Compare Listings

Hmmm….$354,000 Over Asking in a Down Market?

135coleIs that correct? Let’s see, sales price $1,553,000, minus list price $1,199,000 equals $354,000. Is that right? Hmmm. Day offer received 9/28/07 minus list date 9/12/07 equals 16 days on the market. Is that right? It can’t be. We just said volume is down 41%. Ohhhh. We get it. We’re just being led astray that the San Francisco market has tanked, when in fact, it has NOT! Don’t believe what you’re reading. Cooled, yes. Tanked, no. Go ahead and put that on the Craigslist Housing forums,“Planet of Slums”.

135-137 Cole in Park North. Two units, both vacant, both needing some love, and both flying off the shelf in unison.

Say it with us now. The market is still good. The market is still good. The market is still good. Eventually, it might sink in.

What’s going on $500,000-$700,000 [theFrontSteps]

God Save the Queens of the Craigslist Housing Forum [theFrontSteps]

135-137 Cole [mls]



Related posts

What Is My Home Worth? Why Online Valuations Stink, So Do Appraisers

"What do you think my home is worth?" "How's the market?" By far, the two most asked questions of...

Continue reading
by theFrontSteps

San Francisco / Bay Area Latest Earthquakes, Liquefaction, Landslide, and Soft Story Round Up

The ground has been shaking a little bit lately (Did you feel that one?) in the San Francisco / Bay...

Continue reading
by theFrontSteps

Fire Damaged Home In San Francisco Sells For $602,000 Over Asking

"Fire Damaged". Lucky 8's? Or location? Perhaps all three combined made for one helluva frenzy on...

Continue reading
by theFrontSteps

10 thoughts on “Hmmm….$354,000 Over Asking in a Down Market?”

  • eddy

    November 29, 2007 at 9:51 am

    Just because a place “flys” off the market in 16 days for 30% over asking doesn’t mean the market isn’t tanking; just like the stalefish on masonic doesn’t mean the market is tanking. These places will sell for what the market asks.

    There are still a lot of people with a lot of cash and buying power that need / want a home in SF and will pay market rates. But the statistics are telling us that there are 41% fewer of those people when compared to prior years.

    It’s east to cheer the SF market and I don’t hope for, or think, the market to crash; but you simply cannot ignore all of the real press (not bubble blogs, but real press, congress, the federal reserve, etc.) on the current state of the overall housing market. It’s hard to believe, if not foolish to do so, that SF will be immune to these issues. Time will tell.

  • theFrontSteps

    November 29, 2007 at 10:05 am

    Damnit Eddy! I’m about to run out the door and you caught me. You know we put all this “glory” reporting, and as you can see a lot of the “doom” reporting on the site to show there are always two sides to every story. We don’t ignore the media, the congress, the federal reserve, or any of them. All of that information is valuable. We are simply saying that from what we are experiencing, as agents representing buyers and sellers in this very market, it is nowhere near as bad as the headlines are telling you. Yes, it has cooled, but no it is not that bad here in our little pockets of insanity. Not even close…yet. And nobody knows where things will be tomorrow. You are absolutely correct, “time will tell”, and when it does, we’ll be sure to tell all of you.

    Got to go. Thanks for your comments. Don’t tear into me as I won’t be near a computer for hours to defend myself. 😉

  • james

    November 29, 2007 at 10:22 am

    my district 6 is a big contrarian according to these stats:

    District 6 Oct-06 Oct-07

    Number of Sales 15 28

    Median Selling Price 692,000 742,500

    Average DOM 40 36

    50% more volume at 8% higher sales prices in 4 less days on market


  • eddy

    November 29, 2007 at 10:25 am


  • Foolio

    November 29, 2007 at 11:16 am

    Hmm…do mid-September sales accurately reflect what’s going on today, 2 days from December?

  • realtor

    November 29, 2007 at 12:07 pm


    Yes. This closed 11/28. This indicates that even though this place went into contract in Sep, actually October if you look at the report, the sale still went through even during all the negative reporting we’re hearing. From what I can tell, there were contingencies and these buyers had the chance to pull out had they desired to do so. I’d be willing to bet that had they pulled out the other buyers would have been happy to pull in.

  • kenny

    November 29, 2007 at 12:17 pm

    In mid September people were even more leery.

  • becky

    November 29, 2007 at 5:07 pm

    Anything west of Masonic isn’t NOPA, it’s the Panhandle or North Park. And we existed way before NOPA ever did (way back when it was the Western Addition and Alamo Square).

    [Editor’s note: Please excuse. We truncated North Panhandle into NOPA, like idiots, but have been out most of the day. For the record, all posts we do go off of the SFAR districts map and their associated names…for consistency and accuracy. You are correct and we should have written Park North. Thanks.]

  • Craig

    November 30, 2007 at 11:18 am

    Park North includes “NOPA”. I don’t really understand how a distinction was drawn at Masonic. Both sides are still “North of the (damn) Panhandle” from Stanyon to Broderick. Confusion…

    [Editor’s note: Damnit! You’re all right. We’re putting this on the front page. A quick glance over my right shoulder to my handy map hanging on the wall revealed a large boulevard I could have sworn was Masonic. Not to be…Divis. Where EXACTLY is NOPA, who knows.]

  • YourLandlord

    November 30, 2007 at 11:49 am

    Ummmm. WOW WOW WOW! Just in time for the SF market to rocket next yr with more rate cuts and bailouts.

    Lucky buyers.


Join The Discussion

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Follow us, it’s worth it

Get the latest posts delivered to your mailbox: