Best value in Atherton – affordable housing is now possible
Beds: 2 Baths: 2 Sq. Ft.: 1,330 $/Sq. Ft.: $989 Lot Size: 8,500 Sq. Ft. Property Type: Detached Single Family Stories: 1 Year Built: 1922 Community: El Camino to Alameda County: San Mateo MLS#: 81005654 Source: MLSListings Status: Active On Redfin: 7 days Complete renovation 2 years ago! Beautiful chef’s kitchen with granite countertops, stainless steel appliances, breakfast bar, & wine fridge. Living room with access to patio/lawn, 2 remodeled baths, dual-paned windows, hardwood floors, surround sound, and lutron switches with remotes.
Thanks to Burbed reader Herve for this find!
Wow. What an amazing value! Just $1.3 million dollars! And remodeled just 2 years ago – it’s even got lutron switches and hardwood floors!
Yes indeed, the affordable housing crisis is over. Even Atherton has affordable housing. Now, granted, it might not be affordable to low income folks… but most two or 3 adult engineer households can easily afford this.
Just think, with this house, you can proudly tell your co-workers that you live in the same city as so many famous Silicon Valley executives. Sure, your house might look a little different, but hey… it’s got room to grow. With a little touch up, this could easily shoot up to $2 million.
Finally, just think, located on El Camino Real, thousands of commuters each day will drive by your house, wondering who is so lucky to live in Atherton. And it will be you. Pride of ownership baby!
February 25th, 2010 at 7:02 am
The landscaping is priceless
February 25th, 2010 at 8:57 am
Is that the Maltese Falcon on the patio table? The price makes perfect sense then, assuming it comes with the house.
February 25th, 2010 at 11:42 am
That yard is pretty damn
hilarioussad. What’s more amazing is that this place was purchased in 2007 for $1.338M – presumably before they sunk all of the money into remodeling. Ooh, a flip gone wrong!(It also changed hands in 2005 for $910k. Those people cashed out at just the right time!)
February 25th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
Does the fact it is on Camino Real explain the ‘surround sound’ ?
February 25th, 2010 at 12:44 pm
(It also changed hands in 2005 for $910k. Those people cashed out at just the right time!)
—-
But according to our faux-estate expert, the home value doubles every 10 years. So, if the current owner waits till 2017, he will be able to sell it for $2.6M, even with this sad yard.
BTW, looks like the owner forgot to enjoy the joy of home-ownership by watering his lawn. Probably he is enjoying the “warmth” of home-ownership now. After all, this is winter.
February 25th, 2010 at 11:59 pm
Looks like the house is is the home of Apricot Acquisitions LLC.
February 26th, 2010 at 12:56 am
ooOOo. Sounds Professional. Professional like real estater.
February 26th, 2010 at 9:42 am
What a fine acquisition this was! I’d hire these financial geniuses! Uh, wait, they paid more for it than the selling price…
February 26th, 2010 at 10:08 am
I have a 2-person tent. I’m going to put it up somewhere in Atherton and have some contractors throw in hardwood floors and a granite countertop. Then offer it for, oh, 800k. Crazy? Delusional? No more than the doofus who’s trying to sell this shack for 1.3 mill.
February 26th, 2010 at 10:10 am
Looks like the house is is the home of Apricot Acquisitions LLC.
Tax shelter. IRS is going to have a field day with him.
February 26th, 2010 at 1:55 pm
>>according to our faux-estate expert, the home value doubles every 10 years.
For the record, I’ve never seen such a quote from anybody here.
February 26th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
You should stop drinking, RE. You said it just two days ago. I’m sure Pralay could find at least five previous times you’ve said it.
http://www.burbed.com/2010/02/21/solution-to-californias-budget-woes-tax-renters/#comment-55716
Nice troll for a very rainy day though.
February 26th, 2010 at 2:32 pm
Who is a worthless despicable ignorant self serving fool?
Real Estater.
February 26th, 2010 at 2:38 pm
nomadic,
Let me quote myself:
>>on the average the Bay Area doubles in price every 10 years.
In our language, every word makes a difference. Keep up, man!
February 26th, 2010 at 2:42 pm
All,
Can you feel it? The job market is picking up now. Regardless of what you may read in the media (which is usually 3-6 months behind), it is very real. Many companies over reacted to the recession and let too many folks go, now they can’t find enough tech resources to keep up with demand. In some areas, there’s literally a feeding frenzy already. If you are aware of what’s in demand, you could be getting multiple job offers right now.
February 26th, 2010 at 3:06 pm
Oh really real estater. Would you care to share with us what you believe is “in demand?” Is there a demand for more worthless half witted pseudo-tech-guy wannabes?
February 26th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
The rest of your quote seems to negate your narrow interpretation:
As I’ve stated numerous times, on the average the Bay Area doubles in price every 10 years. You can prove it to yourself by checking home prices here in the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s, and every decade thereafter.
So now are you saying prices always doubled from 1950-59, 1960-69, etc. So from 2000-2010 they doubled too, right? I don’t think so.
I’ll throw you a bone on the job market though – it’s showing some signs of improvement locally. Not quite a “feeding frenzy” though.
February 26th, 2010 at 3:29 pm
nomadic,
You still don’t get it. If you pick out any specific period, it might not necessarily double. However, if you bought in 1950, it would have doubled every 10 years on the average. It would be the same result if you started in 1970, or 1980. However, if you insist on figuring out why a specific house did not double from year x to year y, then you missed the point entirely.
On the job market, there are Absolutely areas with feeding frenzy (with a capital A). However, you need to know a cross section of the market and the industries to know where the hot spots are.
February 26th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
Oooh! Our resident turd thinks he has inside knowledge. I’m sure his sources are as truthful and speak with the same veracity as he.
February 26th, 2010 at 4:52 pm
Anybody care to explain that the teeth marks on the wife were not due to a “feeding frenzy”?
February 26th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
The truth is that if you look at listings in the Bay Area, on average you will see that for 20 year periods ending in ’09 or ’10 that most properties appreciated from 2-3.5 times the purchase price in the late 80s/1990. Outside of Palo Alto you will be hard pressed to find anyplace that has appreciated at an average of 7.2% annualized or above, there are certain gentrified neighborhoods that will fit the bill, but for the most part you will not find properties that doubled on average every 10 years, at least after the Volcker got rid of inflation. Inflation was 2.31 times from 1972 to 1982, so essentially if your house only doubled in price then it lost value in real terms. For all intents are purposes when analyzing data I work with numbers from 1983 onward, as the high inflation years are an outlier.
Go to Redfin and find properties around the Bay Area that changed hands in ’88/’89 or ’90 and then again in ’09 or ’10, and calculate the average annualized % gain (if Redfin hasn’t done it for you), and you will see it almost never is over 7.2%.
February 26th, 2010 at 5:04 pm
cardinal2007:
I said double in price; I didn’t say double in inflation adjusted price.
February 26th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
RE, we really don’t care what you said, other to have fun making comments.
DreamT said: Anybody care to explain that the teeth marks on the wife were not due to a “feeding frenzy”?
Would those be teeth marks on the Trophy Wife?
February 26th, 2010 at 5:36 pm
Let me quote myself:
>>on the average the Bay Area doubles in price every 10 years.
In our language, every word makes a difference. Keep up, man!
…
…
However, if you insist on figuring out why a specific house did not double from year x to year y, then you missed the point entirely.
—-
Thank you Faux Estater for admitting that some “specific houses” might not be doubling in NEXT 10 years.
This is a NAR ad in 2007 (yes 2007, when home price peaked nationally and housing market tanked since then). It claims:
Faux Extater’s statement comes right from NAR’s manual. The only thing he changed is that instead of nation’s median home price, he changed to “Bay Area”.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck.
February 26th, 2010 at 5:38 pm
If something is a fact, you will hear it from everyone.
February 26th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
lol – Real estater’s position:
I didn’t say every house would double every 10 years! I didn’t say all houses would double every 10 years! I didn’t say that houses double in inflation adjusted price!
In reality real estater hasn’t said anything at all.
February 26th, 2010 at 5:47 pm
Aha, Faux Estater is started talking about “fact” again. NAR’s claim is lie. Check out what article says.
Great time to buy? That’s come from NAR’s manual too.
February 26th, 2010 at 5:50 pm
nomadic – I invoke the fifth.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:00 pm
However, if you insist on figuring out why a specific house did not double from year x to year y, then you missed the point entirely.
—–
It’s it cute? If you show him a “specific house”, Faux Estater would say “you are missing the point entirely”. But yet, Faux Estater himself cherry-picks some “specific houses” to bolster his point.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:02 pm
I said double in price; I didn’t say double in inflation adjusted price.
—-
Great! That’s makes your statement entirely useless.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
NAR is not always wrong. Check out this recent article on interest rates:
Lawrence Yun, chief economist for the National Association of Realtors (NAR), says 30-year fixed rates are “rock bottom” and simply cannot stay at 5 percent. That much, economists, analysts, and the Fed all agree on.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:07 pm
On the job market, there are Absolutely areas with feeding frenzy (with a capital A). However, you need to know a cross section of the market and the industries to know where the hot spots are.
—–
I know Faux Estater. Before Christmas there were demand for truck drivers (for transporting holiday sale items from port to stores). Last weekend when we went to Kirkwood, we saw lots of “help wanted” signs in ski areas. Summer is coming. There will be lot of demand for strawberry pickers.
You just need to know a cross section of the market and the industries to know where the hot spots are.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:09 pm
NAR is not always wrong.
—-
We know, we know. Once in a blue moon they are right. Like 5% of the time? That’s great track-record for a professional institution.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:12 pm
CBS MarketWatch:
It’s a great time to buy a house
When something is a fact, you’ll hear it from everyone.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:14 pm
Lawrence Yun, chief economist for the National Association of Realtors (NAR), says 30-year fixed rates are “rock bottom” and simply cannot stay at 5 percent. That much, economists, analysts, and the Fed all agree on.
—–
Therefore, hurry, hurry. Buy your home. Is that what Yun is trying to say, Faux Estater? But Yun and Lereah are saying it for decade.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:17 pm
I thought when the media announce it’s the right time to buy something, it means it’s time to sell?
February 26th, 2010 at 6:18 pm
God I hate the NAR. Never believe a single word uttered by those shameless hucksters. Their sole interest is conning people into buying housing just so they can get their commission. I mean, just look at that ad that Plalay linked to in post #24. What an absolute load of ****.
“thanks to the power of leverage.” yeah. Forgot to mention how that can work negatively too. Yeah but what to they care if people have lost their entire downpayment and more over the past couple of years.
“The average homeowner today has 36 times the wealth of the average renter”. Hey everybody, join our ponzi scheme. I stil rent and am doing very well. I know that I wouldn’t have 36 x my wealth if I “owned”.
Unbelievable.
Lies, tricks and manipulation. They are truly loathesome.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:19 pm
CBS MarketWatch:
It’s a great time to buy a house
—-
Thanks for the link, Faux Estater. Alan Levenson is right – if someone is looking for home, it is a great time. But he also cautions that people should NOT look house as a “great investment”.
Go ahead and buy your 2 investment properties.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:25 pm
>>Yeah but what to they care if people have lost their entire downpayment and more over the past couple of years.
>>Hey everybody, join our ponzi scheme.
If prices go down, you complain about losing money. If prices go up, then it’s a ponzi scheme. In other words, your thinking is just like Pralay — there’s always an excuse not to buy.
February 26th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
NAR is not always wrong.
As one of my old professors used to say…”Even a blind squirrel will find a nut sometimes”
or
“Even a broken clock is right twice a day.”
LOLer
February 26th, 2010 at 6:43 pm
If prices go down, you complain about losing money. If prices go up, then it’s a ponzi scheme.
—-
Comprehension problem! Prices going up has nothing to do with ponzi scheme. The NAR’s claim “the average homeowner today has 36 times the wealth of the average renter” ignores cause-and-effect. A 50 year old homeowner could be wealthier than a renter just graduated from college. Luring people into false “buy-home-get-wealthy” investment scheme is indeed sounds like ponzi scheme.
February 26th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
Wait – pralay you’re saying all I need to do in order to get wealthy is buy a home? Well, gee golly, that’s something anyone can do! Boy do I love America!
February 26th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Yes, you need to buy a home to get wealthy. Pay attention what NAR said:
Let’s take some examples. You are a renter and not wealthy. Warren Buffett is homeowner and wealthy. That means if you just buy a home, you will be next Warren Buffett.
February 26th, 2010 at 7:22 pm
Lawrence Yun, chief economist for the National Association of Realtors (NAR), says 30-year fixed rates are “rock bottom” and simply cannot stay at 5 percent. That much, economists, analysts, and the Fed all agree on.
Yes, and they also say that rising interest rates will put downward pressure on housing prices. There is no urgency to buy a house for financial reasons.
From Herve’s article in today’s thread:
After that program runs out, mortgage rates should not spike, but rather rise gradually to about 6 percent over the next year, predicts Cameron Findlay, chief economist at LendingTree.com. That will mean homebuyers may have to reduce their price range, and that trend could put downward pressure on prices.
February 26th, 2010 at 7:26 pm
Uh oh! Looks like people may have to start look at actually paying back mortgages in the future!
That does not bode well for home “values.”
February 27th, 2010 at 4:48 am
As the global economy is recovering, China can’t find enough workers to keep up with the demand.
Factory wages have risen as much as 20 percent in recent months.
Telemarketers are turning away potential customers because recruiters have fully booked them to cold-call people and offer them jobs.
Some manufacturers, already weeks behind schedule because they can’t find enough workers, are closing down production lines and considering raising prices.
At a government-run employment center in downtown Guangzhou, employers seeking workers outnumbered job-hunters Thursday afternoon.
“You can walk into any factory and get a job,”
I think the same thing can happen to the United States by as soon as 2015 when majority of the baby-boomers retire. Keep in mind as the largest economy in the world, we have far fewer workers than China. As odd as it may sound at this moment in time, I do not see jobs as a major issue in the next 5 years. In fact, the overwhelming trend is going to be higher demand and lower supply of human resources. By 2020 your salary will likely double.
February 27th, 2010 at 4:55 am
Let me say this again:
>>By 2020 your salary will likely double.
Salary doubling and house prices doubling in the next 10 years means that it’s a wash for renters. What would it mean for homeowners? It means your financial burden will essentially be 1/4 of what it is today compared to your net worth. This is why NAR is on the right track. Owning a home will just about guarantee you’ll be richer than if you rent.
February 27th, 2010 at 8:57 am
This is why NAR is on the right track.
—–
Thanks for enlightening us.
As shown in #35, they have a pretty good track record for dishonesty.
February 27th, 2010 at 9:17 am
Let me say this again:
>>By 2020 your salary will likely double.
—–
Why double? Your thrown number is arbitrary anyway. Why don’t you just say it will triple or quadruple? Or even 10 times. Or even 20 times. That would bolster your case for home value even better.
Needless to say that you made another self-defeating argument, because you are implicitly admitting that home value is tied to income. The average income in Santa Clara county remained stagnant in last decade (between 2000 to 2009). Yet the home value skyrocketed. On other hand, in Silicon Valley the income increased in 90s, but yet the home value did not skyrocket in similar fashion. That tells a lot about the bubble of 2003-2006, right?
February 27th, 2010 at 9:23 am
Owning a home will just about guarantee you’ll be richer than if you rent.
—
Please see the video link that you yourself provided. That guy said that people should not take home as “great investment”.
Your “buy-home-get-rich” scheme comes right from NAR’s manual. “Silicon Valley tech guy”? Yeah, we get it.
February 27th, 2010 at 10:07 am
>>because you are implicitly admitting that home value is tied to income.
That’s your reading comprehension problem. I described two trends:
- Bay Area home price doubling on the average every 10 years
- One time event of baby boomers retiring, plus smaller post-boomer work face leading to labor shortage and higher salaries
Both trends combined will put the homeowner ahead by a factor of 4.
February 27th, 2010 at 10:13 am
>>That guy said that people should not take home as “great investment”.
Perhaps not immediately or generically, but the long term result for California has been proven, even agreed to by people like Bob during our Prop 13 discussion.
When times are good, people think prices will never drop. Similarly, when times are bad, people think things will stay bad forever. Due to the existence of such stupidity, there is opportunity for investors to make money.
February 27th, 2010 at 4:02 pm
One time event of baby boomers retiring, plus smaller post-boomer work face leading to labor shortage and higher salaries
—-
Considering the fact that baby boomers are going to have more active lives than you think, I have serious doubt about your absurd prediction. Actually some of the baby boomers might have to sell their homes to fund their retirement lives. Does it ring any bell, Faux Estater? More homes in market?
Just like NAR, why don’t you say following:
February 27th, 2010 at 4:03 pm
Both trends combined will put the homeowner ahead by a factor of 4.
—-
Congratulation for your math ability, Faux Estater. You did it.
February 27th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
Perhaps not immediately or generically, but the long term result for California has been proven,
—-
Thanks for telling us that even a housing bull like you has given up hope for the CA housing market for short term. I guess great weather and mythical foreigners are not good enough.
February 27th, 2010 at 8:41 pm
>>Considering the fact that baby boomers are going to have more active lives than you think, I have serious doubt about your absurd prediction.
You think baby boomers will live forever? I have serious doubts about your brain.
February 27th, 2010 at 9:11 pm
You think baby boomers will live forever?
—-
And where did you exactly you get the idea of “forever”. I am curious.
February 27th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
I have serious doubts about your brain.
—–
Damn! Something wrong in my brain! But hey, as long as my brain is capable of poking fun of your losing bids (although you have “professional” realtor), it is not going to helpful for you.
March 9th, 2010 at 8:10 am
> One time event of baby boomers retiring
Looks like we’re going to have to wait a bit longer before this happens: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Most-Americans-still-cnnm-3163666925.html?x=0
The percentage of workers who said they have less than $10,000 in savings grew to 43% in 2010, from 39% in 2009, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute’s annual Retirement Confidence Survey. That excludes the value of primary homes and defined-benefit pension plans.
March 9th, 2010 at 8:49 am
Don’t be an alarmist, Herve! All they have to do is sell their houses and -boom!- they can retire comfortably…
May 17th, 2010 at 10:43 am
Total rip-off and not worth the asking price.
July 31st, 2011 at 5:32 pm
Reduced to $1,098,000. Even more affordable now!
July 31st, 2011 at 6:21 pm
Did you notice:
“Feb 01, 2011 Sold (Public Records) $711,000 -17.9%/yr Public Records”