Selling After Short-Term Stays

By Dave Fratello | July 12th, 2016

You probably know that short-term rentals have been effectively banned in Manhattan Beach.

But what about short-term ownership? Not regulated yet.

1313 Pine Avenue Manhattan Beach CASome recent listings have come to market after being acquired not-so-very-long-ago. You have to wonder: What changed? (We don't make it this blog's business to dive into the personal stories, even when we do hear.)

A recent closed sale at 1313 Pine (pictured) was a moderate success story. The 5br/4ba, 3260 sqft. home was purchased early last year while it was being framed out as a spec home. The buyer just couldn't let it go to someone else, so they paid $3.290M in Jan. 2015. 

This year, they offered it back on the public market for $3.499M, but found that the market wasn't quite there.

The sale at $3.345M in June this year was technically more than acquisition, but at a full, typical 5% cost of sale, that would leave them in the red by more than $100K. 

What might you expect with a sale after such a short hold?

1632 Voorhees Avenue Manhattan Beach CAAs we noted in our weekend post, 1632 Voorhees (6br/5ba, 4525 sqft.) presents a similar scenario, although later in the year here.

We called it "a very high-caliber newer home (2015 build) with tons of space and a bright, sunny yard."

The current owners bought it before it was complete 13 months ago for $3.251M (here's the sold listing).

Now they are looking for $3.499M, just as 1313 Pine began. (The parallels are close.) We'll see how that ends up. We did say this weekend, "If anyone can get $3.5M in East Manhattan now, it would have to be a beaut like this."

1800 N Ardmore Avenue Manhattan Beach CAA pretty different case is 1800 N. Ardmore, a lot sale now up at $2.595M.

In this case, there wasn't a new house that the people moved into and then, later, hit upon the idea of moving out of.

Quite the opposite: There used to be a house there (see the prior listing), but after buying it – and the big 6500+ sqft. corner lot – for $2.225M, the new owners razed it, scooping out a little indentation in the sandy hillside. And then, once the plans for a new build came in, it looks like they decided to unload instead of finishing the job.

They're thinking land values are up since the land purchase, hence the current markup of $370K (+17%) over the Aug. 2014 price.

516 Marine Avenue Manhattan Beach CAThat sort of bought-the-land, then-thought-again story appears to apply to 516 Marine, also. 

This Sand Section lot (with a vintage 1960s house on it) was purchased off-market in March 2015 for $2.150M.

By October 2015, they were looking to pocket a little profit and get out, listing the property for $2.600M.

You had to follow the bouncing price on that one. It was all over. For a time it was as high as $3.699M – as if you were buying a spec build before the old house had even been flattened. (One old listing featured renderings of a hot hot new home that exists only on a computer somewhere.)

Now 516 Marine is offered for $2.179M, in what should be its embarrassing 4th listing in 6 weeks. (They keep re-listing with each price cut, the most recent $20K.) 516 Marine is not on track for a net positive.

808 Rosecrans Avenue Manhattan Beach CAWe also mentioned this weekend the case of 808 Rosecrans (4br/4ba, 3165 sqft.), purchased in November 2015 for $1.862M. (Here's the sold listing.)

After some paint and two bathroom remodels (not the master), it's back and asking quite a bit more than purchase price at $2.249M.

Fundamentally, it's the same house, with some improvement of two of the more glaring issues.

We can also look to the Sand Section for another would-be quick turnaround.

422 21st Place Manhattan Beach CAThat's 422 21st Place (4br/4ba, 1920 sqft.), a tall SFR with some views that was purchased in April 2015 for $2.250M. (That was an overbid on a list price of $2.199M.)

You might recognize this one because it was on the market for 3 months before quitting last week. They had tried at $2.449M before cutting to $2.399M in June, then dropping out last week.

Tuesday, it was back at $2.399M with the same agent – a re-list.

It's hard to pin the "build date" tail on this one: Tax records show 1972 and 1985, while the MLS says 2011. With a discrepancy like that, it's usually a date or remodel that they are posting in the MLS as "year built." (Should they?) 

There was a bidding war here last year, but now 15 months later, they're not getting 7% more (yet).

FLASHBACKS: In October 2007, we noted a similar pattern and posted here on MB Confidential about it in "A Year and Out." In some later posts, as the market was wobbling and declining, we showed that sellers didn't recoup their investments.

But we also covered similar same-house sale phenomena in 2012-14, where short-term holds resulted in profits for the sellers. Example: "One Year, Then Out – At a Profit?" So pick your time!


Please see our blog disclaimer.

Please see our blog disclaimer.

Latest Listings Among
Manhattan Beach Homes For Sale