The Book Concern Building condo #511 which measures a legal 275 square feet – that’s 16 square feet smaller than the “smallest condo in San Francisco” that made headlines when it fetched $415,000 in April – has sold for $465,000 or roughly $1,690 per square foot.

Having originally been listed at $485,000, rather than artificially priced at 50 percent below comparable sales in order to generate traffic, a bidding frenzy and perhaps some press, the list price for 83 McAllister #511 was reduced to $450,000 prior to attracting the two offers which led to its $465,000 contract price.  As such, the sale will still be recorded as “over asking” according to industry stats and reports.

And just how crazy is that $465,000 price? Well, the studio was purchased for $391,000 in May of 2007.  So that’s total appreciation of 19 percent over the past eight years, or a little less than 2 percent a year, on an apples-to-apples basis.

Keep in mind that while the legal square footage of the Book Concern Building studio is only 275 square feet, that doesn’t include its good-sized sleeping loft which is technically ‘storage’ space.

83 McAllister #511 Loft

And while 275 square feet might seem small, even with the loft, keep in mind that there are a couple hundred condos in San Francisco which are all legitimately smaller and more are on the way.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by James

    I looked at these when they were new and they were by far the worst new condos I have ever seen – they are like prison cells.

    June 15, 2015 – I’m calling a top.

    • Posted by DontfeartheREpa

      “June 15, 2015 – I’m calling a top.”

      Undoubtedly a top. But the top…probably not.

      • Posted by anon

        That’s why people pay these prices. Because they perceive that this isn’t a top and expect to reap the appreciation.

        Now as to how that plays out…

        • Posted by redseca2

          Reaping appreciation is buying Tesla at $18.
          Buying this now is something else entirely.

  2. Posted by Dixon Hill

    I don’t hate this condo as much as many of the other commenters on the previous thread. A lot of people could live comfortably in a place like this. The price is a bit nutty.

    At $250K this type of unit would satisfy an unmet need in the city and a developer could probably sell hundreds of units. Maybe thousands.

  3. Posted by minka

    It looks the kitchen has no oven but just a microwave.

    • Posted by matthew

      No oven, but I think there’s a low-profile electric stovetop installed above the fridge.

  4. Posted by Mark F.

    It’s not all that bad for someone who doesn’t cook, but the location is horrible. I agree that the price is insane. I looked at a place near Bart in Berkeley that was 700 square feet and priced at $365K a few weeks ago.

  5. Posted by Brian M

    Grim. Just grim. Is Portland or Austin or heck, Pittsburgh, PA really that much worse than forcing oneself to live in this lightless cubicle?

    • Posted by Dixon Hill

      What do you have against Portland or Austin? Both really nice cities.

      • Posted by Brian M

        Absolutely nothing! My only point is that there are some people (not necessarily in this thread) who claim that San Francisco is completely sui generis and always worth every penny. Seeing this dim hole…I am not so sure.

        (And Pittsburch has some neat neighborhoods. For $400 K you can get a really cool, completely renovated to the studs and/or Dwell-edinterior townhouse on a beuatiful tree-lined street north of a downtown with a 1% vacancy rate)

  6. Posted by Dixon Hill

    The staging is horrible. Some artwork on the walls and halfway decent furnishings would go a long way towards making this place look more comfortable. The agent probably figured it would sell quickly without much effort.

    By the way, some people without a lot of stuff have no issues with living in a compact home (namelink).

    • Posted by Brian M

      Are these people vampires with a fear of sunlight?

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles