As we wrote this past December:

In August 2006 it sold for $550,000 as a fixer, was remodeled (including the addition of two bedrooms and a bath), and then flipped four months later for $770,000 which not only established a neighborhood “comp” but justification for prices elsewhere in San Francisco (“If homes in Bayview are selling for $770,000…”).

In October 2008 the single-family home at 1747 La Salle returned to the market asking $560,000 but failed to sell. The home has since been “reconstructed” (“Everything in the home is brand new”) and was re-priced at $450,000 (“a must see, won’t last”) this past September. And for the past month they’ve been asking $375,000.

On Friday the short sale list price for 1747 La Salle was reduced to $345,000. And yes, it’s still listed as a “must see” but “won’t last” no longer.
∙ Listing: 1747 La Salle Avenue (5/3) – $345,000 [MLS]
If Homes In Bayview Are Selling For $770,000 $375,000… [SocketSite]

17 thoughts on “If Homes In Bayview Are Selling For $770,000 <strike>$375,000</strike> $345,000…”
  1. Real estate always goes up.
    There’s never been a better time to buy or sell a house.
    Buy now or be priced out forever.

  2. “a fool and his bank’s money will be separated in the bayview.”
    You bet, the laws of economics stop at the borders of bayview/hunters point.

  3. Right, let’s pretend it’s still early 2007 and nothing will fall in price except D10 because, you know, other areas in SF are better.
    Remember that in 2007, $770,000 was VERY CHEAP for a decent remodeled house in SF, albeit in a less than great neighborhood. It took about that much to buy a 1 BR condo in Jackson Square. We’ve seen today how that worked out. It’s all an interconnected continuum. There is no “market of one” either on good properties or bad.

  4. riiight a.t.,
    but some people chased properties. some overbid by x% to ‘beat out’ the competition. you still hear stories about how some folks “paid 20% over asking, beating out 17 others”.
    so its not unusual to hear stories about someone paying say $750/sq.ft when there were others paying $500/sq.ft. hey, it happens. it just does not happen to everyone equally…

  5. bizarre that there not any pictures of the interior on the MLS, and not any decent ones of the exterior. I guess they really want to sell this dog.
    The pluses..walking distance to Flora Grubb, my favorite nursery in SF (with Ritual Coffee on site).
    Minuses…well, there are lots of them. But this is cheap…

  6. go ahead a.t.,
    say what you mean-all properties purchased between ’04-’08 are down 20-40%.
    thing is this is not true. some people got into overbid wars, some did not. some focused on what they wanted-some focused on what was available at the time.
    some got creamed, others did not. and we are much more likely to see the foolish trying to sell off their bad purchases into this market.
    this property is a good example of that. given the choice of spending $770k on sfre you could opt for bigger in bayview or smaller in d5,d6,d7.
    same outcomes in this continuum?? i think not.

  7. “gee, what were those three rules about real estate?”
    by golly, ninnee, you’re sooo right. only the stupid who didn’t follow the simple rules are being hurt.

  8. “gee, what were those three rules about real estate?”
    Don’t buy in Bayview, Don’t buy in Bayview, Don’t buy in Bayview.
    The truth is that there were very nice places of 1400+ SqFt condos and even nicer TICs in “prime” SF for $770k in 2006. Or at least primer than Bayview. Not SFHs, but still very comparable overall. And I’m sure that you wouldn’t be in a -50% short sale position right now. And I would be surprised to see any of those places trade at -50%.
    There is a comp at 2237 Sutter that clearly shows a 2000 square foot TIC selling in 2006 for $850k and selling in 2010 for $840k. It’s a perfect Apple. Down 10k from 2006. And TIC’s have been hit hard! See name link for redfin history.
    I’m not going to stand here and write that this comp represents that all of SF is only down 1% from 2006; but I feel pretty confident in saying that buying a SFH in Bayview in 2006 for $770k was patently a terrible idea. I’m not sure buying in 2011 for $345k is a great idea to be honest; but there are clearly buyers for these homes and good families that need this type of housing / location. But do go here looking to make a huge profit on the long term.

  9. Here are those same three rules paraphrased a little differently:
    Don’t buy at the Ritz. Don’t buy at the Ritz. Don’t buy at the Ritz.
    From the tax records, looks like we’re down about 45% on this at asking, about a million bucks (foreclosed so you and I ate some of this loss). They should have bought in the Bayview instead and only lost a fraction of that amount . . .
    [Editor’s Note: Ritz-Carlton (690 Market Street) At 39 Percent Off This Afternoon.]

  10. Either the $770k purchase price was a cashback fraud deal or we’ve unearthed one of the dumbest bubbletoppers in Ess Eff. I don’t need to see pictures to know that the 770k price was “for suckers only”.
    – el bombero

Leave a Reply

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