With the development of Union and Mosaica since 916 Alabama Street was purchased for $690,000 in 2005, one could argue its sale today won’t be perfectly apples-to-apples as the neighborhood has developed. That being said, the “bright top floor” two-bedroom is back on the market today as a “likely short sale” and listed for $625,000.
Compared to 110 Chattanooga Street #A, which property might you consider to be more typical of the housing stock in San Francisco?
∙ Listing: 916 Alabama (2/1.5) – $625,000 [MLS]
∙ The Union Of 76 New Units At 2101/2125 Bryant [SocketSite]
∙ Mosaica 601 On The Market And Affordable Rental Applications Soon [SocketSite]
∙ A Zack | De Vito Designed Apple That Didn’t Totally Derail [SocketSite]
Another apple to my mission basket…and to what I have know all along- the better properties in the mish only fell around 10%. All my units are in the mish, and tic quality. Given the severity of the housing crash, I’m down (sic) with a 10% decline. I’m cash flowing, living off the rental income, and hanging tight.
Unfortunately I’m out of the buying market, as there are some great deals out there in multi units. So I found a new hobby- street photography and playing with my new Leica. Still pop into SS on occasion, but I’m just letting this market ride. When money becomes available again I’ll look into another deal. Have to see how the deflation/inflation gig plays out though…that will be interesting.
“Typical” ? This is the only 2 br 1 1/2 ba in all of the Inner Mission right now.
Hi Hipster!
So. No more cash out refi’s on the current buildings to provide a downpayment for the next building?
How is a man supposed to build a mighty real estate empire without leverage?
“the better properties in the mish only fell around 10%.”
Right, from 2005 prices. Twice that from peak 2007 prices. But I agree that the inner mission has done better than most of SF in only falling this much (so far).
diemos,
you forgot about his option ARM tsunami as well.
It breaks my heart to see a fireplace carcass like the Alabama place.
There are a few deals out there for individual places, especially in the TIC universe. Financing is tough and pretty steep for TICs, which means much less competition, whereas for livable condos you’ll be competing with kids using dirt cheap financing. Lots of cash will give you a great edge. Not for the faint of heart. It’s your hard-earned money at risk.
For some TICs, I am seeing more than 25% drops in prices. I am now expecting a 40% discount compared with Condos due mostly to the financing.
Diemos- exactomundo!
Sparks- you mean the one at <3%? Attached to libor with low cap, think I’m safe on that one, thanks.
Lol- I think it will not get to -40%. 20% discount more like it. Decent tics in the mish for ~$400k are selling, and the supply is low. It’s the perfect entry market buy, so will not fall 40% IMO.
Right, from 2005 prices. Twice that from peak 2007 prices. But I agree that the inner mission has done better than most of SF in only falling this much (so far).
I thought the Socketsite readership was in agreement that you’re not allowed to talk about the Mission, “The Mission hasn’t changed in 10 years” guy? But if not, how about you prove that the Mission went up 10 percent from 2005 to 2007? Because judging from the $psqft, it looks like condos went up about 3%, from $598 psqft to $616 psqft, 2005 to 2007.
err 20% ? (even more off?)
Sure, fluj. Prices only went up 3% from 2005 to 2007, the meat of the biggest real estate bubble in SF history. Imagine the guffaws you would have emitted if anyone would have argued that in 2007! And you would have been right!
You know perfectly well that prices went up at least 10% during that span. Here is a decent “comp” to this place showing an 18% drop from 2007 (after a 55% increase from 2002 — I guess that was all in the first three years, astounding!):
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/1800-Bryant-St-94110/unit-114/home/2030179
Like I said, the inner mission has, in fact, done less badly than most other areas. But it has still taken a big hit with more to come.
Again with the one comp versus samplesets routine? Enough already. Condos typically list square footage, so they work better for comparing $psqft. I do not know that Mission condos went up 10 percent from 2005 to 2007. In fact, I doubted it the moment I read you saying it. So I looked it up, and guess what, you’re wrong. Again.
Gotcha fluj. When your B.S. is called, just ignore the apples-to-apples comps and turn to misleading and selective statistics. You know that 22% of the 2005 condo sales did not even list sf, and that jumped up to 28% in 2007. Out of your already small “samplesets” of 129 and 111, that’s a big chunk. Think mix. And what is the $/sf you cite — median, average, or some fluj-factor? Inner mission up by 3% from 2005-2007. Sure, that’s credible. Show me a 2005-2007 sale that reflects such a miniscule jump. I just showed you a -18% 2007-2010 comp.
No thanks. What good is one property? You always do the same things. You make big statements and then when challenged, will cherry pick and try to call your cherrypicked apples a plurality. Or else you try to argue minutiae. Which you’re also doing here by trying to say that a difference of 6% between non reported $psqft would qualify as mix, when it probably results in 4 or 5 properties tops. A normal person would consider the relative sameness of the other sales figures and disregard that small amount. But of course, you want to seize upon it. It’s stale what you do on here and I’m not interested in talking to you any more today. You said something. I countered it. You cherry picked, and you seized upon minuetiae. If we keep arguing you’ll actually concede points and still want to argue more. It’s boring, and your “Mission hasn’t changed in 10 years” statment gets dumber daily.
Prices for comparable condos in the Mission jumped by well more than 10 percent after 2005, really started to fall in 2008; a mini new construction and remodel/flip boomlet might be to blame for the modest change in price per square foot statistic.
That’s your guys’s do-si-do, though right? One person claims actuarial figures, one claims examples and the cycle continues. I think you guys revel in the drama of the never-ending conversation, just keep refusing the other person’s terms and you’ll never have to stop bickering. A win-win.
If you can find anything that shows Mission condos jumped by more than 10 percent between 2005 and 2007, I’m all ears. The reality is that Mission condos only started getting really expensive post 2007. For example, of the 9-C condos that have ever sold for over $1M, 11 of 17 are from 2008 and on.
Yeah, EH, right. Except for the fact that for some reason these same guys will also use averages and median whenever it suits them. If you’ve noticed a precipitous falloff in that particular square dance, emphasis on the word square, it’s by design. At least one do-si-do partner has realized that the music sucks.
At least one do-si-do partner has realized that the music sucks.
It takes two to tango, and if the music sucks then it’s taken you a long time to notice, and at any rate you’re all still on the dancefloor.
This is a characteristic hypocritical m.o. for ol’ flujie. 99% of what he says here he just makes up with no supporting evidence whatsoever. And he doggedly stands by it in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence, turning to ad hominem attacks or misdirection. But if someone else makes an assertion he dislikes he demands conclusive, irrefutable proof (which is nearly impossible to provide in this biz) or he argues the assertion has been conclusively disproven. not still up in the air or unproven, but disproven. Pot, kettle. But I do get a kick watching him foam at the mouth when others run circles around him.
Also, I’ve lived in the mish since 1994. The big improvements were during the dot-com years. Slight but steady upturn through about 2008 but definitely backsliding since then. Just walk up Valencia or Mission these days and that is obvious. Maybe sit-lie will help.
Let’s see if I got this straight, dollars per sq foot YOY and the preponderence of post-2007 1M Mission condo sales versus one cherrypicked apple, and a sort of anecdote, and it’s disproven and circles run ’round? OK.
One of the biggest changes that I have seen is that the Mission has become one of the top dining destinations in the city. That wasn’t the case 10 years ago. Some of these new establishments have navigated through some pretty heavy terrain and managed to set up thriving businesses in marginal locations, and that has definitely had a positive impact on the surrounding area. Ten years ago many people moved to the Mission only if they had to and couldn’t find housing in Noe, Castro, Upper Market etc. I don’t think that is now necessarily the case. It still has got a way to go, (just walk by 16th & Mission at night time!) but I think the genetrification process is only going to continue.