Purchased for $775,000 in February of 2015, the “amazing” one-bedroom unit #211 at 1875 Mission Street, which is outfitted “high end finishes, hardwood floors, [an] in-unit washer & dryer and 1-car parking space in garage,” has just resold for $832,020.
That’s total appreciation of 7.4 percent for the unit from early 2015 to today. But based on an aggregate sales data, Redfin estimates the market for units similar to 1875 Mission Street #211 appreciated 9.3 percent from February of 2015 to the end of that year alone.
In other words, while a straight line from early 2015 to today would show “continued” appreciation over the past thirty months, a curve would reveal a front-ended up and more recent down.
Speaking of revealing, we’re currently tracking an “A+” single-family home in the Mission which was purchased in early 2015 and is now back on the market today. We’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.
with 5%-6% sales commission + transfer tax and other carrying costs (property tax, mortgage interest, etc), I doubt the seller walked away with a real profit here.
What did Redfin estimate as the market appreciation/depreciation from the end of 2015 to now?
That would be depreciation of a percent from the end of 2015 to earlier this month, based on which Redfin had estimated 1875 Mission Street #211 would be worth $884K (versus the $832K it actually fetched).
OK JT… but what does the buyer get? A 1-bd condo for 850k??
Yes, roughing speaking with incidental costs associated with the $832k purchase price.
One bedroom should be in quotes too. It’s really a studio.
[Editor’s Note: Legally, it’s a one-bedroom.]
editor: how so, the “bedroom” looks like a sleeping area w/o doors that’s open to the hallway.
The “bedroom” does not seem to have a window.
What’s up with the fire sprinklers? I can’t help noticing all these pipes under the ceiling.
That is all part of its chic industrial aesthetic.
SocketSite really needs an upvote button
It’s a scant one bedroom above a block-long pissoir. I hate to think of opening the windows on a day like today.
Of course, the pissoir was just as lovely in 2015, though perhaps the odors were muted in February by the rains.
The bedroom actually does have a glass door that can swing close, it also can lock in place to be more open (I toured this place a few years ago when it was brand new).
Redfin is still estimating $883K even though it’s also got the three day old sale data of $832K, so perhaps Redfin’s estimate is off vs the market actually went up and then down? While the bedroom does have a glass door/wall, it’s also an 800 square foot unit, which is larger than some of the newer two bedroom units in other buildings.
Any thoughts on how one might isolate the difference between a model’s ability to estimate the value of a specific unit versus the implied movement in the underlying market based on sales data (as we did above)?
Is it really a big deal how the softening in the market since 2015 is characterized between, a straight line, a curve, or a squiggly line? Seems most of the what the various reports are all showing is that the market is near where it was in 2015. When you throw in that any individual unit might have sold for more or less than the average in that time, it is hard for me to figure out what the big argument is about on this site or why the editor seems determine to highlight the places that were losers over a short term hold (historically a risky holding period for r/e) and yet also try to highlight how a place that sold for more than it did in Feb 2015 still lost value from 2015. I bought my place in Feb 2007 and the place next door went for more in May 2007, does that really tell us much about where the market is right now? If not, then why does a place that changed hands in Feb 2015 but might have gone for more sometime later in 2015, tell us about the market now the same example from 2007 doesn’t?
So just a one window at the end, condo. I call these “cave” condo’s.
“Shotgun View”
After 17 years in SF, all I can say is “wow.” 800k+ for a bed area tucked in an alcove. Sad that one of the major selling points is an in-unit w/d. For that price it should be a given.
So we have posts about how condos are selling for less than they did in 2015 and a post about how a place that sold for more than it did in 2015 shows how the market is also down since 2015, with it all being based on exactly how many days from the estimated exact peak that was reached in 2015? Whatever. I’m just glad that my unit is in line to sell for 50% more than when I bought it back at another near peak in 2007.
Stark contrast to the 2-bedroom condo just cater-corner that sold for $695,000. That one will be an even sweeter deal when 1950 Mission gets built next door, replacing the Navigation Center with attractive, well-designed affordable housing. I wonder how the 1875 Mission seller found a [person] willing to pay so much more for a smaller condo with less light and one fewer bedroom further from BART.
1930 Mission hasn’t closed yet, so to say it sold for $695,000 is inaccurate. That’s it’s listing price. And it’s listed as active-contingent, on the market for 126 days as of today.
Do we know the sqftage? Looks like 600.
1875 Mission Street #211 is actually 799 square feet (per its condo map).
are square footage numbers reported as the gross area within the exterior walls of the unit, or a net area with unusable spaces (such as the floor area occupied by interior walls, columns, etc.) taken out?
Measured from the inside of the outermost perimeter walls of the unit. Columns and stairs and interior walls are not subtracted.
UPDATE: In related news, 15 months later on that aforementioned curve: Up and Down in the Inner Mission Take Two