CFAH

2200 Market Street: The Century

Purchased for $949,000 a year ago last week, the one-bedroom condo #504 atop The Century at 2200 Market Street has been on the market for three months asking $899,000.

2200 Market Street #504 Living

Yesterday, the listing for #504 was withdrawn from the MLS without a reported sale.

A sale at asking would have represented a 5 percent year-over-year drop in the value for the penthouse level condo on an apples-to-apples basis. And on a price per square foot basis, a sale at asking would have been 15 percent below the price which was paid for the adjacent and similarly sized one-bedroom unit #502 last June.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by cfb

    Could it be that housing in SF is overpriced for the majority of prospective buyers? Wow, who knew!

    • Posted by ElitistPig

      WHAT?! How dare you accuse our housing market of being overheated!

    • Posted by zig

      where I live in San Mateo houses seem to be selling for absurd frenzy like prices

  2. Posted by Snob

    The poor design, shoddy construction, and cheap materials are visible from across the street.

    • Posted by Futurist

      Please be specific about the “poor design, shoddy construction and cheap materials”, because they don’t exist.
      What design and construction credentials do you have to warrant your comments?

      Because you are simply misinformed.

      • Posted by Comment

        I’m with Snob… ticky-tacky.

        • Posted by Futurist

          It’s a strange and very SF thing to do: criticize everything new and different yet have nothing to offer in terms of “improvement” or “better”. Easy and essentially mindless to be an arm-chair critic.

          Fact is these new projects are bringing much needed new housing to previously under used, odd cor ner properties. These new buildings helped to define and strengthen the urban street edge and add to the vitality of the neighborhood.

          I suppose it’s one thing just not to like what it looks like. That’s easy. But, largely, these new buildings are constructed with new, modern, durable materials that fit a particular budget and design aesthetic.

          Calling them “ticky-tacky” means you’re just trolling.

          • Posted by anon

            Just because I can’t cook doesn’t mean I think Denny’s is haute cuisine!
            People shouldn’t have to learn to build buildings just to express their opinion.

          • Posted by Futurist

            Yes, but cooking is hardly akin to architectural design, understanding of building materials and assembly, and the construction process.

            Opinions are fine. They are usually rampant here on SS, with very little to back them up.

            I call that trolling.

          • Posted by passist

            Someone clearly is an owner in the building! Fact is, New housing is great, but price will be commensurate to design. Too many new projects have cut major corners to maximize profit, in light of land costs.

            Personally I don’t know why anyone would buy new, before all the potential litigation and contractor defects. Wait 10 years, and you know what you’re buying.

          • Posted by Amewsed

            I knew someone who bought a new condo across the street from AT&T ballpark when the area was new and hip. There was a restaurant below and the condo residents had to deal with numerous sewer backup issues, problems associated with restaurant venting flues, etc. Buyer’s regret came pretty quickly.

      • Posted by Snob

        Not trolling, but the place was not well thought out. The ground floor has a deep, non-gated emergency exit that is perfect for tweekers to camp and crap (I’ve seen it first hand), making it less than ideal for an emergency exit. The balconies on the prow are a nonsense feature, surely added by a realtor to “add value”. The lines of the hardy wall siding were laid out on a separate grid for no apparent reason at all. The secondary balconies with the obscure glass rails…I could go on. The whole thing just screams “developer special” with only an eye on the bottom line. I’m sure some people love it. I guess its better to live in it, because then you don’t have to look at it.

        I like contemporary design – when its good. This just isn’t.
        Oh, and for those who must know, I have several years under my belt in both design theory and the practice of architecture and construction.

        • Posted by Futurist

          I’m sure you’re not trolling, but I don’t think you really know what you’re talking about.

          1. The recessed exit you are referring to is typical. Gated or not, the architect is hardly responsible for the action of “tweekers”. that’s an urban society issue.
          2.Realtors don’t add features. The small balconies at the top are still useful, and visually distinguish the top floor from the other floors. Design wise, it’s part of the tri-part typology of “base, middle and top” of classical design.
          3. The term is Hardie plank siding (not hardy). These may or may not be that brand. The grid is broken up into squares to define the recessed (orange) balcony areas. Architects know how to spell Hardie.
          4. The small prow balconies with obscure glass. A nice feature to accentuate the end of the building where the angled street grid meets the Market St. grid. So, you don’t like them. Big deal.
          5. There is no such thing as “developer special”. And every project, still has a “bottom line”. That’s just good business practice.

          So you don’t like this project. Doesn’t make it not “good”. Now how many years did you say you have “under your belt”? Licensed?

          • Posted by Snob

            I stand by everything I wrote. 10, and yes.

            To-may-to, To-mah-to.

          • Posted by Futurist

            Ok cool, but I’m skeptical. You’re new here aren’t you? new name for sure.

            But, seriously, all architects I know can spell Hardie correctly. Just sayin.

          • Posted by anon

            the realtor add “value thing” was ludicrous, and not written by someone who has done things

          • Posted by Futurist

            Agreed.

          • Posted by Comment

            I hope not all architects can / have to spell Hardie… that’s a pretty crappy product.

          • Posted by shza

            Why do you say Hardie is a crappy product? Asking seriously as someone who may want to reside a house, likely to the tune of $100k+ in the next 5 years — no dry rot and less water invasion (and considerably cheaper to install) than stucco, right?

          • Posted by Futurist

            Not to belabor this, but we all do…at times. But.
            James Hardie products are not shoddy> The are sustainable, fire resistant, solid, easy to install and reasonably low cost/sf. The commercial version is used widely on urban residential projects.

            These panels may or may not be Hardie. They also could be Nichiha, American Fiber Cement, or GeoBoard, just to name a few.

    • Posted by anotherSF

      I attended the open house and was impressed with the quality in the bathrooms/kitchen. I used to be a craftsman and am often disappointed by people’s efforts to improve a house before selling. Being a condo, you’re limited to the construction companies QA but this turned out pretty well. The realtor claimed the owner never used the stove.

      Weird thing about this unit is the 2 window AC units installed. Also, no parking but that is becoming the norm for condos and given the proximity to transit and car-share, not a problem.

  3. Posted by asiagoSF

    who can afford almost $1 mil for a 1-bedroom??

    • Posted by Futurist

      Evidence seems to point that many can. This is a prime neighborhood with excellent public transit locations.

      • Posted by Frisco

        But it’s not selling at that price.

    • Posted by JR "Bob" Dobbs

      Yeah, great neighborhood and great transit.

      But. Only a 1Br, and nothing really special or large about it, on an extremely busy and loud street, with no parking (I think). Nearly $1 million seemed pretty crazy and out of line. And it looks like even $900K is more than anyone will stomach for this particular place.

      Lots of stuff around here is selling for insane prices, so I certainly would not call a “top” from this. Imho, situations like this one are really helpful to help ascertain where the market really is, and let everyone know that there is a limit to the madness.

    • Posted by moto mayhem

      not about who can afford IMHO because many CAN. But the better question is why would you pay for $900k+ for a 1bdroom at the top or near top of the market. Why not buy a 2bdr in a better location for nearly same price because they do exist

      • Posted by Futurist

        Because they prefer that location?

        Just a thought.

  4. Posted by San Francisco

    pop

  5. Posted by BayviewSF

    How much can this condo be rented for? The seller might have decided to lease instead of losing money in a sale.

    • Posted by Amewsed

      How much are the HOAs? That can kill any rental income.

  6. Posted by Snowbored

    I wonder how much of it is the presence of a restaurant and a bar on the ground floor now vs when it was originally purchased? Luxury condos and late night businesses aren’t a great combination.

  7. Posted by anon

    This condo, 625 duncan, the old mayors house, ashbury,…
    Wouldn’t call it a pop, but we’re definitely leaving the stage where every buy is a winner no matter what.

    • Posted by anon

      Jeeze, the 20% drop in Twitter sure puts a cherry on top

      • Posted by anon

        Now over the past few days Twitter’s nipping at 30% down, Yelp down 25% and linked in down 20%!
        Once potential unicorn “Secret” now inaugurating this round’s dotcom deadpool!
        Little bubble trouble going on.
        This “they overpaid” thing might become a trend.

  8. Posted by Amewsed

    So reduce the selling price to $700K and hope it sells no lower than $650K.

  9. Posted by SFian

    Wait til Uber goes public. This will get scooped up in two seconds.

  10. Posted by BayviewSF

    It might be specific to this particular building. How many lagging sales did SS report about this building? The general market is doing very well, though I am not sure how well the new condos are selling.

    • Posted by Orland

      Condos reported to be in very high demand, short supply generally.

  11. Posted by Doug B

    You’re living over a restaurant and a bar, on Market street. And now the lot across Sanchez is getting a sizable building plunked down on it, construction over the next year. All factors that I don’t think were evident at the time of the initial sale.

    • Posted by Doug B

      Well, okay, living on Market St was evident before. 🙂

      [Editor’s Note: As were the plans for across Sanchez and the restaurant/commercial spaces below.]

    • Posted by Futurist

      I’m pretty sure that ALL those factors were evident at the time of sales: The empty lot was well advertised for being the site of new housing. The commercial spaces at the ground floor are part of the initial project.

      Anyone who would choose to buy into this project HAD to be aware of this busy, urban location and the reality of new construction nearby very soon. Buyer beware and buyer due diligence.

    • Posted by BayviewSF

      Many new buildings are now required to have commercial space at the ground floor. If ground floor commercials are a negative, those new condos would not sell.

      Construction project is temporary and it will not affect value in the long run. Market street is a negative due to noise?

  12. Posted by OwnerAgain

    The sellers may have priced it at $899K to fuel a frenzied bidding war that didn’t materialize. I never trust an asking price that is lower than the last sales price. (Actually, I never trust an asking price. Period.)

  13. Posted by Sam

    Exactly. The problem here was a bad pricing and marketing strategy.

  14. Posted by New to SF

    I went to the open house. I actually thought the construction was well done, at least the interior. But it’s a boring unit, it’s like living in a luxury hotel. The staging exacerbated this.

    The balconies felt like a waste, a bit like an obstruction to the view. The window AC units seemed cheap to me. I also thought it was priced poorly, not quite low enough to incite a bidding war. I heard through the grapevine that the owner wasn’t going to accept anything less than $1M and that turned me off immediately as a buyer.

    • Posted by R

      In which case there may have been offers at or above asking that were not accepted. Who knows?

  15. Posted by anon

    $1M would only have been 5% YoY from the previous sale, much less than the market has previously been appreciating. Did the grapevine think the market’s going at less than 5% now?

    And if you think the asking should have been set even lower why were you offended that you heard the seller had a higher target in mind?

    • Posted by shza

      I’m curious what the other bids were on this place when the seller purchased. The most plausible explanation is that that person overpaid.

    • Posted by New to SF

      Even in this market it felt expensive when you compare the unit to others that sold in the 900K to 1M range. Clearly I’m not the only one who thought this.

  16. Posted by SocketSite

    UPDATE: 2200 Market Street #504 has just been re-listed for $999,000.

    • Posted by moto mayhem

      interesting strategy. so they didn’t sell at $899K, so raising the price to $999K? sounds like they have a great RE agent. LOL

      • Posted by anon

        sounds like they did, actually

  17. Posted by All AboutSF

    @moto mayhem Sold for 1.03 million. @ New to SF Obviously not aware of SF prices. The beautiful staging and amazing views made this listing stand out. There is a new listing for $925,000 on the second floor for the same floorplan.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles