Two Views from the Hills

Two Hill Section listings near $4m reflect very different views of price appreciation since 2004.

Both homes are marked up, of course, one by 25% and one by 64% over the prices paid by the current owners in 2004.

• 637 6th St. is almost new (2004), a corner lot Italianate mansion, 5br + 6ba (including partials) and 4387 sq. ft., on a 4970 sq. ft. lot with big views. The current owners paid $3.125m in Nov. 2004. List price: $3,899,500 (+25%).

• 869 3rd St. is a very clean, modern 4br/4ba home with 4136 sq. ft., on a 5720 sq. ft. lot with good yard/outdoor space and views. Built in 2000. The current owners paid $2,437,500 in May 2004. List price: $3,995,000 (+64%).

The homes will be compared by buyers first and foremost because they're so close in price.

6th St. is obviously newer, a bit larger and more voluptuous, and it appears to have the better views. 3rd St. is no slouch, with the yard being a big plus.

In 2004, 6th St. was valued at 28% above 3rd St. Today, 3rd St. asks more than 6th.

The turnaround appears to result from the sellers' different takes today on appreciation since 2004.

The wilder, more bullish view is held by the sellers of 3rd St. And that home is, according to the listing, currently owned by two licensed California realtors.

Home is Livable Now: Re-List It!

Who knows what situations might come up during a listing that might merit a quick cancel-and-re-list?

Oh, you might have a realtor/developer who just wants to restart the clock, or an address change on the property mid-listing, or this:

Certificate of occupancy just received!!

That's the great, great news on the new construction at 2309 Pacific. After nearly 75 DOM, they can actually legally allow buyers to move into the house. Bravo!

To celebrate, today the sellers got a fresh, new MLS#, replacing tired old S947286 with the much cleaner new S951920.

There was a token reduction, too ($60k to $2.239m) but the certificate of occupancy was the headline. Finally, they're ready for offers!

(Blush) MBC Called '#1 Consumer Real Estate Blog'

Too much. A very generous post on a Seattle RE blog (RainCityGuide.com) that features multiple real estate experts actually calls MBC the "#1 Consumer Real Estate Blog."

We promise not to believe the hype. But it's nice recognition for a few months' work, in the same sense that we've appreciated many readers' support.

So, what's the Seattle-MB connection?!?

The author of the post, Ardell DellaLoggia, once owned 714 MBB, the townhome whose current owner is now in a bit of a bind, but whose story has made good copy. (She was "two owners back" by her phrasing.)

Ardell & MBC have been in touch for some time strictly because of her past ownership of the subject property. But it happens she's a prolific and opinionated blogger in her own right, and a busy realtor as well.

We actually don't agree on everything about the role played by blogs like MBC, and she notes some errors we make here, given that your correspondent is a "layman." But in the end, she likes it, and we're grateful for the mention.

SW: 'Optimistic' Buyers May Be 'Disappointed'

The other day MBC featured one local realtor's reflections on buyer sentiment that she is aware of. The implication that prices are high for today's buyers appeared to be partly unwelcome.

Our most recent post discussed one MB home that is almost certainly worth less than what the owners paid last year.

Now, we have the official line from the major regional realty firm. In a July 24 press release, Shorewood owners Arnold Goldstein and Larry Wolf are quoted (once again jointly) in support of the release's claim that "results for June continued to demonstrate the South Bay’s resilience in the face of downward trends seen elsewhere." Cue Arnold & Larry:

We continue to be optimistic that South Bay home prices – particularly in the more affluent beach communities – will remain strong, and that buyers waiting for major price declines may be disappointed. It all comes down to continued strong demand, limited supply and the overall desirability of these markets. [emphasis added]

Now, it's no surprise that the party line would be optimism. (They've already called the bottom.) But are they really saying they want a whole class of buyers to be "disappointed?"

If you are buying or selling a house in the South Bay, Shorewood is likely to be involved in at least half the transaction. But of course that doesn't mean the firm's owners can dictate market prices.

MBC wonders, wouldn't they recognize that demand might be getting pent up as buyer sentiment shifts toward pessimism as to future prices? By one reading, the surest way to get more action going would be to see prices slip.

MBC invites your comments on current and future market conditions. Let's get that going in comments attached to this post.

MBC's take: you don't have to spend long looking at the RE market to see that no one really knows what's next. But what buyers, in particular, think is next does matter.

And let's not make this about Shorewood or Kaye or anyone else. In this discussion they're just people with an opinion. What's yours?

Time to Close the Books on the MBB TH Price War?

It might be time to finish a story MBC began long ago, that of two townhomes in the same building on Manhattan Beach Blvd. that wound up in a price war.

Winner: 710 MBB (left), sold 7/27/07 for $1,206,000.

Loser: 714 MBB (right), paid $1.355m in April '06, last listed at $1.349m, before quitting the market in late May.

To recap, 710 MBB was the more up-to-date unit and 714 MBB is actually on MBB, so when 710 undercut 714, it looked hopeless for 714. (Hence the dropout.)

If 714 MBB really has to sell, and that's what it looked like with the sellers having less than a year in the unit before offering it back up for sale, then the only questions were:

• how bad the (pricing) damage would be once 710 closed, and
• what the prospects might be for the market once they were ready to re-list.

Well, 710 MBB closed $149k below the purchase price on 714. And prospects are...

All things being equal except remodeling – obviously superior at 710 – 714 MBB would be fortunate to get $1.15m. They probably would need to accept an offer between $1m-$1.1m, if it went back on the market now. The potential losses could range from $250k-$400k, after costs of selling.

And that's if they list now. If the sellers wait...

One Realtor's Take on the Slowdown

Local realtor and blogger Kaye Thomas offers some good perspective in a piece from earlier this week, entitled "The Seller's Lament: Where, Oh Where, Have The Buyers Gone?"

Some highlights from Kaye's telling of the word on the street:

Inventory is rising in the Beach Cities and sales volume is slowing. Some of this is seasonal but lot of the reason for slower sales is that many buyers have set price limits...

Home sales ( homes that have closed escrow) are not looking great for July in most of the Beach Cities and are really low in Manhattan Beach...

Buyers and Sellers are just not in the same ballpark on prices. Many sellers are looking at prices from their perceived idea of value not true market value... [Homes that buyers] feel are over that value are just sitting.. often for a very long time...

Kaye also adds a lot of data in graph & chart form in this story, and another one giving some median price data going back to 1970 (not all of it very narrowly drawn).

Bravo, and thanks, Kaye, for the continued explosion of data.

Fishbowl Sold?

Let's be clear here, MBC is pleased to see willing sellers and willing buyers meet and reach a deal. We're mostly focused on pricing.

So it is in a spirit of celebration that we note that 300 N. Dianthus now sports a "SOLD" sign. The entry on the MLS hasn't been updated yet, but that will surely come.

Start price (4/12/07): $4.495m.

Last list: $4.295m.

When MBC first wrote about this home, what drew our notice was the gaping flaw in an otherwise beautiful home – a poorly located master bedroom. (There were some other quirks we didn't get into much.) Our point was that there ought to be some kind of discount for that.

It would appear the discount was at least $200k (a paltry 4%), perhaps more. When we get the final word we'll publish that.

Drought Ends, Glut Continues

A sales drought in the Tree Section $2m+ segment has now ended after 25 days.

MBC's records show that the last sale was 3005 Poinsettia, posted on June 29 and discussed here.

Today comes the news that the new construction at 3113 Valley is pending.

This home is 5br/4ba, 3400 sq. ft., on a slightly larger-than-usual lot (5000 sq. ft.). Last price was $2.299m – or $674/sq. ft., the lowest among Tree Section new construction.

Bonus feature: Solar electric generating system pre-installed. Nice.


But 3113 Valley has been immediately replaced by a new home at 3104 Pacific (pictured), which begins at $2.149m, $150k below the other new construction in the Trees.

That probably seems like aggressive pricing for a newbie that, by profile, is a lot like the others that are close in price (5br/4ba, 3200 sq. ft.).

But 3104 Pacific also must consider two new homes on Pacific sold within the last year that sat around awhile and took real reductions.

• 2512 Pacific (5br/4ba, 3600 sq. ft.) began in March 2006 at $2.350m. It stuck around and the listing language got more pleading – "Waiting For The Bubble? Seller Will Negotiate Now!!!" County records show it sold for $2m (plus $4k) in Nov. '06, down $345k (-15%).

• 3405 Pacific (4br/4ba, 3200 sq.ft.) also began in March 2006, at $2.149m. It sold one year later for $1.775m, down $375k (-17%).

With neighboring new construction selling for $1.775m and $2.0m, all of a sudden, the price on 3104 Pacific looks quite high.

The home at 2512 was bigger, but went for $150k less than the start price here. All things being equal, at the same square footage price ($556), 3104 should sell for $1.780m – about the same as 3405 Pacific.

Of course, those sales closed long ago. We need not consider them now. It's a different market already.

Can't Ignore the Rush of News

Let's get outside our comfy confines a moment and see what the rest of the world is saying about real estate.

Countrywide Financial CEO Anthony Mozilo, yesterday:

We are experiencing home price depreciation almost like never before, with the exception of the Great Depression.

Ian Shepherdson, economist for High Frequency Economics, today:

Housing is contracting at an accelerating pace, taking out with a vengeance the brief stabilization at the turn of the year, when mild weather and plunging gas prices supported activity.

Front page of the LA Times today:

Foreclosures [statewide] soared to 17,408 for the three months ended June 30, an increase of 799% from the same period last year. The current rate handily exceeds the previous foreclosure peak set in 1996, when the state was in the final throes of a six-year slump....

Most analysts say the housing market won't stabilize until 2008 or 2009. The so-called soft landing that was much talked about last year is rarely mentioned anymore.

On second thought, let's go to the beach.

Take the House, Take the Car

One of these days, the folks selling 1313 Oak will find a buyer.

They did not last year, when they started at $2.8m in April 2006.

They have not so far in 2007, despite a $300k price drop when they began anew in late May this year.

Offering up $300k worth of custom furnishings as part of the deal didn't work. The "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" connection didn't move the house.

So now, you get a free car. If only you'll pay full price. (Pic above from Beach Reporter ad.)

The Mercedes S550 is valued at nearly $90k new. (Is this one new?)

The listing no longer mentions the $300k worth of free furniture – is it still a silent part of the deal? Or do we get the car, but no "Queer Eye" lifestyle?

We may chuckle at the tactics, but we can't ignore something real: So far in July 2007, 1313 Oak was alone among all Tree Section listings over $2m to actually accept an offer. (There were 32 active listings as of July 15.) But escrow failed. That the deal didn't work out could be anyone's fault.

Maybe the gas tank wasn't full.

Trees: Two Near $2m May Be Sold

There is a little movement amid the otherwise complete stagnation of the Tree Section market above $2m.

The "cheapest" home over $2m, and another priced just under $2m, are now apparently near deals:

• 2909 Elm (5/4, 3450 sq ft) was featured by MBC after the price moved from $2.8m to $2.025m; [please see update at end]
  

• 746 36th (4/4, 3000 sq ft) is a newer listing that began at $1.985m, perhaps endeavoring to avoid the curse of the $2m+ segment.

Both of these homes were completed by the early 1990s, so this hardly relieves the new-construction glut. But at least it's action. (They're both on "hold" status, a step short of pending.)

MBC doesn't record the exact dates that homes go into escrow. But we can estimate pretty reliably that the last one to go in the Trees at $2m+ was 3005 Poinsettia ($2.525m) on or about June 29.

Yes, that's nearly a full month now without a sale in the $2m+ range. Inventory in the segment was at 32 on the last MB Market Update.

Of course, it's not hard to imagine 2909 Elm going for a bit under $2m, in which case the clock keeps running while we wait for a sale in this segment.


UPDATE: The risk of blogging as news breaks is that the news can change. As of 5pm Tues., 2909 Elm is now canceled, not on hold or pending. Are they giving up, re-listing, or sold? We'll write again when we get the info. The first comment (below) was sage.

Didja Know They're Still Flipping These Days?

Buy it, fix it, flip it!

That was the formula for real estate riches, back when we were all younger, from about 2001-2005.

You thought flippers were gone, but no, you're wrong.

1717 Pacific was purchased Sept. 20, 2006, for a cool $1.2m. This past week, it's back for $1.479m (+$279k/23%), after an overhaul.

Not enough of an overhaul, for MBC's taste. The strangely boxy, shingle-and-brick face was preserved, though freshened up. (It used to be pink; eeeyaawch.) They had a chance to change the curb, but they didn't.

The façade doesn't evoke any particular style. Is this "colonial"? Or "traditional"? Is it a country/barn look? Oh, the listing helps:

Beautifully remodeled country french property with a yard area the kids will die for.

We're blaming the French for this look? Not fair.

Take a look around the back, and the house just looks like any other awkward, stapled-on remodel of a much older post-war house (1947 original const.).

This one is all of 1500 sq. ft., meaning we're priced at $1,000/sq. ft. here. The house should rank among the elite of all comparables to fetch that.

Maybe the fit and finish bring it there. (MBC hasn't been able to get by just yet.) The listing boasts that the "attention to detail must be seen to appreciate." OK, maybe.

Or maybe this is just a small, so-so house with a location challenge, old guts and awful curb "appeal" that was a bad candidate for a flip.

And here's a tip for listing agents. Looking at the second half of that quote from the listing, MBC is thinking it's best to avoid the phrase, "the kids will die" when pitching a house to families. It's a subtle deterrent.

Despite the many strikes, serendipitously, these flippers have entered a market nearly devoid of listings below $1.6m. They might just pull it off.

The math on this one is tough to figure. Selling at list price, the net is just over $200k (assuming < 6% commissions), but then you have the remodeling costs to cover.

This was no big jackpot, even if it sells quickly. And if it doesn't...

Perfect Starter is a Scraper

Some months ago, in MBC's inaugural days, we featured a home pitched as "The perfect Tree section starter!"

3521 Elm is a 1200 sq. ft. bungalow in a part of the Tree Section that's pretty forgettable. That the sellers believed that "move-in buyers" should pay just shy of $1.3m for this small "starter" in a minus location was galling.

As MBC said at the time:

To pay $1.2-$1.3m to live in a tiny house here seems like a desperation move.

The months passed, and the market seemed largely to agree.

In June, after this one went pending, the listing agent's ads started to show the home as one of several sales to builders. At that point, it was clear this would be no one's "starter home." It was a scraper.

This week the price came in at $1.150m, 10% off the start price, and seemingly a bit high for the location. Next stop? Part of the Tree Section new-construction glut.

A Million Hear About DOM Scandal

MBC's readership is high-quality, but it's measured in the hundreds. Today's LA Times, thrown on the driveways of a million people this morning, takes a page from our focus on DOM trickery in a strident staff editorial entitled, "Not-so-open houses."

The piece is an attack on the recent decision by SoCalMLS to cease publishing DOM in client reports. Per the Times:

[T]his is clearly a change that serves nervous home sellers and their agents — the only parties who would be concerned that apparently lengthy days-on-market periods might prompt buyers to make low-ball offers.

Right.

The piece goes on to note the irony that this cutback in information is coming at a time when "the real estate market is experiencing a rapid trend toward transparency." Right again.

Unfortunately, the only online tools referenced are two realtor-driven sites and something called cyberhomes.com, no reference to our favorites, ZipRealty and Zillow – but also no free promo for dreadful Trulia.com.

Since a lot of you aren't going to take the time to read the whole LA Times piece, we shall ruin it for those who do by sharing the closing line:

So here's some advice: When an agent tells you that overpriced starter home you're looking at just listed two days ago, smile, nod and check to see how thick the dust is on the windowsills.

Skepticism is going mainstream.

Discussion of Market Updates for 7/15/07

The newest Manhattan Beach Market Update spreadsheets are now available, dated July 15, 2007.

Click here to download the PDF or go to our sister site, Manhattan Beach Market Update to read the discussion.

In sum, the Hill Section is flat, the Sand Section remains busy, and the Tree Section has officially separated into two completely different segments.

In the Trees, there were 8 sales of active listings under $1.6m (and another private lot sale at $1.2m), while absolutely nothing priced above $2m sold in the two-week period of the report. (There were 7 sales in the 4 weeks prior.)

With 5 new listings entering the $2m+ segment, we now have 3 out of 4 listings in the Trees (32 of 42) in that tier. And there are still 40+ homes in construction targeting that market.

MBC will return to the "Tree Section glut" story shortly.

LAT Tries to Crash the Market

The regional fish-wrapper appears to have some kind of agenda to crash the housing market.

How else to explain the front-page treatment (in Business) of a story entitled "Southland home sales tumble," complete with snazzy maps and charts to make the point? And what's with singling out Manhattan Beach for an 18% drop in prices (June 2007 vs. 2006)?

What about the good news?

MB sales (-23.5%) weren't off as badly as the multi-county SoCal region as a whole, which saw a 36% drop in sales YoY. And the median price is still up 2.4% in the region, and 4.8% in L.A. County!

Don't the Times' editors understand that their slant, or data, or whatever, could shake buyers' confidence? Or, worse, embolden them to wait to buy?


UPDATE: Data corrections were made after a commenter pointed out errors. Thanks.

Avg. Price Per Sq. Ft., 2000-2007

Things are getting nerdy over at Kaye Thomas' blog, which of course we mean in the best possible way.

Kaye has posted sales data by month for 2000-2007, along with average price per square foot for each month in that period.

PPSF is just one of many imperfect measures of housing costs, as Kaye notes, one that is particularly confounding given all the new construction and larger homes developed in MB over the period under study.

Regardless of the limitations, more data = good. Please share your thanks & thots if you follow the link over there.

A Clearing in the Trees

Within several days, eight Tree Section listings priced below $1.6m have sold.

Quite suddenly, this leaves just one teardown and one small cottage on Ardmore in the sub-$1.6m range.

The sales, in summary form (details to come shortly in the next Market Update), with their last list prices:

• 848 14th * $1.199m * 2 DOM
• 2811 Valley * $1.229m * 140+ DOM
• 3528 Poinsettia * $1.279m * 10 DOM
• 2804 Pacific * $1.399m * 10 DOM
• 3204 Poinsettia * $1.550m * 30 DOM
• 717 12th * $1.512m * 3 DOM
• 2305 Pine * $1.595m * 130 DOM
• 2418 Ardmore * $1.599m * 55 DOM

Of these, two were quite new – the teardown on 14th overlooks the playing fields east of Pacific School, and the 12th St. listing was a charmer near Martyrs. The two Poinsettia sales were recent remodels – 3204 slick, 3528 OK but lacking curb appeal.

The long-timer on Pine was priced high, and an anonymous comment says the escrow is unconventional, so we'll see on that one.

The standouts as interesting barometers are 2804 Pacific, which you just knew would go quickly because of realistic pricing, and 2418 Ardmore, because, for that price, you get almost 3500 sq. ft. – about 1,000 to 2,000 more than for other listings below $2m.

For a hundred reasons, these sales don't say anything definitive about the prices of the remaining active listings in the Trees.

But isn't the action suggestive?

Eight separate Tree Section buyers passed on the pricier stuff.

Any of the next three listings up the ladder might have been with the lucky ones here, but for prices that seem to suggest they are a cut above the recent sales:

• 1140 Laurel ($1.599m) has a location challenge, an imperfect layout and quite little outdoor space;
• 1829 Poinsettia ($1.625m) is deliciously redone, but small (1450 sq. ft.) and with too little usable outdoor space; and
• 2622 Pacific ($1.649m) has its sweet bits, but that corner at Pacific and 27th ain't quiet, there's little curb appeal and there's no yard.

Buyers will tell you when the pros outweigh the cons by way of their pricing decisions. For now, they seem to be telling us that these three are all high.

Now, is it a benefit to be among the few listings left below $2m?

A $400k Price Increase on John

Do the people who bought 512 John St. earlier this year really mean to sell it?

They paid $4.075m. As soon as their purchase closed, the home was on the market (2/16/07) for $4.449m (+375k).

It lingered, and the price dropped $100k. Print ads started pitching the house as a rental ($20k/mo.), which MBC discussed here.

Last Tuesday, after 144 DOM, the price shot up $400,000 to $4.75m. No kidding.

Two suggestions for potential buyers: They'll take $4.35m! And that's not a 10% discount.

Also, the flippers' bottom line might be closer to 5% over their purchase price: $4.275m.

A Serious Look at Inventory

A new fruit of the detailed tracking MBC does under separate cover at our sister site, Manhattan Beach Market Update, is a series of graphs showing inventory and changes since Spring. (Click here for the complete story and all graphs.)


As is our custom, the data show what's been happening in each of the three regions west of Sepulveda (Hill, Sand and Trees) separately, plus the whole of MB (west of Sepulveda) in sum.

What do we see?

Modest spikes in listings since mid-May, and a remarkably even number of sales in each 2-week period for the whole west-of-Hwy.-1 area – 10-12 sales each period being the norm.

If this is the sort of thing you find interesting, MBC encourages you to read the nerdy fine print in the Market Update story at least once. When we post future graphs it'll be clearer to you what the data do, or don't, say.

Changing Address Midstream

We've established pretty well by now that a common ploy of stale listings is to pull a bogus re-list and reset the DOM clock.

Earlier this week MBC discussed what appeared to be a unique case of a property address being changed at the same time as a bogus re-list was pushed through. (232 16th St., with a front door facing Highland Ave., became 234 16th.).

Some thought the tactic strange, others outrageous. But some sellers, assisted by their agent, apparently thought it was a brilliant move to change address while they were on the market.

That's how 3009 Highland Ave. became 232 30th Place this week. Same house, same agent, new address and new MLS# starting July 11. (Old: S945313, New: S950705.)

It might be significant that the new construction (now in escrow) next door to "232 30th Place" had also changed its address from a Highland number to 233 30th St., but if that wasn't done before the listing went live, it's just a sidenote.

One reason this move didn't slip past us is that we wrote about 3009 Highland before its identity crisis. At the time we lauded the sellers' non-greedy pricing, since they paid $1.225m in July '05 and were seeking a markup of just 12% – fairly little real cash once a sale closes. The new listing carries $1.369m as the start price, though 3009 Highland had been down a tad to $1.359m before that listing was canceled.

So that's two now. How many make a trend?

Intriguingly, the agent on "232 30th Place" is the same one hawking the new construction at the corner of 45th and Highland (most recently discussed here).

At this time, that address is 4419 Highland Ave., but if it gets stuck...

Hello 220 45th St.!

A Personal Revelation

There are many blogs that are about the authors of those blogs.

This is not one of those types of blogs.

There are many real estate blogs that serve mainly to promote the business of the authors, typically agents who help to buy and sell homes.

This is not one of those types of blogs.

MBC is something different, a fact we know that some readers appreciate, and some don't.

The decision to publish this blog anonymously was made a long time ago, before there were readers, and it has been made again and again since. The principal reason is to let the content speak for itself.

Not incidentally, MBC also allows anonymous comments. That is because, first, a blog is best when it features a live, organic, two-way conversation, and, second, because anonymity encourages a frank exchange of information. (Though neither frankness nor truth are guaranteed.)

Anonymity, in general, seems to make MBC better, not worse.

It has been a bit of a surprise to learn, over these months, that some readers think MB Watcher is a realtor. That is not true. Indeed, we can go a bit further and specify that your faithful correspondent enjoys no income from the business of real estate.

We might never have said that much, but the goal here is to end a witch hunt before it begins.

No innocent person should be accused of authoring this blog on grounds that doing so would be against the interests of his or her employer, or in contravention of any policies or binding agreements to which that person is a party.

History shows that once a cloud of suspicion forms, many are unduly tainted and harmed. Let's not have that happen here.

Oh, sure, it might seem MBC could clear up all questions by ending the policy of anonymity.

Not now. That is a decision to be made on its own terms, not under any pressure.

We've already spent too much time on this subject, fairly proving that this issue is a distraction to be avoided. Likewise, we shall avoid descent into long-winded, high-falutin', self-justifying diatribes about the "purpose" or "meaning" of Manhattan Beach Confidential. It is what it is. An alternative view, an alternative place to go and learn and share and argue.

Please note that our disclaimer encourages requests for corrections to any factual information that is in dispute.

We're doing our best here, but not in violation of any oath or agreement or terms of any license or certification.

It's a blog, folks, and even if it seems inconvenient at times, it ain't a crime.

Reality Slowly Dawns

It took 300 days to break their will, but today the sellers at 2812 Elm have reduced their price.

First, kudos are in order: This property has never been "re-listed." (A credit to LA Cindy Shearin, Real Estate West.)

The obstinacy of the sellers has been on full public display since Sept. 13, 2006, when they began at $1.769m and then never budged.

The sellers wanted their $1.769m in part because they paid almost $1.6m in June 2005. Though they sought a 12% premium only 15 months later, surely they just considered that to be normal appreciation that the market would recognize in time.

For a home in a nice location with great curb appeal (as well as 4br/4ba, 2500 sq. ft.), the sellers almost won their bet, but then they didn't.

The new price is $1.699m, down $70k of the $185k extra the sellers had sought. More importantly, they're finally saying they might be ready to deal. (A good thing, because buyers may still think they're high by $100k-$250k.)

Another dawning: Over at the oft-referenced 758 14th St. in Arbolado Court (in order, see here, here and here), the sellers are now down to $1.799m from $1.860m.

We are slowly approaching a list price equivalent to the $1.695m they paid last July 21.

It's progress, in that we've now seen almost $200k chopped off asking, but it's still possible that buyers are saying "no, thanks" because they don't think the market has moved up at all since last Summer.

Relistery Mystery

Here's the strangest re-list we've come acro