November 28, 2011

BLACK FRIDAY DEALS: Cheapest house in Alameda County

BLACK FRIDAY DEALS continue all this week!  This is the time to find the lowest-prices throughout the Bay Area!  Plus we’ll continue to bring you all the regular Burbed features you expect.

Today, the cheapest house in all of Alameda County!  Woot!  And when we run out of Bay Area Counties, don’t worry, there are plenty of Special Cities to find more DEALS for you.  Feel free to place your requests!

So, Alameda County, where would your absolute rock-bottom cheapest house for sale be?  You have so many excellent contenders for the role, it’s hard to pick just one city!  When I searched for properties under $100K countywide, I got more than 200 results.  Heck, even under $50K I still have to sort ten different houses!  How low can we go?  $40,000?  $30,000?

6024 FORTUNE Way, Oakland, CA 94605


SQ. FT.: 700
$/SQ. FT.: $20
LOT SIZE: 1,800 Sq. Ft.
TYPE: Detached
COUNTY: Alameda
MLS#: 40549840
STATUS: Pending
ON REDFIN: 25 days

Partially burned property. PRICED TO SELL! Great investment opportunity. Make your offer today!


Yes, this one is pending, but the state of this house combined with the street name make it a winner.  And remember, if it’s partially burned, that means it’s partially burn-free!

Great news: the fireplace looks like it’s still standing.

Comments (9) -- Posted by: madhaus @ 4:07 am

9 Responses to “BLACK FRIDAY DEALS: Cheapest house in Alameda County”

  1. PKamp3 Says:

    The last burned out house had a label like, “DO NOT ENTER”. This seems better!

    I do think it’s crazy that for the price of 100 of these you can get one house (maybe as large as a 1,300 sq. ft. ranch) in Palo Alto.

  2. z2amiller Says:

    Partially burned? I’d hate to see what kind of house is fully burned.

    This looks like a pretty sad story – With all of the crap out front it looks like maybe the fire had just happened and the owners would be back to sort out and collect their belongings. But then in some of the pictures, there are plants growing through the windows so clearly the house has been in this condition for some time.

  3. * Says:

    redin says land value is assessed at $50k.
    previous recent sales from $40k-$80k.

    buy the land for $14k cash.
    let it sit for 20 years.
    might be worth something by then.

  4. ES Says:

    WHY ARE THERE PHOTOS OF THE INSIDE??? like someone’s going to go “well the inside’s not *too* badly burned… let’s go ahead and salvage this…”

  5. nomadic Says:

    ES, I think the Realtor was just being nice by providing a vicarious thrill to anyone who looks at the listing.

  6. SEA Says:

    How much is the REALTOR going to make on this deal?

  7. Tamara Singh Says:

    $14k for a burned wreck of a house doesn’t seem like a good deal. It seems like a waste of time and money. I’ve seen much better deals, and I’m willing to put my money into other areas of the country, like Detroit, where you can still find $1 properties that haven’t been burnt to the ground and might actually be habitable.

  8. SEA Says:

    Jul 19, 2011 Foreclosed $310k.

    From $310k to $14k…

    Also, basically next door, 2520 61st Ave “Super Cute HOME! Totally refreshed and MOVE-IN READY! FP, New paint, hardwood floors thru out, original details, updated landscaping. Close to markets, schools, public transportation with easy access to the 580 and 880 hwys. GO SEE!”

    After a $450k foreclosure, and then a $100k sale [=$350+k loss for the lender], it’s pending at $150k.

    What’s really difficult to understand is why this was ever a half million [=max of our not a lot of money] neighborhood just a few years ago.

    During January 2007, 2520 61st Ave closed at $469k including $20k in so-called overbidding.

    Did the buyers really think buying would be cheaper than renting? Did they think that not being able to afford an extra $2 in gas suggested that buying a half million dollar house was the responsible thing to do? Were they thinking that investing in this neighborhood was relatively safe? Pride of ownership?

    Maybe the collective thought was that these places had ‘location location location,’ with the value being in the land and all. But if the value is in the land, why is the listing price $14k?

    For what it’s worth, for the others who are still making payments on their ~$500k purchase, let’s consider the interest expense on a zero down interest only loan: 5% of $500k = $25k

    What’s odd is that I’m guessing that many who paid so much for so little were the ones shouting RENTARD at their (former) friends the loudest.

    How could anyone have ever predicted that tossing around dollars this way could turn out so poorly?

    Oh well.

  9. ms Says:

    Thanks for the background. This house was super cute once too

Leave a Reply

Please be nice. No name calling, no personal attacks, no racist stuff, no baiting, etc. Let's be nice to each other in the true Bay Area spirit! (Comments may be edited/removed without notice.)