Remarkable Two-Bedroom Fails to Fetch Its 2014 Price
September 18, 2019
Priced at $2.345 million in early 2014, the “remarkable” two-bedroom, two-bath unit #29A with a 200-square-foot terrace near the top of the Infinity tower at 301 Main Street sold for $2.1 million, or roughly $1,656 per square foot, that November, four months after the plans for a twisty 400-foot tower to rise across the street had been unveiled.
This past August [2018], the “quintessential waterfront” unit with “the ultimate entertainers floor plan” and “custom finishes throughout,” including built-in A/V equipment, hardwood floors and mechanical shades, returned to the market listed for $2.099 million, a sale at which would have effectively represented a push in terms of appreciation for the two-bedroom over the past four years.
And having been reduced to $1.999 million [in September], 301 Main Street #29A remains on the market and listed as available inventory in San Francisco.
As we added earlier this month:
Newly listed for $2.099 million this past May and then withdrawn from the MLS after “three weeks on the market,” 301 Main Street #29A has just been listed anew with another official “1” day on the market (at least according to all industry stats) and a reduced (although not according to industry stats) list price of “$1.899 million,” a sale at which would represent depreciation of 9.5 percent for the luxury two-bedroom unit on an apples-to-apples, versus “median price,” basis since the end of 2014.
And the sale of 301 Main Street #29A has now officially closed escrow with only “14 days on the market” and an “over asking” contract price of $1.9 million, which certainly isn’t “cheap” at nearly $1,500 per square foot but was 9.5 percent cheaper than in the fourth quarter of 2014.
Comments from Plugged-In Readers
Comments are closed.
What construction project is visible in the second picture?
That would be the aforementioned twisty tower, down the block.
I think most people would pay less for a unit that had a large building blocking a view, especially one under construction, vs the same unit absent the neighboring building.
Even if the plans were on the books at the time of the previous purchase, buyers and appraisers are likely to overlook this fact especially if there are other comparable sales in the building that support the value of the unit at the time.
The real estate market is imperfect in many ways; factoring in the price impact of a new adjacent building is just one of them.
What are those big ass cranes in front of the window?
As previously noted, those cranes were actually for the twisty new tower on the corner of Folsom and Spear. And while the angled view from one end of the balcony and dining area of the remarkable two-bedroom on the corner of Folsom and Main do now include the designer tower down the block, the living room view pictured above, along with its two bedroom views, remain relatively intact.
I’m sure there are no 2014-2019 sales out there, or sitting in the apple cart, to counter this down by 9.5% (with a new building blocking views). right?
While only measuring back to early 2016, versus late 2014, this luxury two-bedroom could have been a great one. Unfortunately, it appears to have been withdrawn from the MLS without securing a buyer at its sub-2016 price. But luckily, there are, in fact, many more in the cart!
this one must have fallen out of your cart.
Interesting. Biotech money. The colorist doesn’t fall far from the tree…
what does that mean?
@sparkly, previous owner worked for Apple design team.
oh okay. So it doesn’t have anything to do with this apple being up 30%.
168 Jersey is another apple. Sold for 5.8M in 15. Sold for 7M in April.
Whoa. A drop of 9.5 percent following (two months short of) five years. At least no one will claim this is what happens when you try to sell “after a short hold”.
Are those balconies that far up on a tower actually usable? Or are they too windy for most of the year?
What is luxurious about this unit? I’ve seen MR rental developments with similar finishes/fittings/appliances.
Haha that’s what I always say about these condos
None of this stuff is luxury. It’s an image they are selling. Mostly to people who have decent salaries ($200k +) but are by no means wealthy but want to project appearances. And live downtown. The location is good and getting better fast. All IMO.
the vast increase in junkies would argue against the area “getting better”
Don’t know if its worth anything but smartzip.com/avm just bumped my 301 main condo up 200k I think due to Mira’s pricing.
A little more color from someone who saw this condo during a May open house:
The unit shows a lot worse than the photos indicate. There was a ton of scuffing, scratching, and general wear and tear not visible from the photos. When I saw it, the unit also was not staged and did not show well. To make things worse, the selling agent was overtly derogatory about the surrounding neighborhood, stating that he was tired of/over the area and surrounding restaurants. (As a current resident of the neighborhood who was evaluating whether to stay, his comments were actually one of many factors that caused me to buy in a different part of the city; and they were surprising because he actually is an agent who claims to be specialized to the SOMA/South Beach neighborhood.) Anyway: I think that the unit could have sold sooner had the seller and selling agent bothered to spruce it up, stage it, and market it well, and I don’t think the 9.5 percent “drop” says anything about the larger market (whether in SOMA or in SF more generally) beyond this unit.