’t care about the very large loss = this backstory.
retainging wall issue + somebody needed to move + didn’t care about the very large loss
Of those three factors, the only one that could possibly cause a reduction in the value of the house would be the retaining wall issue. And that only if there was no issue in 2007 (which we have no evidence of).
Having looked at it in 2007, I don’t recall anything about a
retaining wall problem.
And that only if there was no issue in 2007 (which we have no evidence of)
Right. ‘Cause, again, nothing new can possibly occur to a retaining wall on a steep hill in 2 or so years time. No uphill neighbors can possibly change groundwater routes. Right? You all who write on this website are qualified to dismiss things outright, correct? Ha. Please.
And, sorry, but despite the fact of the changed status, it’s funny how so many of you want to seize on a negative result without challenging it. The same group would clamor to find whether or not a bathroom had been remodelled. You want to talk about unaccountable.
“They’re houses, people. View them as houses. Not mutual funds.”
Isn’t that exactly the sentiment housing bubble believers were expressing during the bubble years?
And weren’t they mocked for expressing that idea, maybe not by anonn (I don’t know), but certainly by many anonymous bubble deniers.
But the fact remains that this is just another property, in a growing list of properties from all over SF that have shown 10, 20, 30 percent drops compared to the prior sale price.
Whatever the reason prices in SF are dropping, it is clear that they are still dropping and any defect in the home is going to mean a major price cut and loss to the previous owner.
If only this previous owner had actually had some ‘pride of ownership’ they would have maintained the home and not had to sell at a 30% loss. Of course that would have meant for the owner to treat the house as a home and not a mutual fund.
Tragic, that a drainage problem can wipe out $565K in value.
“He often feeds crumbs to all the squawking ducks without checking the contents of the bag.”
Best.
anonn quote.
evah.
Tragic, that a drainage problem can wipe out $565K in value.
First, “drainage problem” ? Secondly, nobody is disputing that the market has changed. Third, despite a market shift most will agree that even with problems this is a low price for the area, so it begs the question about the rationale behind the sale.
But no. “It’s clear that prices are still dropping” — you know, from this one house and all. And, “pride of ownership” — facetiously. Blah blah blah. Hater City, Internet, WWW.
Isn’t that exactly the sentiment housing bubble believers were expressing during the bubble years
What do you mean? Regardless of timeframe, it should be viewed in its own light, and case by case. You and others like you want to purely look at numbers when assessing property. Here with this one, you want to take an individual case and make a bigger point with it. Over and over again that’s the mentality on here. It never once made any sense.
“so it begs the question about the rationale behind the sale”
Husband and wife moved out here from the midwest. Husband died in May: the death was anticipated a early as January. Wife sold the house. (It’s amazing what you can find out on the Internet)
It wouldn’t surprise me to see many realtors scrounging for reasons while the sale price was low, when the real story is just that you have a motivated seller who would rather get out than wait forever for a better price. If you have some minor foundation problem, which almost all homes on hillsides do from time to time, you post it on the MLS sale record hoping the appraisers will ignore that sale so that they don’t use an arms length transaction as a comp to halt your next sale. It happens.
An by the way, in these situations, the seller can credit back the estimated amount of the repairs to the buyer, so the cost of repair may have been included in the purchase price anyway, and so the issue may not have affected the price at all. Even if it did, it may not have been more than 10% of the loss.
The MLS info reads “price dropped 100K due to retaining wall” or something similar. Your pretzel logic is funny. Seems as if I — the big bad realtor, grasping at straws to try to rationalize the low price — was the only one who wondered about the backstory + retaining wall. Nobody else. They all wanted to say, “Wow. Prices are down 30% over in the Real SF.” Jokes.
An by the way, in these situations, the seller can credit back the estimated amount of the repairs to the buyer, so the cost of repair may have been included in the purchase price anyway, and so the issue may not have affected the price at all
Huh? No, it was front and center. I don’t think your credits back suspicions have ever once been proven correct on here. I’ve not seen one, anyway.
Suspicions? No, it’s a common technique to try to keep the comps up. Check out the third comment from a more-honest-than-usual realtor:
http://www.trulia.com/voices/General_Area/what_do_sellers_offer_a_credit_back_to_the_buyer_-6586
And “$100K drop due to retaining wall” sounds like the realtor trying to goose the comps. What was that realtor going to say: $100K drop because the market is crashing and I mis priced the place from the start?
And that’s what it’s all about right now: provide reasons why an arms length transaction that indicates prices are falling shouldn’t be used as a comp so the appraisers don’t get wind of it an use to to squash the next sale where the buyer’s agent convinced the buyer to overbid.
I noticed a distinct shift a few weeks ago when the agent at 235 Berry came on here and said 1)the sale of the unit was a short sale so it should be ignored (as if that is a rarity) and 2)just wait until you hear the much higher price of the next sale!
The realtors have moved from “It’s on a busy street” to “Two kitchen cabinet screws were missing: $100K off”.
Here you had someone who probably just took the first reasonable offer so she could go back and be with her family after her husband died. The retaining wall issue is just cover provided by a realtor who couldn’t talk his or her selling client into waiting for a higher offer and is now trying to limit the fallout.
Retaining walls on steep hillsides slide. Not hard to fix and the seller probably credited back the buyer to fix it anyway. The real story is $565K off in 94109.
Your conspiracy theory laden synopses aren’t worth anything, nor are your analyses of any construction difficulty or any cost. Good find on the backstory, tho.
“r.e. bettors”–nice Freudian slip there.
Um, I said “you’re … bettors.” You get poor marks for reading something into a typo.
i for one want to thank tipster for staying on top of and exposing industry shenanigans. always enjoy his/her posts.
What did Tipster expose, precisely? Please. Give one true anecdote of Tipster proving something he’s said about conspiratorial behavior.
i think that he provides a cold & hard look at the realities behind a real estate transaction, both on the seller and buyer side. i don’t keep a mental log of who has said precisely what about any particular property, and i have no emotional interest in any of them, but whether every fact happened to be true or not specific properties (i have no reason to believe they are not true), he brings to light things to be cautious of.
But he’s alleging something in this particular case that’s utterly false. Think about it. Why would the realtor care about keeping up appearances of comps here? There’s an emotional loss. The house needed to be sold, even at a loss. It’s nonsense.
I take it back. I recall Tipster saying that for some new condo developments, credits back were masking price. I agree that that happens. But the guy brings very little to light other than his own fevered thoughts.
He has also continued to talk about enormous credits back well after reforms have taken place. I don’t recall exactly when, but legislation went into effect that effectively enables lenders to scrutinize transactions more efficiently. Title companies got more clout to red flag potential questionable credits. It’s common knowledge. Yet our man Tipster has continued to talk about hundreds of thousands of dollars credited back on transactions years later. And it’s only apropos of his own imagining.
BTW, as far as the apples to apples comparison, the retaining wall appears to have been installed in 1990 or earlier. When the husband and wife bought the property in 2007, their friendly realtor should have told them the retaining wall was at least 17 years old, the slope was fairly steep, and they should budget for a repair at sometime during their ownership of the property.
The repair should have been built into their initial purrchase price in 2007. Whether someone from the midwest actually knew anything about steep sloping lots, and whether the realtor knew, told them, or even cared more than he or she cared about getting their commission is of course another issue.
But a reasonable person buying a property in 2007 with a 17 year old retaining wall would have adjusted their offer accordingly and those competing for the same property would have been affected by it as well.
Therefore, I don’t think you can discount this issue from the $565K loss at all. I think it was, or should have been, built in to the original purchase price, even if there was no credit back to the current 2009 buyer.
i don’t want to get sucked into this and the debates on this board are above my head anyway; just wanted to give props to tipster. but he did point out that the realtor may have used the retaining wall as an excuse for lowering the price instead of admitting that the property was mispriced to begin with.
Yeah well, the eight or nine people who say, didn’t bid as high as 1.95M, including one poster in this thread, perhaps did behave that way. The realtor in question very well may have advised about the retaining wall. The retaining wall may not have been noticeably flawed at the time. Why you always speak with certainty when you’re speculating is not known.
Meanwhile, I think up the street a bit 1198 (and a townhome adjacent to it but with a Hyde street address) sold quickly (well, I thought the Hyde street one did at least…for over whatever the asking was at the time). I was trying to look that one up but couldn’t find past sales of that. Anyway, folks I’d bet would still say that Russian Hill is still pretty strong. So little invetory (especially in the desireable parts of Russian Hill…I don’t count this house as desireable as it’s just too steep / not easy walking).
sorry…1198 Filbert (cross Hyde).
FWIW, tipster and annon the same person…
$1,385,000 (price) + $100,000 (repairs) = $1,485,000
$1,485,000 – $1,950,000 = -$465,000
-$465,000 / $1,950,000 = -24%
24% drop from 2007 = stupid skeptics or blowhard bulls?
No factoring of a death in the family, and an emotional need to sell. But you’ve extrapolated outwardly just the same. This is one case. Not an entire market. Why is that difficult for so many of you to get your heads around, time and time again?
“The retaining wall may not have been noticeably flawed at the time.”
And if it was noticeably flawed, no prob. Just apply some Fix-All to any gaping cracks and then slather the whole thing with some thick paint. That will conceal the flaw to 90% of buyers and the evidence won’t reappear for at least a year.
Stager trick #26.
For really messed up buckled walls, hire a contractor to overlay a slate veneer.
Flipper trick #43
“No factoring of a death in the family, and an emotional need to sell.”
Meh.
Every buyer’s got a reason to buy.
Every seller’s got a reason to sell.
Mix them all together and, voila!, you get a market.
“Why is that difficult for so many of you to get your heads around, time and time again?”
Why is it so difficult for you to get your head around the fact that you don’t get to exclude data points just because you don’t like their implications.
No worries though. Messers Case and Schiller will dump this in the pot with the rest of the apples.
@ diemos
Nobody’s excluding a data point. It is a data point. What it isn’t, is an entire market. You’re finding fault with me wondering about others extrapolating this as if it’s a market, yet you’re conceding it’s only one point. Yeah, I can hardly wait until Mssrs Case and Shiller lump this in with all the Contra Costa County doings. That’ll be ever so definitive.
And if it was noticeably flawed, no prob. Just apply some Fix-All to any gaping cracks and then slather the whole thing with some thick paint. That will conceal the flaw to 90% of buyers and the evidence won’t reappear for at least a year.
Stager trick #26.
For really messed up buckled walls, hire a contractor to overlay a slate veneer.
Flipper trick # 43
Talk like you know what actually occurred. Talk like you would understand construction costs anyway. Internet kibbitzer trick # infinite.
It’s a fixer, it’s sliding into the bay, it’s not a market comp, the last buyer overpaid, tipster is an idiot, SS editors are part of a conspiracy tied to the Bear Illuminati — third day into this thread and the flujbot ain’t quitting. If only the market showed such strength!
OK. I changed my mind. This house is “the market.” Everything is 30% off. Three days of such intense debate made me come round. Excellent skillsets in the art of persuasion were on display everywhere. Nice one by all bears. Except for you, “boring.” That one sucked.
The tree is not the forest.
And yet, the forest is nothing but a collection of trees.
Yeah well you and all your pals want to look at houses only as if they are numbers. The first 10 comments of this thread or so are bears gloating when they didn’t even know any particulars. “Where are all the bulls?” etc. Then light gets shed on the actual case, actual facts are generously given, and the would be bashers resort to tired Socketsiteisms. It’s cool. I know who the willfully ignorant remain.
“SS editors are part of a conspiracy tied to the Bear Illuminati”
Does that make Fluj “Robert Langdon”?
I will need to consult the Priory of Sion (SF Association of Realtors)
Junior house closes
Theory of pricing erupts
Anonn drinks milk shake
Say your piece and move
Conventional wisdom rules
Socketsite wisdom
Though you never once
bother to check back to see
what you said checks out
In light of the retaining wall uncertainty for 2552 Hyde Street, we’re pulling its “apples to apples” designation. That doesn’t mean it’s not a valid data point nor food for thought, but by our definition a material change in the condition of a property excludes it from earning a coveted “apples” tag, even if that condition was preexisting but simply not known.
Interestingly enough, if the price was indeed “dropped $100K” to reflect a retaining wall issue, it might suggest the issue was even unknown at the time of listing but uncovered during an inspection and would cost around $100,000 to cure for total cost of $1,485,000 to return it to its 2007 condition (not accounting for the paint).
The tragic circumstances of this sale, however, are not grounds for dismissing the validity of the data point (nor would have been enough to revoke its apple tag). While a motivated seller might lead a property to be marked to market at a time when the market is down, it’s rather disingenuous to argue that a property that was listed for over three months and realized three price reductions didn’t receive a fair shake.
The fact that this is not suitable for a family (due to spiral staircase) made this a much less attractive SFH, plus busy corner location at main cablecar stop is crappy, plus front window provides no privacy, etc. etc. All this shows is that any home with any major drawbacks like this will sit on the market and will have to drop in price in order to sell.
All this shows is that any home with any major drawbacks like this will sit on the market and will have to drop in price in order to sell.
Fortunately, any home that sells is bound to have some drawbacks. If it sells for less than expected, then it must be due to those drawbacks. Ergo, prices of “good” homes can never fall!
Huh?