As we wrote 33 days ago:
Listed for $1,995,000 last October, 13 days later the sale of 2739 Larkin closed escrow with a reported contract price of $2,650,000. Yes, 33 percent over asking.
It’s now six months later, and while it’s been making the rounds quietly for at least a few weeks, yesterday 2739 Larkin was officially listed for $2,695,000.
While not noted on the MLS once again, tax records report it’s 2,596 square feet. We’ll let you set the odds on a repeat performance with respect to price.
Yesterday, the sale of 2739 Larkin closed escrow with a reported contract price of $2,725,000, up 3 percent over the past seven months on an apples-to-apples basis.
And yes, the seller last year was a Lucas.
∙ If You Weren’t The Winning Bidder For 2739 Larkin Six Months Ago… [SocketSite]
There is no housing bubble. /jedi mind trick
Seriously, this is a pretty crazy outcome. I’m not a bull by any stretch but I’m fairly optimistic in terms of the housing market insofar as I don’t think we’re going to see another 10-30% drop from today. But there are certain properties that I do feel could suffer such a drop in the future……..
Regardless of outcomes, I’m curious if there is a back story here– to buy a place like this and put it back on the mkt so quickly.
my, my this is one quiet thread. where is tipster’s conspiracy theory? an outcome that contradicts his daily mantra of the sky is falling can only have happened if someone pulled a fast one.
You’re asking for accountability? From Tipster? You’ll be waiting quite some time. He’s too busy breaking down how inexpensive Sand Hill Road rents are. After being challenged about rents for San Francisco. Linking the two areas. After, you know, telling everyone how the same Silicon Valley that doesn’t have any bearing whatsoever on San Francisco. Unless it’s laying people off. In which case San Francisco’s jobs scene is a virtual wasteland. And so on and so forth.
Hee hee, you guys are funny! You know as well as anyone what is going on. Feel free to crow about some $2.7mm exception to the rule. But see:
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/2519-Chestnut-St-94123/home/1651251
Marina 3BR that just sold for $100k less than the 9/09 “bottom”
or
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/375-Arlington-St-94131/home/805629
“Hot” Glen Park 3BR that just sold for $78,000 below the Feb. 2005 selling price.
or dozens of other examples you can come up with as easily as anyone else can. But that would require some integrity and accountability, wouldn’t it . . .
AT, there’s a difference between “the sky is falling” and sales in a worse market off by 3 to 5 percent from last sale. Are you aware of that? If you weren’t before then consider that a gift, and here endeth the lesson.
I had a question — what’s the relation of this property to 1009 Francisco? They appear to share a lot, but appear to be distinct properties. Are they part of the same HOA, since it doesn’t appear that the lot was divided? Malin sold 1009 Francisco for $5.5M in 2009 vs. $4.5M in 2001 and $3.3M in 1999:
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/1009-Francisco-St-94109/home/1626623
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/2739-Larkin-St-94109/home/901171
Sorry if this was already covered in a prior thread, but I didn’t see it in the two that I checked.
Now, flujie, you know perfectly well that early 2005 was way before the bubble peak, and September 2009 was way after it. Yet current sales are still well below these points (100k is real money to 99.9% of SF residents), even in areas that are “holding up remarkably well.” You really need yet another 30-40% off 2007 example?
Oh, the ole “everything would have done 1X * this in spring 2007” argument? Yeah. Not interested. The SF market is always going to be about who is in it at any given time, and for what. Different neighborhoods had different peaks and valleys within the last market. There, there’s another free one for you.
“always going to be about who is in it at any given time, and for what.”
Thanks! That was worth every cent you charged!
Whatever I didn’t charge you is more than what your employer is getting out of you while you troll, bait people whose knowledge bases dwarf yours, and get Tipster’s back.
Uh, I am the employer, fluj. But if you want to report my time-wasting to me, feel free, and I’ll make sure I reprimand myself.
And take a look above to see who started baiting whom, flujie.
You’re both a homeowner AND the employer now. Got it.
As far as baiting goes, a quick glance up the thread sees nobody talking to you, all “hee hee,” “crow,” “integrity,” “accountability,” and odd examples that don’t even fit in with your own usual modus operandi aside.
Odd. I just received an email touting a “huge $200K price reduction” for this property, but the realtor’s website has it listed at $2,699,000.