Two-Thirds of SF Sales Over Asking Price

Courtesy SF Curbed.

Courtesy SF Curbed.

It is starting to sound a lot like the last dot.com boom with Curbed SF reporting that two-thirds of San Francisco’s real estate sales going for over asking price. It’s time to do a profile of a realtor and the madness of writing dozens of offers that go no where. Read more. 

Filed under: Mobile, Today's Mission

19 Comments

  1. John

    I’ve said this before. Asking prices are notional and so looking at sales price in relation to them isn’t too indicative.

    In a good market, many realtors will suggest setting a deliberately cheap asking price to generate viewings and create an artificial buying frenzy.

    And it works. I did that the last time I sold a place and it went for 300K over asking. But it still only went for a fair market price.

    Better guides are DOM (days on market) and number of bids per property.

    But yes, this is a screaming bull market for SF RE. RE always come back. Gotta love this country.

  2. Kaliman

    Nothing new here.
    The real estate industry is constantly working itself to create market frenzy. It’s been a fact for years that housing has been going for over the asking price. This piece of news is just another ploy to continue the news in the real estate market favor. San Francisco is just a different market with a limited supply of housing stock.

    Bottom Line: Realtors driven by greed continue to feed the bidding “wars”. Greedy speculators cashing in on the frenzy. Greedy investors looking to cash in on the market.

    • poor.ass.millionaire

      Errrr….lemme guess…..you’re a renter.

      • Kaliman

        Let me guess – you are John’s sounding board?

      • John

        Yes, for all the grand rhetoric about caring for the poor, most of the whining about the SF housing market comes from those who are tenants but who want to give themselves the benefits of ownership at somebody else’s expense.

        • Kaliman

          Not a tenant but support tenant’s and tenant’s rights.
          You just keep on being a greedy troll.

          • John

            Oh sure, I support so-called tenants’ rights too, because as a LL things like rent control drive up rents which are great for me.

            Good to hear you’re a property owner though. see how much we have in common?

    • Greed is being a lazy bum and expecting subsidized rent controlled apartments forever and demanding that Tech companies cough up money to pay for and support your lazy lifestyle. TRUE GREED….

    • You are so ignorant, do you do meth? I bought a great downtown condo for $369.00 a sq. ft in 2011. No frenzy then, no matter how hard the realtors tried to whip one up, In fact the prices kept dropping then and there where lots of units to choose from. This was just 2 years ago ! Now my condo is worth almost 3 times what I paid for it, $ 907.00 a sq. ft is the average downtown right now. I FREAKING LOVE CAPITALISM, of course losers hate it. But they are just losers

      • Kaliman

        No meth here. Good to hear you got a good deal and that you love capitalism.
        No losers either. I think I bought in at $150 sf many years back. Wish others can afford their own homes but if that’s not an option then affordable apartments are still a social good.

        • John

          Kaliman, you bought a SF home for $150. Damn, you’re good.

          But do please tell us where all those “affordable apartments” are.

  3. John

    Kaliman, you clearly do not understand RE. The asking price is a fiction so it doesn’t matter if sales are above or below asking. What matters is that we have massive demand and, thanks to SF’s dumb NIMBY land use laws, constrained supply.

    You can either whine about it or profit from it. I choose the latter.

    Oh, and what could be more “greedy” than a tenant feeling entitled to a 1986 rent on his month-to-month rental?

  4. Kaliman

    Most realtors are just like you and are driven by the profit margin regardless of the social implications.

    We know your MO – Rent control is ruining SF…tenants are milking the housing stock…bidding wars are good for realtors…I know everything…blah, blah, blah.

    You are a b-r-o-k-e-n record and a useless troll.

    Your dribble is sickening. Yuck.

    • John

      I don’t think that rent control is ruining SF. I think rent control is ruining SF for anyone wanting to move here who cannot afford to buy.

      It essentially rewards entrenched tenants at the expense of other tenants who are not as lucky. And it rewards any landlord who knows how to generate turnover by fair means or foul.

      I’m not that thrilled about realtors myself, but I would not blame them for RE inflation – that is mainly caused by SF’s whacked land use policies.

      • Godzuki

        John,

        Have you considered the situation where an individual has a rent-controlled apt. for X amount of time and, because of that situation, is able to save up enough for a down payment, then moves to ownership?

        I would imagine this has happened a lot in SF; how do you feel about that scenario?

        • John

          I think that all tenants should aspire to home ownership. I was a tenant here myself 20 years ago and always aspired to escape from that.

          It also helps their landlord who then gets turnover and the opportunity to reset the rent to market. Or of course sell the now vacant unit as a TIC, which will probably sell to an existing tenant.

          But the current system of rent control is too arbitrary and random in who benefits and who does not, for it to be considered an equitable public policy.

          As it is now, it will gradually erode away as property owners migrate away from offering their units for long-term renting.

    • Your demanding others pay for your miserable existence is what is sickening…

  5. Jaime

    not everyone wants to own. renting has it’s good points not the least of which is no responsibility for upkeep. some people are single or married (or domestic partners) with no kids which means no school district worries.

    • John

      Taking some responsibility isn’t a bad idea. A good part of the reason the government gives tax breaks to homeowners but not to tenants is that that home ownership cultivates responsibility, stability and a greater sense of belonging in the community.

Comments are closed.