- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic to the Top
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
Delusional Seller that bought at Peak, Listing for 50% Higher
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-02-2012 12:31 PM
http://www.redfin.com/CA/Millbrae/135-Linda-Vis-94
135 LINDA Vis Millbrae, CA 94030
List: $1,350,000
| Beds: | 3 |
| Baths: | 2.5 |
| Sq. Ft.: | 1,680 |
| $/Sq. Ft.: | $804 |
| Lot Size: | 5,130 Sq. Ft. |
let's count the ways this listng is over priced!
- listed $/sqft = $804.
$804 is the highest $/sqft out of 18 houses in millbrae. next highest $/sqft is $650/sqft. this listng is 24% higher.
average $/sqft is $496/sqft. this listing is 62% higher than the average $/sqft. - listed price is $1.35M for 1680sqft
this is the 2nd highest listing in millbrae:
the other listings are all over 2400sqft. this one is 1700sqft.
for a lesser price you can get an extra 700-1700 sqft, an extra 1-2 bedrooms and an extra 0.5 to 1.5 bathrooms. - and last but not least, it's right beside 280 so be sure to stock up on asthma inhalers at costco!
i wonder how they got a listing price of $1.35M?
let's see...
| Jan 30, 2012 | Listed (Active) | $1,350,000 | -- | MLSListings #81203587 | |
| Apr 13, 2011 | Delisted | * | -- | Inactive San Francisco MLS #2 | |
| Apr 13, 2011 | - Delisted (Temporarily Withdrawn) | -- | -- | Inactive MLSListings #3 | |
| Oct 18, 2010 | - Listed (Active) | * | -- | Inactive MLSListings #3 | |
| Oct 18, 2010 | Listed (Active) | * | -- | Inactive San Francisco MLS #2 | |
| Aug 04, 2006 | Sold (Public Records) | $899,000 | -- | Public Records |
bought for $900k in 2006. interesting...
$1.35M/$900k = 1.5 for a nice round number of 50% appreciation.
remember future sellers, a simple strategy to price your house is to completely ignore the current market, add 50% to your purhcase price (when you bought at the absolutely peak). this GUARANTEES!! a 50% return!
Re: Delusional Seller that bought at Peak, Listing for 50% Higher
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-02-2012 12:40 PM
You left out the fact that it was built brand new in 2010. Thats what a cursory read of the listing indicates. So the 2006 price might have been a land only/fixer upper price.
Not saying that justifies the list prce. But perhaps goes a long way to explain the gap between 2006 purchase price and today's list price.
Re: Delusional Seller that bought at Peak, Listing for 50% Higher
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-02-2012 01:05 PM
Buddy just did a tear down full custom high end build - not far from there his cost was over $800 a square foot too. New build or MAJOR rebuild will command that type of price just from the stand point of labor - permits and materials.
Re: Delusional Seller that bought at Peak, Listing for 50% Higher
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-02-2012 01:07 PM
Also it's 4x2 2256 sqft. Still $600/sqft. But for a turnkey house maybe that's not so bad.
For every delusional buyer who tries to sell a house at an inflated price there's a delusional buyer who thinks he's going to get a nice house in a nice neighborhood for $400k. Neither have anything to do with future prices.
Re: Delusional Seller that bought at Peak, Listing for 50% Higher
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-02-2012 01:46 PM
This one has seen a major remodel just by looking at the 2006 listing pictures:
http://www.redfin.com/CA/Millbrae/135-Linda-Vis-94
450K difference between purchase and current listing price; explains the 50% diff. Remodel likely cost less than 450k, but a man has to make his profit for the risk and investment!
Just saying..
Re: Delusional Seller that bought at Peak, Listing for 50% Higher
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-02-2012 09:43 PM
listing won't sell at their asking price. doesn't matter that they remodelled. it's too high.
Re: Delusional Seller that bought at Peak, Listing for 50% Higher
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-02-2012 10:45 PM
That agent did not pay attention when creating the listing?
Public facts say "2256 sqft, built in 2010"
Listing says "1680 sqft, built in 1946"
Someone ought to give the seller a heads-up. Usually it's the other way round.. assessor has old data, MLS has the new data.
Re: Delusional Seller that bought at Peak, Listing for 50% Higher
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-03-2012 11:21 AM
It is a new house with 2256sf. So Mike's whole analysis is meaningless. Let's see what it sells for.
Re: Delusional Seller that bought at Peak, Listing for 50% Higher
[ Edited ]- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-03-2012 11:50 AM - last edited on 02-03-2012 04:01 PM by SheilaM
elt, it won't sell for list.
Re: Delusional Seller that bought at Peak, Listing for 50% Higher
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Email to a Friend
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-03-2012 02:06 PM
Mike,
Saying it wont sell for list is a very different position than your first post which showed it being overpriced by 50% or more.
In your defense your original post was based on incorrect info - 1600 sqft old house, versus 2200sqft new house. But would have been nice of you to acknowledge the findings that myself and others posted on the thread explaining the large gap.
Yes so it may not sell for list, but neither will it sell for below 2006 peak - which is what you had implied it should sell for having ignored the changes in the house.

