3.6 Crunch Time

[J Grant]

A lot of people don't understand that point. When times are good an SFR appraiser who gets full fee is usually making more than the street level CG. It's when times get lean that the CG is still getting work due to the broader scope of practice. Appraising 1-4s is also a high energy routine when compared to camping out for a week in front of a screen. Different lifestyle, really.

You do not understand. The above is true when appraisers get or can get direct lender work. at full fee.

But since many SFR are not able to get a full fee, due to AMC huge market share, the SFR appraiser in good times will make considerably less than a street-level CG. And of course, in lean times the same applies but even more severely.

 

[George Hatch]

If I didn't understand it then I wouldn't have qualified it that way when I wrote it.

 

[Surf Cat]

I'm not saying you forgot how to ride a bike. I am saying you have a lot to say about things that don't concern you. You will never write a 3.6, yet you have so much to share about it. You will never work for an AMC, yet you have so much to say about it. I don't understand why.

Are you are bored?
Seeking validation from Danny?
It makes you feel superior?

It's just very strange behavior.

Many professionals in different vocations comment all the time on parts of an industry they don’t personally perform.

I may not agree with George's take on AMC's or the 3.6..... but he has every right to engage in debate, and/or disagreements regarding the overall status and direction of the appraisal industry. I don't think it's strange vehavior at all.

 

[RCA]

Imo it is not the fault of the software companies.

I fail to see how any software program can overcome the limitations of UAD 3.6. It is cloud based/web based,

No, it doesn't have to be cloud or web/based.

But software vendors prefer cloud based/ so they can charge a monthly fee - making it easier for someone to try their product. Anything that run in a browser can also be made local - just run it on your local computer and access the interface with a browser using a URL like https://locahost:<port number>.

.... so it can not execute the functions a stable form offers, such as pasting a comp from another column, etc.

nonsense

It will print as a form, but it fills out in real time.

nonsense

Jumping from one softare to another will not change that. Because it is web-based, all these newbie companies can join the party. All they are doing is charging you to use the "dynamic format" Fannie provided.

You don't know what 'dynamic format' means. It just means that based on your specs (such as whether you are doing an FHA, VA, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae or other type of form - or appraising a specific property type, etc.) it will adjust the layout and forms in the UI.

The way to make it function efficiently that I can tell is to autopopulate the comps we choose from one of the data import programs ( Alamode offers Data Source).

It's all the same.

Perhaps the tech Bro companies offer their own version of it, but regardless of which program or AI is deployed, the data imports from the MLS that WE pay for, in addition to the free public records.

Well, it's faster to upload a spreadsheet than to have to type in all the data, as most had to do with, say, Alamode Total. Of course advanced Total users knew how to upload spreadsheets into Total (which is why I used Total back in the day).

Alamode is working on a merge function ( some call it a clone ) of a saved 3.6, so if and when that comes out,

They have always had merge functionality - but it wasn't that easy to use.

it will make things easier (I hope ). Alamode can save comments for 3.6, which will work similarly to how it works in 2.6. We have to create those comments from scratch again and save them.

Is Alamode providing a web-only version of UAD 3.6?

If it is taking the established software companies, Alamode and ACI, this long to make 3.6 functional, then there are baked-in issues that make the "dynamic format" clash with the forms that can be printed and have to be transmitted to clients.

Probably they have mostly older, mature software engineers who may not be up to date on newer technology. They "should" be ahead of Aivre. Except for the historic problem, they are loaded down having to support a widely used existing product built around an older technology.

 

[Airstream]

Just got done talking to an appraiser friend who is doing his first 3.6 with Total. It is a tedious piece of crap. The program is glitchy and all adjustments have to be made by hand. Took forever to do the grid. They won't have the auto-adjust feature for 2 more months. He worked until 9:30 last night just going through the program. No thanks. I would not do any 3.6 until the Total program has the auto-adjust feature. We have stepped back into DOS territory. He said it is just brutal and tedious.

 

[chad hampton]

Just got done talking to an appraiser friend who is doing his first 3.6 with Total. It is a tedious piece of crap. The program is glitchy and all adjustments have to be made by hand. Took forever to do the grid. They won't have the auto-adjust feature for 2 more months. He worked until 9:30 last night just going through the program. No thanks. I would not do any 3.6 until the Total program has the auto-adjust feature. We have stepped back into DOS territory. He said it is just brutal and tedious.

Well, he just needs to take the advice of the GSE‘s and give 3, 4, or 5 more software companies a try before he finds one that might work.

No big deal

 

[George Hatch]

You can make software recommendations. I can make recommendations. No problem. We're individuals who are not employed at the GSEs which are promulgating the UAD and who cannot get caught offering public criticizing/endorsing or otherwise favoring one appraisalware company over another.

If he did endorse one over the others you and others would be all over his case for that. And rightfully so.
You might consider picking an intellectually consistent position and sticking to it.

 

[Airstream]

You can make software recommendations. I can make recommendations. No problem. We're individuals who are not employed at the GSEs which are promulgating the UAD and who cannot get caught offering public criticizing/endorsing or otherwise favoring one appraisalware company over another.

If he did endorse one over the others you and others would be all over his case for that. And rightfully so.
You might consider picking an intellectually consistent position and sticking to it.

Right now what is an appraiser supposed to do?
1) Changing software is very difficult to do; especially since not one single software company is really beyond beta or development stage. When an appraiser has been doing appraisals for 10 or 15 years with one software and knows it well, to change takes tremendous time. And it is still necessary to keep the old software because files are not easily transferred. And how is one supposed to try different software without actually having to do an order? You don't really know how bad or good a software is until you have used it for weeks. We don't have weeks of experimenting. If this was a year out from full implantation, and software companies had their acts together it would be different. Also not only does an appraiser have to learn software, but an entirely new form and how it operates. This is just idiocy.
2) We only have 2.5 months before this goes full time all the time. That's not much time. This is the busiest time of year for appraisers. So deciding to change software this time of the year is the worst possible time to do that. I have changed software before. I went from ACI to Total back in about 2000. It was not an easy thing, and that was when the programs were pretty simple, forms were far less complex, the scope of work was simpler, and they weren't very expensive. And it took me weeks to learn it well enough to become efficient, and I only did it because there was someone else in our real estate office that was using it and I could see how the software actually worked on a day to day basis.
3) The GSEs pushed this down our throats without enough time to adequately prepare. This is terrible mismanagement. Based upon what I have read on the Total web site about their software they are really months away from just getting a truly operable system. And when I mean operable, I mean the bugs are worked out and the necessary features on included. No software will be perfect; especially when it is essentially new. But at least it should be functional. Therefore, testing beta software is really a worthless endeavor because we really don't have anyone with a final finished product.

And as far as the GSEs yes, I don't expect them to recommend. But they should also be listening to what appraisers are saying. WE ARE NOT READY, BECAUSE THE SOFTWARE COMPANIES ARE NOT READY.

 

[George Hatch]

Maybe they'll extend their date. Maybe they'll wait until most of the software companies are ready.

Apparently some 3.6s have already been completed, sent through their lenders and accepted at the GSEs. Those reports didn't develop and deliver themselves.

SOMEBODY did them and they will have used appraisalware to do it. Proof of concept, proof of capability.

 

[gregb]

Some expense choices loom. I have renewed ACI thru next April and was required to purchase a separate ACI license plus Apex for a new computer (spent ~$6,500). If one direct lender and VA require 360, I will be compelled in order to keep these clients to likely move to another appraisal software, as ACI is lagging. It looks like more than half of my clients will stick with legacy forms, so it makes sense that I maintain the ACI software. The deciding point will be if VA moves to mandatory 360, where I either opt in or out of 360.