Back in November, reader Debtpocalypse alerted us to a listing at 252 Stanford Avenue in Kensington (above). He wrote: “$1.7 million for a sub-7,000 sqft lot in Kensington? Good luck with that.. This is the silliest listing in quite some time.”
Well, the home in question — a Michael Thomas-designed mid-century modern house on three levels, did not reduce its asking price, has found a buyer and is now marked “sale pending”.
We will be sure to report back when — if — the closing price is revealed, just to see how “silly” this listing turned out to be.
It wouldn’t be the first time Debtpocalypse has framed an opinion as fact and then been proven completely wrong.
Assuming pending converts to eventual sale, shall we guess the transaction price? I’ve not been to an open house in months, so I don’t have the same sense of confidence in clearing prices. That said, I’ll start:
$1.48m.
[i]It wouldn’t be the first time Debtpocalypse has framed an opinion as fact and then been proven completely wrong.[/i]
I can assure you as well that it won’t be the last.
You the buyer, the seller, or the listing agent?
Don’t waste your time on this troll Debt, your posts/opinions are always a breath of fresh air in these pseudo-bullish times.
None of the above. Just a regular reader who understands and respects that while a house or its price may seem “silly” to one person, it may not be “silly” to someone else. And as long as the person who buys the house is happy with the transaction, who are we to say what’s “silly” or not?
I also know how hard it is to sell a house in this market and I choose not to make it more difficult for them to sell by denigrating the listing or talking poorly about a property – which I notice you do with regularity on this blog.
Deflationjunkie is the same way. You can try and write me off as a “troll” all you want, but I find you two to be the boorish hecklers at the back of the auditorium who do nothing but shout insults at the actors.
If you don’t like a house. Don’t buy it. If you think a price is too high. Don’t pay it. But to mock people who do is not only childish, it’s annoying.
@ No Debt – you may be missing the point of blogs like Tracey’s.
“If you don’t like a house[, d]on’t buy it. If you think a price is too high[, d]on’t pay it.” One might respond, if you don’t find the opinions expressed on this blog great fodder for thought or constructive debate, don’t read them.
Blogs are all about information, dialog and opinion. The “if you don’t have something nice to say…” principle makes sense for a first grade classroom where one can’t opt out. But this loose community who read Tracey’s missives and comment on them is (are? my grammar fails me) opting in. It seems disingenuous and inappropriate to show up here and say “keep your opinions to yourselves unless you’re saying something nice about real estate.”
Gone are the days when sellers and agents could withhold or obfuscate information that might not be advantageous to their sale, and relax that they wouldn’t be found out. The internet is here. Information wants to flow, communities will form, and individuals who would otherwise never have met will discuss very personal opinions about the presidential candidate, the limited product selection in their local grocery store, or the price of the new home for sale down the street.
Yes, it’s hard to sell right now. Is that justification for not speaking an opinion about a property? What happens when the tables turn – then it’ll be ok to speak out? It sure wasn’t hard to sell five years ago, even with the internet in place. Them’s the breaks.
Of course opinions can always be argued. That’s the point. So one is welcomed and encouraged to post “that $1.7m price tag isn’t silly; it can be justified by xx comparable sale in that ‘hood or yy upgrade done to the home.” Sound off. Tell us why you think Debtpocalypse and deflationjunkie are wrong, rather than telling us what kind of people you think they are.
All this said, it is exactly correct that “silly” is irrelevant. If a buyer has seen the home and all its flaws (the sub 7000 sq ft lot included), and it’s worth $1.7 million to him or her, then that’s what the home is “worth.” And bully to the sellers and their agent(s) for managing to find the one buyer in a million who would think so and has the money to buy at this moment.
@Pop, I think it’s you who seem to be missing my point. Go back and read my original comment.
He didn’t say “In my opinion this price is silly.” He presented it as fact. “This is the silliest listing in quite some time.” And when I called him on that, I was marginalized as being biased and called a troll.
If Debtpocalypse and Deflation Junkie are going to come on this blog, present their opinion as fact, and then shoot the messenger when it’s pointed out that they were wrong, they’re the ones who need a lesson on how blogs and opinions work. “Don’t waste your time on this troll” is about as far from “great fodder for thought or constructive debate” as you can get.
@No Debt, I didn’t miss your point. I addressed some of your points quite specifically. Let’s review…
1) You state: “I also know how hard it is to sell a house in this market and I choose not to make it more difficult … to sell by denigrating the listing or talking poorly about a property”
Of seven paragraphs in my post, numbers three, four and five address your statement. Care to defend your point?
2) You state: “while a house or its price may seem ’silly’ to one person, it may not be ’silly’ to someone else.”
Exactly. I spend my seventh paragraph agreeing with you.
Are you frustrated that I didn’t take up your FIRST point before addressing your subsequent points? I missed the blog rule that says I have to address points in chronological order.
But if you insist, let’s go there. First, a statement like “this is the silliest listing in quite some time” is subjective. Most readers don’t need the author to open with “In my opinion…” to know that the sentiment is the author’s opinion, not a statement of fact. Do you really expect blog commentors to add “In my opinion…” to all their subjective statements? If so, where are those three crucial words in your sentence, “…they’re the ones who need a lesson on how blogs and opinions work”? Second, you state that Debtpocalypse and deflationjunkie “shot the messenger.” Au contraire. Debtpocalypse immediately held up his or her hand and agreed with you. How is that shooting the messenger?
Finally, note my purposeful use of the word “fodder,” which Merriam Webster defines as “inferior or readily available material.” It doesn’t take intellectually superior material to inspire thought and debate.
“He didn’t say “In my opinion this price is silly.” He presented it as fact. “This is the silliest listing in quite some time.” And when I called him on that, I was marginalized as being biased and called a troll.”
————————————————————
Yo! No Debt – since you are keen on distinguishing between facts & opinions, show me where I presented this as fact? In fact, show me where I said anything at all about this property on this site prior to this blog entry. Ever.
Give us the link.
My “silly” remarks on this specific property were made in a private email from me to Tracy. While I will happily stand corrected, I do not believe I made any public statement here about this property, involving pricing silliness or otherwise – if so, please provide the link here.
Tracy chose to make my email contents public in this blog entry to which we are offering comment, which is absolutely her right – over the last year or so, she has recounted portions of other emails from me, edited others, ignored others. It’s her blog.
Coda: $1.51m
http://www.redfin.com/CA/Kensington/252-Stanford-Ave-94708/home/1738996
I was off by $30,000.
Congratulations to both buyer & seller.