3.6 and ACI

[TerryRohrer]

I disagree. As for data collection, we'll see - I'm suspect. But data standardization is progress.

Progress for who? This doesn’t do sh*t for appraisers.

 

[cashcatz]

Progress for who? This doesn’t do sh*t for appraisers.

Data standardization and normalization is good for everyone. Appraisal industry is WAY behind vs others. That's a totally separate issue from data slurping.

 

[TerryRohrer]

Data standardization and normalization is good for everyone. Appraisal industry is WAY behind vs others. That's a totally separate issue from data slurping.

Apparently, you don’t have a clue regarding the flow of real estate data. In a nutshell, it goes like this: Garbage > Appraiser > Standardized data for the use of anyone BUT appraisers, particularly for use against appraisers. Do you see the lack of loop in the flow where any benefit accrues to appraisers?

 

[cashcatz]

Apparently, you don’t have a clue regarding the flow of real estate data. In a nutshell, it goes like this: Garbage > Appraiser > Standardized data for the use of anyone BUT appraisers, particularly for use against appraisers. Do you see the lack of loop in the flow where any benefit accrues to appraisers?

Sure, no clue, just been running a software company in the space for over a decade. Let me tell ya' - the data inconsistency in the industry really is a problem (across MLS, public records, appraisals, and all the other little thing). We spend a godawful amount of time just building data mapping logic and other hacks to get the data more consistant, and that's without selling or sharing any of our customer data.

You are conflating technical things with the data theft, which is a separate issue - and one which I call out frequently here and other places. Believe it or not, you can actually have good industry data structures and standards without it being mined. One is a technical concern, the other is a legal one.

 

[J Grant]

Yep, order/workflow/calendar/office management. We export to UAD 3.6 now (MISMO .xml). So far SFREP is the only one that I know of that can import that format.

No offense but again the tech bro aspect is off the mark. The issue for most appraisers is not workflow management of their meager volume of orders. Even a busy appraiser can handle that with existing software or other programs. They might appreciate it as a feature, but it is not a game-changer.

The issues for appraisers are low fees (solve THAT and appraisers would buy your solution.) The issue that is not software-solvable is the layers of inspection difficulty and the layers of difficulty in filling out the "dynamic format" in UAD 3.6, adding hours they might not recoup in fees.

Computer programs that deploy data that appraisers will either use wisely or dump into a report to cut time are another issue.

 

[TerryRohrer]

Sure, no clue, just been running a software company in the space for over a decade. Let me tell ya' - the data inconsistency in the industry really is a problem (across MLS, public records, appraisals, and all the other little thing).

Since when did "programmer" = "appraiser"?

We spend a godawful amount of time just building data mapping logic and other hacks to get the data more consistant, and that's without selling or sharing any of our customer data.

What do you think appraisers are doing? Waiting for you to provide them with perfectly cleaned, standardized data that plunks right into a report without thought or review? And even if you are providing the perfect solution for assimilating data garbage into perfect, UAD 3.6 ready data that autopopulates every appraisal software in existence, are you providing that pro bono? If not, who is paying you? FNMA? Freddie? FHA? VA? Nope, as I suspected, appraisers are bearing that cost.

You are conflating technical things with the data theft, which is a separate issue - and one which I call out frequently here and other places. Believe it or not, you can actually have good industry data structures and standards without it being mined. One is a technical concern, the other is a legal one.

Data standardization (UAD 3.6) is a cost borne by appraisers that does not produce results that benefit appraisers, regardless of how others benefit from it. Sorry to inform you, UAD 3.6 does not apply to realtors. Or Assessors. Or Treasurers. Or Clerks and Recorders. Or USDA. Or NASS. Or the Geospatial Data Gateway. Or Buyers. Or Sellers. Or anyone else I deal with on a daily basis that I'm not conflating anything with anything. I have not once mentioned or implied anything to do with data mining. I am acutely aware of data inconsistency, and have been so since I started in 1987, and I can assure you, nothing you or the GSEs are doing solves that problem. You/they simply don't have the reach you are imagining/hallucinating. Until you control every aspect of real estate, and everyone within that realm, you, nor they, are going to solve the data inconsistency problem. That leaves appraisers bearing the cost.

 

[cashcatz]

Since when did "programmer" = "appraiser"?

Dude, I have a BBA in Real Estate from one of the best schools in the country and worked as a commercial appraiser in addition to knowing programming. I will admit my residential knowledge is more limited, but I do work with this stuff every day.

You also won't hear me advocating for 3.6 - it's a dumpster fire created by neck tie bureaucrats, but you are fighting against windmills by opposing data standards. And yeah, I wish we had data standards that cut across not just appraisal, but all real estate. There have been some efforts with MISMO and Appraisal Institute's Property Use Classification System (PUCS) and other which are all half-baked because they also suffer the created-by-bureaucrats issue with their own special-interests in mind.

So maybe we are actually on the same page, just talking past each other?

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

perfectly cleaned, standardized data

Unicorn data... there is no such thing, never will be when 50 states are involved.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

you are fighting against windmills by opposing data standards.

Henry Harrison proposed standardized house style names 40 year ago and how did that go?

 

[TerryRohrer]

Dude, I have a BBA in Real Estate from one of the best schools in the country and worked as a commercial appraiser in addition to knowing programming. I will admit my residential knowledge is more limited, but I do work with this stuff every day.

You also won't hear me advocating for 3.6 - it's a dumpster fire created by neck tie bureaucrats, but you are fighting against windmills by opposing data standards. And yeah, I wish we had data standards that cut across not just appraisal, but all real estate. There have been some efforts with MISMO and Appraisal Institute's Property Use Classification System (PUCS) and other which are all half-baked because they also suffer the created-by-bureaucrats issue with their own special-interests in mind.

So maybe we are actually on the same page, just talking past each other?

I did not say, or imply, that "you" know nothing of appraising. But as you indicated above, your focus is on programming concerns. What you don't seem to want to acknowledge is that "data standardization" is done by appraisers, at the expense of appraisers. I work with this "stuff" every day, too, and am more aware of all the disparate pieces than you. Nor have you seen anything in my commentary that suggests I am "opposing data standards." None of the entities you mention have any bearing on "data standards" that impact appraisers, except those like UAD 3.6 that raise their expenditures of time and money. I argued in 1989, while the lead residential appraiser in the Assessor's office, that the Clerk and Recorder, Assessor, Treasurer, and newly forming GIS/mapping department should be a single entity. Everyone agreed, no one changed a thing, and that need is worse today than it was then. But every one of those entities has a "data standard" and a turf they are unwilling to relent. Nothing you are pointing to as "data standards" even approaches those entities, much less raises an iota of give-a-sh*t on their part. No does anything you are pointing out loop back to appraisers in the form of useful data. So, where is the great benefit to appraisers you are claiming? I do prefer delivery by portal over mailing paper, but again, appraisers largely bear that cost (remember tech/portal fees?).