CFAH

1080 Chestnut #7D: Interior

As we wrote three months ago:

Back in March of 2008 we first featured the before and after floor plans for 1080 Chestnut #7D which had just hit the market listed for $1,350,000 at the time.

Having sold for $1,295,000 that July, the remodeled one-bedroom “located on one of Russian Hill’s most distinguished flat blocks” returned to the market in early 2011 asking $1,149,000 but failed to find a buyer.

Yesterday, 1080 Chestnut #7D officially returned to the market listed for $999,000, 23 percent under its 2008 sale price on an apples-to-apples basis.

On Friday, the sale of 1080 Chestnut #7D closed escrow with a reported contract price of $975,000. Call it twenty-five percent ($320,000) under its July 2008 sale price on an apples-to-apples basis for the remodeled Russian Hill one-bedroom with views.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by tipster

    No IPOs in 2008. IPOs in 2011/2012.
    Prices still fell.
    Thus, IPOs are not sufficient to keep prices from falling.

  2. Posted by [Realtor]

    The Facebook IPO hasn’t happened yet. When it does, you’ll eat your words.

  3. Posted by anon

    meh, facebook isn’t even in SF but a 45 minute drive away. Don’t hold your breath. Now the zynga IPO, that is in SF and has had a huge impact . . .

  4. Posted by FormerAptBroker

    [Realtor] wrote:
    > The Facebook IPO hasn’t happened yet.
    > When it does, you’ll eat your words.
    As I have posted before we are looking to move back to the Peninsula and Realtors keep telling us that we need to “buy today” before the little overpriced $1-$2mm homes “shoot up in price after the Facebook IPO”. I don’t know any Facebook “insiders” but since I went to GSB and my wife had a part time job at GSB (years after I graduated when she was still an undergrad) we know more people in the VC world than the average couple.
    From what I hear there will not be many people getting enough money to buy a home that do not already have a real nice home (or are currently renting a nice home like Peter Thiel). The guys at Accel & Greylock that are making money off the Facebook IPO are not currently living with roommates in the Mission and from what I hear many with options that wanted a nicer home were able to “monetize” their options over the past couple years to buy one.

  5. Posted by tipster

    IPOs: the “Killer Bees” of bay area real estate. They are to be “feared”, and are always on the verge of having a “calamitous effect”.
    They never actually have much of an effect. We heard how horrible the Zynga IPO would be, people keeping their homes off the market waiting for it, etc. Just like when I was a kid and swarms of killer bees were going to chase me home after school.
    I’m sure a few transactions out of the 5000 or so homes that get sold in SF will be affected, and I’m sure every realtor will go to rooftops and scream about it, but face it:
    You can’t compare a few IPOs in which a handful of insiders make big money, to the after effects of a bubble in which EVERYONE, every single person in the bay area, had access to as much money as they wanted.

  6. Posted by anon

    I think IPOs are the new “Chinese buyers” of SF real estate. Ive been hearing for years that swarms of wealthy Chinese buyers fleeing . . . something . . . will cross the Pacific and . . . for some reason . . . all decide to buy properties in SF and cause prices to skyrocket.

  7. Posted by lol

    I seriously doubt the [realtor] poster is an actual genuine realtor poster. More like a prankster throwing the usual duo what they want to see. I just sit back and enjoy.
    In any case, who cares about IPOs? They are the tip of the iceberg of good tech health. Their presence or lack of presence doesn’t mean anything by itself.

  8. Posted by jenofla

    I’m assuming if any Facebook folks are planning on buying a house with their IPO money, they would be smart enough to stay on the Peninsula (better schools, nicer weather, better commute), Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Atherton, MV. I’ve been driving the 280 now over 3 years and the commute has been slowly but steadily getting worse. Yeah, maybe there’s a bus, but it’s still 2 hours on a bus each day. And If they insist on SF, it’s going to be Noe. If they’re hip young things, they’ll grab a condo in the Mission. Russian Hill 1 bed with $1100 HOA’s? NO.
    Has the Facebook IPO affected prices in the Peninsula? Yes…by realtors scaring the bejeezus out of everybody else. Physician friend from out of state bought a Cupertino place at high prices, trying to beat the Facebook IPO. We’ll see what really happens in a year.

  9. Posted by lol

    The impact of the upcoming Facebook IPO can be mainly see in the delusions of the few permabears still stuck in 2009.

  10. Posted by R

    Wow, the editor sure is playing fast and loose with this thread. Comments changing, disappearing, not being posted at all.
    [Editor’s Note: If by “fast and loose” you mean properly attributed, you’re right. And no, we didn’t arbitrarily choose the screen name “Realtor,” nor are we bothering to give it any weight, it was simply culled from the email of the commenter above.]

  11. Posted by Joshua

    Corrections for some comments above:
    * 2008 included Bear, Lehman, and all the rest.
    * Peter Thiel bought his house in SF and a few more elsewhere.
    * 2012 has already delivered more IPOs than FB. And many people make money off IPOs — angels, VCs, bankers, hedgies etc.

  12. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    R – I saw one deleted comment from anon.ed complaining that someone else was posting as him. The result is that the imposter’s handle was changed. That seems like a reasonable response to trolling.
    Did you see something else?
    The editor sometimes deletes posts (including mine) though I’ve never noticed anything malicious. The editing always seems to be done in the spirit of keeping the discussion interesting and on topic.

  13. Posted by REpornadict

    “IPOs: the “Killer Bees” of bay area real estate. They are to be “feared”, and are always on the verge of having a “calamitous effect”.
    They never actually have much of an effect.”
    No, the Alt-A resets are the :killer bees and their supposed HUGE effect on inventory. Don’t see much talk of these days,.

  14. Posted by El Bombero

    I’m a little disappointed that this place has only fallen 25% since 08. Still, a pretty lousy outcome for the sellers. $320k price decrease, realtor commission, closing costs, transfer taxes, finance costs, high HOA, etc.etc. If my math is in the ballpark, they spent at least $15k per mo to live there. More if you count the opportunity cost of the large downpayment over the past 4 years.

  15. Posted by Rocco

    We seem to have gone off the IPO cliff here.
    1080 Chestnut is a co-op. Not everyone wants to have to be approved by a board. Plus the maintenance and an assessment bring the monthly charges close to 1600K a month. Compared with other listings in the building, however, this was a steal.

  16. Posted by Newbuyer

    More cherry-picking of negative ROI apples. There are plenty of homes that sold in 2005-2008 that have resold at a large gain, but the editor refuses to list them on this site. So f–ing dishonest…

  17. Posted by Joshua

    ^ ok, post a comment with some of your favorite examples

  18. Posted by chloence

    I have to agree with Newbuyer. The cherrypicking has become so outlandish…it’s almost comical.

  19. Posted by anon

    I have to agree as well. This Russian Hill place is a great example of the cherry picking. Down 23% from 2008. Most places in SF have done far worse than this. C’mon ed! It’s almost comical!

  20. Posted by Russian Hill Dweller

    Can one of you regular Socket Site posters please explain to me why you take such intense satisfaction in hearing about property values that have gone down during the recession? Does it make you feel better about yourself? Do you think that maybe, maybe, they will go down so then you can then buy a property yourself and perhaps then go on to make a profit that you find so distainful that others have achieved? I just don’t understand the psychology behind the satisfactory glee I about values going down. The majority of property owners in San Francisco and elsewhere are just ordinary people. I am sure the owner of this property which is a one bedroom view challenged apartment isn’t in a position to randomly lose $300K.

  21. Posted by anon

    Russian Hill Dweller, think how happy the 2012 buyer is to have purchased the place for hundreds of thousands less than it went for 4 years ago thereby saving a fortune. Think how much more cash that means he or she has available to spend elsewhere. Think how much better the new buyer’s retirement will be with all that extra cash. Think of the better college the new buyer can now afford to send his or her kids to. Would you experience glee if all those benefits were taken away? Why? Lower home prices are good for everyone except the relatively few who used their home as an ATM or bought during the bubble (and they certainly did not “make a profit” as you suggest; au contraire!)

  22. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    Russian Hill Dweller – It seems like there are two main categories to your questions. First why would anyone want to see prices fall. The answer is easy. If you’re in the market to buy then falling prices mean that you can afford more. Everyone likes more for less.
    The second category concerns schadenfreude. I don’t feel that reaction and can’t explain it either.
    Though they have a common cause not everyone experiences both reactions. But everyone in the market to buy will appreciate falling prices. This site has a large audience of potential buyers, some of whom were priced out during the boom. So it is not surprising that falling prices are cheered on.

  23. Posted by PN

    I would argue that most of the commentors (and the editor) fall more into the shadenfreude category than ‘buyer’ given that the focus on SS is “apples” only a few seasons old.
    How ’bout extending the timeline back 10 years? 20? How does the investment look then? Or let’s look at all the pocket listings in hot neighborhoods quietly pulling in all cash offers?
    A more complete picture of the market would make SS more credible.

  24. Posted by sparky-b

    “and they certainly did not “make a profit” as you suggest; au contraire”
    not at all what was said. Read!Really!

  25. Posted by anon

    sparky-b, maybe you can explain wtf this sentence means then: “Do you think that maybe, maybe, they will go down so then you can then buy a property yourself and perhaps then go on to make a profit that you find so distainful that others have achieved?”
    What “profits”? This is a thread about a big loss! His comment is a gripe about reactions to falling prices! Who “disdained” any profit? Sorry, but I called out this nonsense for what it was.

  26. Posted by sparky-b

    He/she is talking about the possible future profits of the new buyer, not losses of the last buyer(recent seller).
    He/she is saying it is hypocritical to be pissed at the last bubble surfers (ex. people who say sold in 2007), but hope to buy low now and have a new bubble hit you in stride.

  27. Posted by anon

    OK, whatever! I’ve certainly never heard anyone complain here that they are envious of the lucky few who sold during the bubble peak and now want prices to keep falling, to be followed by a new bubble, so they too can cash out. So the entire premise is nonsense.

  28. Posted by jenofla

    Maybe it’s because this condo would’ve required an income of 200-300K to afford. Maybe it’s because it’s a million-dollar one-bedroom. Maybe to RussianHillDweller, that’s a home for “ordinary people”, but I think the “glee” one feels seeing prices fall is hope that more ordinary people can finally afford a home.
    I remember another home (The Great Courthouse Race And End Of Year Hail Mary Listing) which was obviously a midrange family home that had taken a big loss that engendered more pity.

  29. Posted by El Bombero

    The “cherrypicking” comments on here are pretty funny. Socketsite featured this property way back in 2008, so the editor must have been extraordinarily prescient to choose the one property in Russian Hill that was going to go down by 25%!
    The 2008 thread has some real gems – lots of comments about how nice the remodel is. Lots of people talked about how high the HOA/coop fees were, but of course the fees wound up being an order of magnitude lower than the monthly capital loss that was suffered.

  30. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    Yeah that old thread was interesting. Speaking of prescience check out this comment from Spencer:

    my prediction.
    will sell for less than $1M
    Posted by: Spencer at March 3, 2008 5:24 PM

    He was right, just four years ahead of its eventual sub-million sale.

  31. Posted by Spencer

    Ouch

  32. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    Boo-yah!

  33. Posted by Newbuyer

    Here is a link that includes a home that went for significantly over asking, as well as a home that sold at a much higher price than it’s 2006 transaction…
    http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2012/04/03/top_three_residential_property_sales_for_the_past_seven_days.php
    Why does SS seem to always miss the success stories?

  34. Posted by R

    Presumably you’re talking about 2535 Green Street?
    Looks like they did a little work, but $300k over the 2006 price is still a good result no matter how you slice it.

  35. Posted by Joshua

    2535 might not be the best example of appreciation if you account for transaction, carrying, and improvement costs. Pretty certain you’d calculate a negative ROI for the 2006 buyer…even if you assume zero cost of capital.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Recent Articles