Purchased for $1,700,000 in November 2005 by way of a $1,105,000 first and $425,000 second (i.e., 10 percent down), in 2008 the Cole Valley Edwardian at 1027 Cole returned to the market priced at $2,195,000 and was reduced to $2,145,000 before being withdrawn.
In 2009 the property was relisted as a “short sale” asking $1,695,000. And this past September the property was returned to the bank.
Yesterday 1027 Cole was listed for $1,377,000, 19 percent below its year 2005 price (37 percent below its year 2008 expectations).
∙ Listing: 1027 Cole Street (3/3) 2,495 sqft – $1,377,000 [MLS]

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Haunted

    Is this house by chance haunted? I get a strange feeling just looking at the pictures..

  2. Posted by jason

    I don’t get a haunted vibe (and I am somewhat in tune to those kinda things). But what I do get is a bland, boring, lack-of-character vibe. And if I was a ghost, it would piss me off to be trapped there for all of eternity.

  3. Posted by ex SF-er

    very 80’s.
    they sure like spiral staircases as well.
    I think there is potential but it would be costly and need a good eye to make anything special out of this.
    all that said, it has great square footage!

  4. Posted by EBGuy

    The former homeowners weren’t so successful with their lawsuit against the mortgagees on this place, but it looks like they may be having more success (well they haven’t lost it, and the case has been kicked up to federal court) against Countrywide. The residence in question in that case is at 1347 Portola. How do you calculate the APR on an ARM again?
    Looks like someone got the best of them in this lawsuit, though. TOTAL JUDGMENT $678,395.13, ouch…

  5. Posted by sfrenegade

    Just out of curiosity, how does PPSF compare to 1130 Cole?

  6. Posted by Al

    Haunted: I think the photography’s a little weird. Especially that last pic, which is crooked. And all the wide empty spaces.

  7. Posted by anonee

    that sq.footage number is bogus as its counting the low ceiling behind the garage space and the hokey loft in the total. even then we are talking over $500/sq.ft for something that needs to be remodeled.
    so a two bed two bath plus unwarranted
    in-law for $1.3m is still a lot of money. the fact that other people got suckered on this does not translate to ss’s sky is falling meme, imo…

  8. Posted by ex SF-er

    so a two bed two bath plus unwarranted in-law for $1.3m is still a lot of money. the fact that other people got suckered on this does not translate to ss’s sky is falling meme, imo…
    not sure it translates well into your “they overpaid” meme either, as essentially overpaying WAS “the market” for RE in SF back in the mid 2000’s.
    I actually agree with both memes.
    1) the prior owners (along with most owners who bought from early/mid 2000s-current) overpaid. The current ASKING (not sales) price of $1.38M is nose bleed levels too, although overshadowed by the fool’s price of 2005.
    2) now many of those owners currently face significant paper losses on that RE.
    The sky might not be falling, but a $323,000 loss on RE over 5 years certainly doesn’t feel good either.
    That’s one of the problems with high priced and overpriced real estate… even relatively mild losses in percentage terms end up being large dollar volumes.
    Not really a great sales meme is it? “Hey, the sky isn’t falling… your housing value might lose around $65k/year but you’re rich anyway so what’s $5k+/month? Did you see the La Cornue stove?”

  9. Posted by anonee

    ex-sfer
    “not sure it translates well into your “they overpaid” meme either, as essentially overpaying WAS “the market” for RE in SF back in the mid 2000’s.”
    i do not agree. yes, its true that most buyers were caught up in the frenzy and yes the lack of supply rose the fortunes of crappy houses but just as in any market there were good trades and bad trades.
    having watched the market in my target districts very closely over 15+ years i can tell you that some players are much better at judging value and potential than others.
    that is why you can have the subject property as a huge loser right on the same street as 1130 cole (which was a huge winner).
    to put it another way, some traders in the sugar pit make a killing and some lose it all. that does not mean sugar is a good or bad investment.
    it has the potential to be both…

  10. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    ^^^ And considering that most of those traders are amateurs expecting to only transact a few times in their lives, wouldn’t it be great if there was a professional that such an amateur trader could hire to help them avoid the pitfalls of a bad trade ?

  11. Posted by Louis

    The problem is the property itself. No view, no character, water damage on the ceiling, etc.
    Other SFH selling this market for significantly higher prices in the general area, even if down from bubble,

  12. Posted by djt

    The “professional” to help you pick a house is the usual things, for which you do not need a professional:
    Location. No noisy streets or corners. Not near low income housing. No unfixable construction defects. Good details and floor plan or correctable to a good floor plan. Few steps to the front door, particularly for 3 Br and up places. Good light or correctable to that. Offstreet parking. Systems upgrades or priced accordingly. In a stable, established area. Access to outdoor space from public space.
    You make money when you buy, so they say.

  13. Posted by anonee

    djt has it right. one would think that if you are making one of the larger transactions of your life (and probably using leverage to do so)that you would hew to these simple principles.
    and many people do so. alas, many do not…

  14. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    … and for those people who do not comprehend those basic principles, wouldn’t it be nice if they who could hire a professional who does have a firm understanding of real estate value ?
    The reality is that most people aren’t like SocketSite readers and could benefit from some hand holding as well as someone to advise against an overpriced purchase. Even those buyers who make a committed effort to understand real estate values will need to invest a lot of time looking at properties and tracking the market before they can form an accurate opinion. I think it takes at least a year of tracking the market and touring properties to calibrate the sense of value. Much much longer if you want to get a grasp of market cycles.
    Those who don’t have the time or don’t care to put in the effort could really benefit from the advice of a seasoned professional. They would even be willing to pay significant fees for that help.

  15. Posted by SFSal

    “that is why you can have the subject property as a huge loser right on the same street as 1130 cole (which was a huge winner).”
    LOL. A huge winner AFTER 1130 fell into foreclosure and AFTER it was renovated and expanded. 99% of buyers don’t have the financing or experience for that kind of project.

  16. Posted by [anon.ed]

    You don’t buy unentitled fixers for anywhere near 1.5M and up south of Sacramento street, and you never did. You don’t tell your clients to either. (Not if you ever want them to be your clients again, that is.) That was 1130 Cole’s problem when Malawieh bought it. That’s 1027’s problem now. It probably makes sense for around 1M or so.

  17. Posted by EBGuy

    Meanwhile, fallout from the bubble continues. The house at 1347 Portola (documented in my November 12, 2010 post above) avoided the the courthouse steps last round. Let’s see how they do this time. A NOD was filed on August 21, 2012 for around $1.6 million. Perennial HOA slacker is never a good sign.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles