Appraisal Bias

[alebrewer]

They are saying the appraiser should use judgment, , not that the appraiser should use math or statistics.

Do you know what a weighted average technique is?......

 

[Tom D]

can we have the attendee of this blog put a passive/aggressive mark for some of the snarky comments, so that we can skip over them, unless you like cat fights.
i however would have safe harbour postings of my passive/agressive snarky comments.

 

[alebrewer]

Now all you are doing is acting spiteful and lobbing insults, and it is not even a discussion of the topic any longer

Doesn't feel real great, does it? Of course, I haven't used words like 'ridiculous', 'you should have never been an appraiser', 'disgusting', 'fail to understand what an appraisal is', 'because you're a cynical ** who never should have been appraising', 'absurd', 'you are proud of being lousy at what you do', etc. (I can keep going if you'd like)...

 

[Tom D]

Doesn't feel real great, does it? Of course, I haven't used words like 'ridiculous', 'you should have never been an appraiser', 'disgusting', 'fail to understand what an appraisal is', 'because you're a cynical ** who never should have been appraising', 'absurd', 'you are proud of being lousy at what you do', etc. (I can keep going if you'd like)...

i can't call this snarky if it only presents the facts.

 

[J Grant]

Do you know what a weighted average technique is?......

yes

 

[J Grant]

Doesn't feel real great, does it? Of course, I haven't used words like 'ridiculous', 'you should have never been an appraiser', 'disgusting', 'fail to understand what an appraisal is', 'because you're a cynical ** who never should have been appraising', 'absurd', 'you are proud of being lousy at what you do', etc. (I can keep going if you'd like)...

My bad , and I apologize for it. Sincerely I shouldn't have said those things..

 

[J Grant]

Finally - a question instead of an accusation/slander. No - I'm not saying a buyer doesn't know the difference. A 'buyer', however, is different than a 'market' (hint: a market is made up of several buyers - as well as sellers). How can you not see that?

The market value onion references the typically motivated buyer and seller - though it is singular, it is a model and thus represents at certain terms what a buyer and seller would do - and a buyer and a seller out in the market recognize differences among prices and thus among the prices expressed as a value opinion

It is just poor practice to state any "number" along a 20k (or whatever ) range of value is the same as/ not better or worse than the other. We are supposed to apply our judgement and analysis as to what number we choose for a point value and then be able to explain why we chose it.

 

[alebrewer]

My bad , and I apologize for it. Sincerely I shouldn't have said those things..

Accepted. It's MUCH harder trying to be nice than allowing oneself to be mean - believe me - I've tried REALLY hard over the past few months (to be nice that is). It just makes for a MUCH more pleasant and edifying experience when folks can stick to debating topics instead of hurling personal attacks.

 

[alebrewer]

The market value onion references the typically motivated buyer and seller - though it is singular, it is a model and thus represents at certain terms what a buyer and seller would do - and a buyer and a seller out in the market recognize differences among prices and thus among the prices expressed as a value opinion

It is just poor practice to state any "number" along a 20k (or whatever ) range of value is the same as/ not better or worse than the other. We are supposed to apply our judgement and analysis as to what number we choose for a point value and then be able to explain why we chose it.

I think maybe you're stuck on 'typically motivated buyer and seller' being one entity. It's not really meant to suggest that only one pair of participants make up the market (at least as I see it). It encompasses ALL participants who qualify as 'typically motivated'. So, then, yes - for one buyer and one seller - I can see where you might come up with 'one number'. As there are multiple participants, however, the 'market' (all of the participants) will demonstrate a range of value for a property - Buyer A thinks it's $X, Seller B thinks it's $Y, and so on. See the difference?

So that, yes - you can distill everything to a single point if you'd like, and that certainly appeases many of the users of our services, but in reality, there is no single point - there is always a range.

 

[Tom D]

It is just poor practice to state any "number" along a 20k (or whatever ) range of value is the same as/ not better or worse than the other. We are supposed to apply our judgement and analysis as to what number we choose for a point value and then be able to explain why we chose it.

that is certainly good practice. but if you have 2 separate appraisals with 2 different values and why we picked that number, then the average person seeing that thinks a pov is that accurate?
and what does the other appraiser of each appraisal think of the other's accurate pov. this might be situational ethics. my pov was better on wed than yours was on fri.