501 Beale#14D
As we wrote in March of 2009:

Originally listed as a Watermark resale for $1,585,000 [in July 2008], from a listing later [that year]: “Views Galore 501 Beale #14D Offered at $1,499,000 Extraordinary price reduction!”

From a listing after that: “Buyers and Agents, now is the time to take advantage of this price!” Asking $1,399,000 at the time.

From the listing [in March 2009]: “Great Opportunity!! Take advantage of HUGE PRICE REDUCTIONs and 1 yr. HOA concession. Motivated sellers!!” Now asking $1,365,000.

And from public records: purchased for $1,303,500 in September of 2006 (not including any incentives). Cognitive listing dissonance (TM) is the first thing that comes to mind.

Last week the short sale of 501 Beale #14D closed escrow with a reported contract price of $932,150. That’s 28.5 percent or $371,350 under its purchase price in 2006 (and 33 percent under the “Great Opportunity!!” asking price in 2009).
Cognitive Listing Dissonance At The Watermark (501 Beale #14D) [SocketSite]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by anonee

    gee, who knew living above the freeway would be a drag? could not have seen that one coming. still, this is a bargain at ~$800/sq.ft….right??

  2. Posted by jason

    AND unit #15D is in contract, list price was $899,000. Neither of which can be good news for #16D, currently listed for $1,299,000 and on the market 69 days. $400,000 is quite a premium for one floor higher…

  3. Posted by hangemhi

    Listing Agent for #16D (asking $1.299M) was the Buyer’s Agent for #14D’s sale. What do you tell prospective buyers????
    16D sold for $1.6M in 2007 with a $1.1M loan (per tax records). So it too will be short when it finally sells. $500k loss, ouch. Amazing that someone would pay $300k more for 2 flights up one year after #14D sold for $1.3M
    And looking at photo 8 of 16D’s listing – your bedroom is eye to eye with the bridge. I personally wouldn’t buy this unit at any price with all that noise.

  4. Posted by sfrenegade

    Unit #22DPH-1D is also sale-pending with a listing at $1,018,880:
    Same floor plan as the other D units, it looks like, but it doesn’t have as much of the cheap apartment with marble in the master bath and views look of the other D-units mentioned here, mostly because of superficial things like a little paint and the warmer cabinets. No idea how 16D is justifying the price when 6 floors above is almost $300K cheaper.

  5. Posted by Paul Hwang

    The floor plate changes on 22, PH-1D is a different floor plan and orientation.

  6. Posted by curmudgeon

    Interesting, that Penthouse unit had a 2006 sale of 1.1 million. So there’s presumably not a huge change in value there (compared to the 14-D unit highlighted here). Is that because that 2006 sale was some sort of “early bird special”? I seem to recall that some people bought in early and flipped these units before the market crashed?

  7. Posted by tipster

    Did they add the freeway between the 2006 sale and today? I thought the bay bridge was built in the 30s, but maybe they didn’t put the freeway in until after the 2006 sale?
    Oh, I just checked. It was there during the 2006 sale. Any noise was there too. The same unit. More than a $420,000.00 loss for a two bedroom.
    You can lose a lot of money in real estate, for sure.
    And yes, $800psft is still very high. So, you’re right, this is still too high of a price, and therefore prices will continue to fall, and people’s life savings will continue to be lost.

  8. Posted by Paul Hwang

    The floor plate changes on 22, PH-1D is a different floor plan and orientation.
    15D is the North east corner with views of the Bay Bridge and water PH-1D is Northwest and does not have view of the Bridge.

  9. Posted by sfrenegade

    Thanks for the correction, Paul. PH-1D sold for $1.18M in 2006. Like several other “penthouse” owners at the Watermark, the former owner of PH-1D got foreclosed on. In this case it was Kondaur Capital taking it back at $912,815. The current listing is almost 14% below the last sale.
    PH-1B was also a foreclosure. It sold for $1.3M in 2006, and then got taken back at $1,063,407, then resold in February for $893K. The loss was eaten by Chase.
    PH-1E was a foreclosure. Sold for $1.523 in January 2007, then taken back by the bank at $1,349,628, and then resold for $1.23M in April. It was in one of Wamu’s infamous Alt-A portfolios of a 2007 vintage.
    PH-1A and PH-1E are still hanging in there.

  10. Posted by J

    Might as well put “owners” in quotes too. They were really just renting money that they didn’t have.

  11. Posted by Paul Hwang

    Oh yeah, PH-1 is actually the 2nd to top floor. PH-2 is actually the top floor in the building and PH-42 is my age.

  12. Posted by ljkljl

    Geeze, enjoy the eyesore, traffic noise, and fumes while out on that balcony…
    A view of girders while sipping wine with friends, how quaint…
    this is a sub-prime floor IMO

  13. Posted by mac

    15D Is back on the market.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles