My prediction on 3.6

[TC]

A newbie using AI, providing a higher number of reports is more desirable than your decades of knowledge and extensive experience.

You are correct, sir!

 

[J Grant]

This is why the AI form filling, comp picking, adjustment calculating, comment providing programs are so attractive. If you don't jump on board, you'll be left behind. It doesn't matter if the information and or calculations are wrong. A newbie using AI, providing a higher number of reports is more desirable than your decades of knowledge and extensive experience.

Per that article posted here in the threads, the users don't want to slog through your commentary. Check the boxes, provide a short AI blurb, sign the report, and turn it in. The old ways are over.

Some clients would not let the newbie on their panel. Just saying -

But if that paradigm, a newbie turns out AI slop and nobody cares, then of course that will create a downward slide. I called this OP out on it ( as did some others ) - trying to fear monger and get people to give up and sign AI slop without input, representing that is the only way to compete. If true, then all of us might end up having a very short career.

If not true, it is serving a purpose to drive good people away, leaving the rest the work to those willing to let AI do it all with no or minimal input. Which is diabolical as a strategy, or pathetic if it is simple desperation.

I believe most agree that a profession which has been degraded to the point where it embodies the AMC-instilled fear of If you don't, do it cheap; someone else will is the polar opposite of a profession that values its people and the freedom to keep and nurture appraisers who will retain standards. Esp for the younger generation.

UAD 3.6 is the symptom rather than the problem - by itself, UAD 3.6 is just a more complex format that is learnable.

 

[TC]

Sorry, JG, but an AMC will take anyone that hits the number.

 

[nachocheesefries]

No, we do not all KNOW that 3.6 alamode is going to be a death blow to our business. Alamode can use AI or other software to auto-populate - They were a pioneer in it with Spark and similar programs. I just took part in one of their online class- you can make templates and save comments - if it takes an hour after that to type in the information, that is time spent analyzing and becoming familiar with the property - it is not just rote work.

If that is what you think...I am happy to hear the input.

 

[J Grant]

If that is what you think...I am happy to hear the input.

Thanks- I believe I have been inputting my viewpoint throughout the thread - that appraisers need to maintain standards whether they rely on AI as an assist or not. It sounds too tempting to simply let AI do it, and if that is the case then truly the appraiser is no longer in charge of their own work product.

 

[Surf Cat]

I did not take away from this article anything about appraisers must let AI fill it all in or be left behind.

Here's what I stated below....what I meant was even though the 3.6 has areas to explain & comment....the users don't want addendums full of commentary. Also, watch the video posted in post #94. Their description of what true tracks & AI does, is what they want.

My post:

"Per that article posted here in the threads, the users don't want to slog through your commentary".

From the article:

Rachel Robinson, chief operating officer with True Footage, Dallas, noted she is excited about the change. “We’ve lived in a world where the forms we’ve been working with are full of paragraphs of whatever information an appraiser feels like sharing with us, which is a challenging space to live in when sitting in the lender seat, trying to figure out what exactly we have from an information perspective.”
 
I have a pretty good inclination that you, based on your postings here, like to explain and tell the story of what you're doing in your appraisals. My addendums in the 2.6 are organized in the order of the form with each section separated and explained. Per the paragraph above, they are done with that.

Per the video, they want AI to make little blurbs instead of appraisers writing long-winded explanations. They are corralling appraisers to fit their analysis in a pretty little box.

 

[Surf Cat]

One of the "early completers" of the 3.6 let it slip that he gridded the sales in a legacy form and transfer the info over. Makes sense since I have yet to see a grid in the 3.6. Please someone tell me there is one.

I don't know what software you currently use Sadie, but in win total, you can view all six to eight comps, from top to bottom. Gross sales prices all the way down to adjusted sales prices. I get the entire overview of all the comps in the grid.

It's asinine that in the 3.6, the grid is broken up between two or three pages. Plus, there's no net and gross adjustments indicating which comparables are the least and or most similar/dissimilar based an adjustment amounts.

To me, all this is very similar to Microsoft windows. From Windows 3.1 all the way to Windows 7, you could pretty much figure out how to get through and do all the operations on your computer. Big change with Windows 10 and 11.

We'll see what happens.

 

[J Grant]

Here's what I stated below....what I meant was even though the 3.6 has areas to explain & comment....the users don't want addendums full of commentary. Also, watch the video posted in post #94. Their description of what true tracks & AI does, is what they want.

My post:

"Per that article posted here in the threads, the users don't want to slog through your commentary".

From the article:

Rachel Robinson, chief operating officer with True Footage, Dallas, noted she is excited about the change. “We’ve lived in a world where the forms we’ve been working with are full of paragraphs of whatever information an appraiser feels like sharing with us, which is a challenging space to live in when sitting in the lender seat, trying to figure out what exactly we have from an information perspective.”
 
I have a pretty good inclination that you, based on your postings here, like to explain and tell the story of what you're doing in your appraisals. My addendums in the 2.6 are organized in the order of the form with each section separated and explained. Per the paragraph above, they are done with that.

Per the video, they want AI to make little blurbs instead of appraisers writing long-winded explanations. They are corralling appraisers to fit their analysis in a pretty little box.

I appreciate your post.

My appraisals do not contain a lot of long-winded commentary - I have reviewed hundreds of appraisals and always groaned when I saw that, since a lot of it can be superfluous. However, sometimes a longer explanation is needed for a complex appraisal. I assume that is still possible in UAD 3.6 if it is broken up into sections?
The fact that it is not allowed by adding an addendum even if needed - I agree that is troubling.

I rely heavily on good comp choices, and if the right comps are picked, then the comments can be more succinct. The adjustment aspect is scary because AI can make poorly derived adjustments that look good - I hope it is still possible to provide market extract adjustments, which are not always mathematically perfect, yet reflect the market and make sense when applied .

 

[HVNY]

3 Words. Dot Com Bubble

 

[HVNY]

The data is going to be wrong unless an appraiser verifies it. And then you gonna have to go and tell Fannie that it is incorrect when they scream at you that you're using the wrong quality code and then you will be tagged as high risk because your data is correct..