CFAH

From the listing when 229 Brannan Street #9J sold for $1,230,000 in September 2006:

Wrapped in luxury, this 2bed, 2 bath unit is a sanctuary in the sky…This is San Francisco living at its finest!

As plugged-in people know, the 1,412 square foot unit at The Brannan was taken back by the bank a year ago with $1,113,492 owed.
This weekend the two-bedroom returned to the market listed for $919,000. In 2004 the “Unbelievable” unit (per its listing at the time) sold for $980,000. Believe it.
∙ Listing: 229 Brannan #9J (2/2) 1,412 sqft – $919,000 [MLS]
Up (And Down) Atop The Brannan: 229 Brannan #17J [SocketSite]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Longtime-Lurker

    I realize that bagging on low grade agents is beyond tired on here. And I realize that the agent is likely working on some sort of cut rate commission for the bank.
    But good lord – those photos??? Really? That’s like the anti-marketing right there. A $200 session with a young photographer out of the academy of art would have done the trick. I know it’s bank owned, I know it’s being liquidated, but this is still a business where aethetics matter. 50% of your potential audience has been turned away off the bat. Even the most savvy investor is going to be a little turned off by those hideous cell phone snap shots – but I’m sure will eventually see through it.
    Just awful.

  2. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    LL is right. Though I’ll complain about the thousands spent on staging, a couple hundred for photos is peanuts. And ironically from the listing: “A must see unit…”. Oh really? Then SHOW IT TO US!
    These days $200 can bring in a professional photographer for an hour. A student would do a good job for even less.

  3. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    … and no photos of the kitchen? Is there even a kitchen in this unit?

  4. Posted by radar

    The listing agent is from outside of the area I am sure………he or she has an 800 number to call. These are companies that do only REO’s and have found a niche,…selected by the banks for low fees of course so quality photos are not a concern.
    No local agent would likely be presenting this unit with such poor photography even if they were using there own wide angle lens camera and not their cell phone.s

  5. Posted by Rillion

    The photo of the sign is quite lovely…

  6. Posted by Mole Man

    This is such a strange market. The photos gave me an idea of what the place is like, and it is kind of nice seeing a place without staging. If people are really curious about a place, then aren’t they going to look at it? Being picky about the glossy photos used to sell things just leads to competition for glossy photos and bleeds value away from what should be a straightforward transaction, especially now that the bubble behind the curtains has been revealed and popped.

  7. Posted by A.T.

    I’m largely with you Mole Man. I don’t care if a place is staged or has pro-quality photos. But from the photos of this place, it appears to be a poorly-lit tiny dump. Yet they are asking $919,000 and a $/sf level that very, very nice places are fetching in this area. One has to think that many who might be interested would simply say “pass” as there are dozens and dozens of competing offerings on the market (which appear to be both better and cheaper) and one can only see so many places.

  8. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    I don’t think that anyone is calling for high quality photos. Just passable photos describing the space. These photos are not only very poor but there aren’t enough to understand the property. Two photos? C’mon!
    For less than $100 you can buy a digicam with a “smart” mode that allows a complete noobie to shoot passable photos. That camera and about ten minutes time could create photos 10X better than what are on this MLS listing. I think that the owner of this property would appreciate that small additional effort.

  9. Posted by Brahma (incensed renter)

    The owner of the property is Wells Fargo Home Mortgage nee Wachovia Mortgage and the pinhead banker in the non-performing loans resolution department or Foreclosure disposal department or whatever it’s called there probably wouldn’t even recall that this place is on the market unless the paperwork is right in front of him or her.
    Expecting that person to demand a minimum level of effort in the marketing materials and to follow-up on the issue if it isn’t in evidence is a expecting them to do something a lot like work.

  10. Posted by Paul Hwang

    229 Brannan 3A on the market too: http://sfarmls.rapmls.com/scripts/mgrqispi.dll?APPNAME=Sanfrancisco&PRGNAME=MLSLogin&ARGUMENT=MhJQceZI4X4BMrAl7rXqwUhvC9M0UAhfrfv1MbwEtbI%3D&KeyRid=1&Include_Search_Criteria=&CurrentSID=159990725
    [Editor’s Note: Purchased for $1,065,000 in 2004, taken back by the bank in May with no bidders at $933,620 versus $954,000 in debt.]

  11. Posted by Hmmm

    I guess pictures are irrelevant or are not a deal breaker for some. Sale is pending. Now let’s see if the offer gets accepted . . .
    Likely will.

  12. Posted by Hmmm

    There are several more foreclosed units in The Brannan building that have not yet been listed by the banks.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles