5 ms·

I’m seeing 50 homes under $1M in San Francisco listed in last 30 days. That’s much more in that price range than I recall seeing in a very long time

by xoxoy 6y ago

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 6y ago
In places like SF you might see more sales because people are afraid to rent these homes. They may never get any rent and it would be very hard to evict a tenant because of local laws and policy.
k3oni 6y ago
Also to keep in mind that RE markets are regional. SF/NYC for example are out of bounds when it comes to this. Question is what is the actual value for each property, they might be under 1M but it might just be that that's their actual value, just more ppl trying to sell now.
squnch 6y ago
Single family homes? Or condos?
- TimSchumann 6y ago
  At that price in SF proper, I can't imagine it's anything but town homes, condos, and the like.
  - bradlys 6y ago
    There are a decent amount of row houses that go for sale under $1m in sf proper. They aren’t in nice areas or worth buying except as investment/rental properties. I don’t see many people buying them. It’s mostly investors. Most single family homes I see with home owners moving in are closer to $2-3mil.
dcolkitt 6y ago
One thing to keep in mind is that SF is a very high-income/high-price metro. Whereas the stimulus and unemployment boost is not adjusted for cost-of-living. Therefore we'd expect places like SF to see the least support from the stimulus.
refurb 6y ago
Listing prices can be a bit deceiving. Usually real estate agents play with listing prices - to get a bidding war going, they'll price well below market price. It's not unusual to see overbids of 20-30%.
- greedo 6y ago
  That's what my agent claimed when setting our asking price. We sure didn't see a bidding war. The benefits to the agent for a lower price is in conflict with what the homeowner wants. For example, a $10K diff in sale price is $350 for the listing agent, and $9650 for the homeowner. So of course agents will push for low prices to get a quick sale. Of course, there are many times that a seller wants a quick sale (moving etc). But often it's in the seller's best interest to be a bit more patient and price it at market.
  - jlbnjmn 6y ago
    Yup. Sold our house in January using Redfin. Best realtor we've dealt with and saved 2%. Also watch out for realtors saying you need upgrades and recommending contractors. They likely are getting a kickback, and by boosting the listing price their commission goes up. You end up with the same proceeds, IF it sells as fast, and you had to front the upgrades. The incentive structure for realtors is whack. At a minimum, the commissions could be tiered instead of continuous.
    - poulsbohemian 6y ago
      I don't know your location, I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, YMMV, but: In most locales, a kickback like you are describing is illegal and can be reported to your state's real estate commission. If you believe that your agent is acting in bad faith, you should at least find a different agent if not report them. In many cases, smart upgrades can yield significant returns. Not all agents who recommend upgrades are trying to con you, many are providing market-aware prudent advise to help you maximize your return. As an agent, I think it is good that tech and other competitive forces are entering the field. That said, commissions often get pointed to as a "problem." Here's the deal: If you believe your house will sell within a range of say, +/- $20K, then the agent's job is to try to get you to the top of that range. 2% in my market, for an average house works out to about $6K. If I can get you an extra $10K+ that you wouldn't have gotten by FSBO or similar, that's where I'm adding value as an agent and that's why commissions exist.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

I’m seeing 50 homes under $1M in San Francisco listed in last 30 days. That’s much more in that price range than I recall seeing in a very long time

by xoxoy 6y ago

I’m seeing 50 homes under $1M in San Francisco listed in last 30 days. That’s much more in that price range than I recall seeing in a very long time

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 6y ago

In places like SF you might see more sales because people are afraid to rent these homes. They may never get any rent and it would be very hard to evict a tenant because of local laws and policy.

k3oni 6y ago

Also to keep in mind that RE markets are regional. SF/NYC for example are out of bounds when it comes to this. Question is what is the actual value for each property, they might be under 1M but it might just be that that's their actual value, just more ppl trying to sell now.

squnch 6y ago

Single family homes? Or condos?

TimSchumann 6y ago
At that price in SF proper, I can't imagine it's anything but town homes, condos, and the like.
- bradlys 6y ago
  There are a decent amount of row houses that go for sale under $1m in sf proper. They aren’t in nice areas or worth buying except as investment/rental properties. I don’t see many people buying them. It’s mostly investors. Most single family homes I see with home owners moving in are closer to $2-3mil.

dcolkitt 6y ago

One thing to keep in mind is that SF is a very high-income/high-price metro. Whereas the stimulus and unemployment boost is not adjusted for cost-of-living. Therefore we'd expect places like SF to see the least support from the stimulus.

refurb 6y ago

Listing prices can be a bit deceiving. Usually real estate agents play with listing prices - to get a bidding war going, they'll price well below market price. It's not unusual to see overbids of 20-30%.

greedo 6y ago
That's what my agent claimed when setting our asking price. We sure didn't see a bidding war. The benefits to the agent for a lower price is in conflict with what the homeowner wants. For example, a $10K diff in sale price is $350 for the listing agent, and $9650 for the homeowner. So of course agents will push for low prices to get a quick sale. Of course, there are many times that a seller wants a quick sale (moving etc). But often it's in the seller's best interest to be a bit more patient and price it at market.
- jlbnjmn 6y ago
  Yup. Sold our house in January using Redfin. Best realtor we've dealt with and saved 2%. Also watch out for realtors saying you need upgrades and recommending contractors. They likely are getting a kickback, and by boosting the listing price their commission goes up. You end up with the same proceeds, IF it sells as fast, and you had to front the upgrades. The incentive structure for realtors is whack. At a minimum, the commissions could be tiered instead of continuous.
  - poulsbohemian 6y ago
    I don't know your location, I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, YMMV, but: In most locales, a kickback like you are describing is illegal and can be reported to your state's real estate commission. If you believe that your agent is acting in bad faith, you should at least find a different agent if not report them. In many cases, smart upgrades can yield significant returns. Not all agents who recommend upgrades are trying to con you, many are providing market-aware prudent advise to help you maximize your return. As an agent, I think it is good that tech and other competitive forces are entering the field. That said, commissions often get pointed to as a "problem." Here's the deal: If you believe your house will sell within a range of say, +/- $20K, then the agent's job is to try to get you to the top of that range. 2% in my market, for an average house works out to about $6K. If I can get you an extra $10K+ that you wouldn't have gotten by FSBO or similar, that's where I'm adding value as an agent and that's why commissions exist.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]