As we first reported in August with respect to a couple of resales down at 310 Townsend:
At the same time, 310 Townsend #408 has just hit the market listed as a short sale for $425,000 having been purchased for $665,000 in 2007 as well. From the listing: “Currently tenant occupied, the condo commands $3100 per month in rent, making it an excellent investment vehicle for cash flow.” Of course, there’s also capital preservation to consider.
And as we added last month:
Having been purchased for $665,000 ($828 per square foot) in 2007, and having fallen out of contract last week when listed for $425,000, the “approved” short sale of 310 Townsend Street #408 is once again active and available and listed for $435,000 ($542 per square), a 36 percent drop in value at asking.
At the same time, the list price for the “regular sale” of 310 Townsend #108 has been reduced to $389,000 ($569 per square foot). The one bedroom was purchased for $525,000 ($768 per square) in 2007 as well, an effective drop of 26 percent at asking.
The short sale of 310 Townsend #308 closed escrow today with a reported contract price of $435,000, thirty-six (36) percent below its sale price in 2007. 310 Townsend #108 is now in contract, but the sale is still contingent.
∙ Apples-To-Apples (And Short To “Regular”) At 310 Townsend [SocketSite]
∙ Capital Preservation Versus Cash Flow At 310 Townsend [SocketSite]
What’s a good way to find short sales in San Francisco? Is the San Francisco MlS a good source?
Thanks in advance!
Can I ask what the point of this type of post is? I’m really curious who this actually appeals to and why.
what are you weirdos talking about? this site always posts about sales.
The short sale of 310 Townsend #308 closed escrow today with a reported contract price of $435,000,…
#308? Or #408?
If this unit continues to rent for $3100/month, and the mortgage+HOA is under $2100/month after putting 20% down, would it be cash positive?
Comps are comps, but this building is fatally flawed IMO. It’s directly across the street from Caltrain. For those of you who have never spent time in the area, anything facing Caltrain is basically unlivable unless you’re deaf. CF+ or not, I bet few tenants would ever live here more than one year.
What do u think Joh? Allowing for a bit of maintenance, etc., this thing should yield a return north of 12%!!
Can u say….Cha-Ching?!?
Good luck with that $3100/mo on an 800sf 1/1 condo – certainly they would NEVER fudge that in a realtor ad aiming to unload the thing on some buyer. May as well run the numbers at one million dollars a month and REALLY come up with some big profits.
And don’t forget property taxes and the opp. costs on the 20% down. But I agree that with a 36% price drop in just 4 years we are at least getting close to the ballpark of making such an investment something other than completely nuts.
$3,100 rent for 803 sq ft, across from train, without parking is unlikely.
Good luck with that $3100/mo on an 800sf 1/1 condo – certainly they would NEVER fudge that in a realtor ad aiming to unload the thing on some buyer. May as well run the numbers at one million dollars a month and REALLY come up with some big profits.
What did the panel decide about the practice of without grounds alluding to fraud on here? Criminal? Or was it, the Editor shouldn’t allow this sort of asinine behavior to go on? Can’t remember.
A realtor include misrepresentations in a listing? Jamais!
You forgot to change your handle there.^ Or should everybody get used to you repeating your own takes as if it’s a new riff?
Ha. You can’t even be an internet jerk properly. What a case.
Well, if the listing stated “Currently tenant occupied, the condo commands $3100 per month in rent”, then the seller would legally be on the hook for that amount, wouldn’t it? I’d assume so, at least for that particular tenant (obviously, nothing from preventing them from moving out without a lease).
I haven’t looked at rent prices around that neighborhood, so I can’t comment on how realistic that is though. I do like the building, but the lack of sunlight in many of the units is problematic, as is the noise from Caltrains. The latter should hopefully be resolved in the coming years with the electrification project.
“Tenant-occupied” and “the condo commands $3100” are not related. The latter is not a statement about the actual rent being paid. And regardless, to even take it back for owner use, be ready to cough up $5k for each tenant, whether they are actually listed on the lease or not. Plus 90-day notice, during which time tenants have a strong incentive not to pay rent.
This building is a dump. I saw it when sales were first released. The view out the living room window was . . . brick wall. $3100 for 800 sq. ft. . . . are you f’ing kidding me?! Who’s the idiot tenant?!
Are the ceilings not tall enough in this building to construct some loft space?
Must have been purchased by one of the jeunesse dorée that we are told are single-handedly keeping our restaurant/nightlife/bar scene as lively as it is and to whom we should only kowtow. Congrats to the seller for finally getting out from under this load.