Three days in a row. Different GLA than advertised.

[alebrewer]

You can not defend your position so make light of it with a face plant emoji! That's okay... a graceful way out!

Not quite that, J. There is no need to defend the truth. It's that some posters here on AF will repeat the same inane arguments ad nauseum just to have the last word. Doesn't matter to them whether their ramblings actually make sense or not. This happens to be one of those situations.

 

[J Grant]

Not quite that, J. There is no need to defend the truth. It's that some posters here on AF will repeat the same inane arguments ad nauseum just to have the last word. Doesn't matter to them whether their ramblings actually make sense or not. This happens to be one of those situations.

I am not arguing to have the last word. I am "arguing" because what you said is incorrect and flies in the face of what appraising is supposed to be. You can try to denigrate it by calling it rambling. But the fact is that you are not in compliance with appraisal practice in this. I have not always been "right" in the past, fine, it is a learning experience. But everything I said here relates to standards and established appraisal practice. A thread does not need to be aobut a "winner" and a "loser." They should explore the topic in appraisal terms.

 

[alebrewer]

I am not arguing to have the last word. I am "arguing" because what you said is incorrect and flies in the face of what appraising is supposed to be. You can try to denigrate it by calling it rambling. But the fact is that you are not in compliance with appraisal practice in this. I have not always been "right" in the past, fine, it is a learning experience. But everything I said here relates to standards and established appraisal practice. A thread does not need to be aobut a "winner" and a "loser." They should explore the topic in appraisal terms.

Just curious if you'll respond to this post - u know - so u can have the last word...

 

[sputnam]

I don't understand why a point value would be more subjective than a range.

It's easier, more supportable, and usually more accurate when an appraiser determines a range of values for a property than when they opine a point value. In other words, the eventual sales price of the property is much more likely to fall with in the range than it is to land directly on a point value. Unless, of course, you are backing into your point value because you know what the sales price is already.

 

[alebrewer]

Unless, of course, you are backing into your point value because you know what the sales price is already.

Or opining to the SP as your opinion of value because the SP is within the range of adjusted sales. Just because one reconciles to the SP doesn't mean they backed into their value...

 

[Artemis Fowl]

Does the Coefficient of Variance pertain to a range of data that was determined by qualitative as well as quantitative means? If so, is a caveat usually required to explain that as a limitation? What I mean is that the adjusted values typically aren't determined entirely by quantitative methods; and if not, is the quality of the range still described by the coefficient of variance--which I "think" is the absolute answer to the question I orignally asked....

It actually doesn't matter for the purpose you originally posited. It takes whatever range you present it and measures variance from the average of that range. This use is kinda just a fancy math presentation.

• The data set [100, 100, 100] has a population standard deviation of 0 and a coefficient of variation of 0 / 100 = 0
• The data set [90, 100, 110] has a population standard deviation of 8.16 and a coefficient of variation of 8.16 / 100 = 0.0816
• The data set [1, 5, 6, 8, 10, 40, 65, 88] has a population standard deviation of 30.8 and a coefficient of variation of 30.8 / 27.9 = 1.10

Basically assigns a score to your range. Closer to zero the narrower the range.

It is one of the indicators used for measuring data sets.
Commonly used statistics for assessors:
https://web.archive.org/web/2010111...ocgov/Statistical_Calculation_Definitions.pdf

Mass appraisal is different. Purpose is not to value an individual property but rather large sets of properties at once. Done right...MOST individual properties will be somewhat close. Not gonna capture everything everytime tho. Why I always thought Bert's methods would have better interest from assessors rather than fee appraisers. IAAO might give a listen. Imagining those classes tho...oof. People struggle with grasping the current methods.

 

[Webbed Feet]

Getting to an exact point value is what the public understands and that's why we do it. It's easier to understand than a narrow range value because sales prices are not perfect.
Some sell higher, some sell lower than market value because of different motivations of buyers and sellers.
The good appraisers are the ones able to choose "best" point value in which most buyers and sellers are willing to pay on effective date.

Nonsense. Real estate appraisers provide a point value because lenders and other users of valuation services demand it so they are taken off the hook regarding that decision point in the lending process or lawsuit, or etc. Providing them does not make one a "Good" appraiser relative to any other appraiser. Nor does it ever make a real estate appraisal opinion or report better. Appraisal opinions are closer to alchemy than they are chemistry science.

 

[alebrewer]

Appraisal opinions are closer to alchemy than they are chemistry science.

Unfortunate, but too often true.

 

[Fernando]

Nonsense. Real estate appraisers provide a point value because lenders and other users of valuation services demand it so they are taken off the hook regarding that decision point in the lending process or lawsuit, or etc. Providing them does not make one a "Good" appraiser relative to any other appraiser. Nor does it ever make a real estate appraisal opinion or report better. Appraisal opinions are closer to alchemy than they are chemistry science.

It's like asking your net worth in stock market. On given day and every minute it can vary for 0 to 2%. Any net value within that range is acceptable just like appraised value.

 

[RCA]

It's easier, more supportable, and usually more accurate when an appraiser determines a range of values for a property than when they opine a point value. In other words, the eventual sales price of the property is much more likely to fall with in the range than it is to land directly on a point value. Unless, of course, you are backing into your point value because you know what the sales price is already.

How about the range [$0, $99,999,999]? - Now that has got to be 100% accurate, for about any property. Well, at least if we assume the property cannot have a negative value (e.g. contaminated) or be worth more than $99,999,999 (Claude estimates less than 0.01% of homes are worth more than $99,999,999, or less than one in 10,000, e.g. a home owned by some Billionaire like Jeff Bezos).

In my closed sale rankings, if I see a house that is DEFINITELY better than the subject that has a date adjusted sale price of $6,000,000 (and every house with a higher ranking is without doubt better as well) and one that is definitly lower in appeal with a date adjusted sale price of $5,200,000 (and everyone one with a lower ranking definitly less appealing). Then, I have an objective range of

MV range: [$5,200,000, $6,000,000]

Now maybe I could narrow the range. But the statement that the subject MV is within this range, appears well supported and therefore the statement can be taken as 100% accurate.