Age/Depreciation Adjustments in Sales Comparison

[CANative]

A new home is built 1 year ago to exact 60's standards including shag carpeting. It has the appearance and functionality of a 50 yr old home and the utility of the 60's. How old is it?

Your turn


"Show me one house that is newer than its actual age".. Was that ever my argument? Show me how something can be older than it is and I might call you a liar

1 year old. Why do you ask?

 

[fifteen]

Now wtf does greg get me but you have a problem with it? It's simple. Some guy was getting young and illegal stuff and wrote a comment to try to back up his indiscretion. Don't accept everything you read as gospel without understanding.


Duh, nothing can be older than it actually is.

If you say it can be, provide proof or shut up. Insults dont' make your point, they make you....

Want to face me in court? I'm a nice guy on the outside

 

[CANative]

While it may only be a year old it's effective age is certainly much greater than 1 year.

 

[fifteen]

It can't be effectively older than it is. It cannot exist beyond itself

Come on guys - 174 posts and none that can prove me wrong? Prove me wrong, please

 

[PropertyEconomics]

A new home is built 1 year ago to exact 60's standards including shag carpeting. It has the appearance and functionality of a 50 yr old home and the utility of the 60's. How old is it?

Your turn


"Show me one house that is newer than its actual age".. Was that ever my argument? Show me how something can be older than it is and I might call you a liar

You already have called me a liar .... its just the class you have. I cant help it or change it ... but youve never shown me where I lied. You are funny to criticize anyone for insults.

 

[Michigan CG]

Mike Kennedy has already given you a perfect example in post 67. You refuse to answer to that post.

http://appraisersforum.com/showpost.php?p=1864563&postcount=67

You also conveniently did not address my post that showed you have no clue about effective age when you stated that your home has an effective age of 1 year when it is actually 3 years old. Your own statement proves that you do not know what effective age is....the simple theory evades you; your training, your education (or lack thereof) and above all common sense obviously show that you do not belong in this profession.

You don't respond to Mr. Kennedy's post 67 because you have no way to rebut him. You did not post to your home's effective age and actual age because you do not have the ability. You pick and choose your responses when you are backed into a corner and you choose to not respond to those who have proven you wrong (once again Mr. Kennedy's post number 67). You can't reply to them because you are denying you are wrong and refuse to admit that you are not as smart as you think you are. It is especially humorous that you post AI textbooks and publications as being wrong. I have never seen anyone post that their publications are not the best in the industry no matter their personal feelings towards the AI.

There are 51,000+ members of this forum, 51,000+ (minus yourself) are laughing at your posts, theories and practices.

http://appraisersforum.com/showpost.php?p=1864639&postcount=103

Do you care to address the above or will you ignore it again as it does not help your position as a person backed into a corner once again by people who actually know what they are doing.

 

[Stone]

Yep. Pretty hard to understand how the HVCC got through.

As others have noted - I hope anyone looking to get behind the "friend of the congressman" (AKA Fifteen-AKA Apprazur) reads this thread before getting on board with this guy.

 

[DMZwerg]

Boyd, I planted some "improved hybrid" pines on the farm Valentines Day 1995. They are now ready for thinning with the thinnings used for pulp purposes. They will reach their maximum economic value somewhere between 2025 and 2030 as lumber for construction.

Sounds about typical FWIR if not a bit on the faster side.

FWIW, the "old growth" pines are much stronger than the fast growing stuff, and I have observed that because the rings are so close together on the old (slow) growth trees <snip> Wood strength is in the "late wood" the dark rings, and the termites prefer the "early wood" the lighter rings with a higher level of digestible cellulose.

Exactly. In the case of more modern oak that is harvested relatively young it tends to be much lighter color and have rinds that are further apart, and thus really old pine with very closely packed rings (especially heartwood) could potentially be as strong and tough as the newer oak. Also, IIRC, as wood ages it shrinks & tightens even more, thus again the potential superiority of older wood over new. A third factor is that there is some form of internalizing pressure as a tree grows wider and thus, as I recall, that is one reason heartwood forms, which everyone knows tends to be a much tougher part of the wood.

Glad to see I am not the only person around with lumber/carpentry experience :icon_mrgreen:

 

[DMZwerg]

Once again Ed, you set the standard for Idiot. Effective age: timeless.

Naw, just a guy who really needs to learn to look up those harder words like "effective". Keeps assuming the limit on the effective age of something is its actual age whereas anyone with any experience actually making physical objects knows that effective age has no real limitation and is instead a relative term. You know, like a child can have an effective maturity level far beyond their years.

Time to pull out the unabridged Websters and whack him over the head a bid until he decides it is better to read the definition first rather than blather on in ignorance

 

[DMZwerg]

Please give me an example of a home that's older than it's actual age. Take your time.... make sure it's correct, irrefutable and legal
A simple request

Go to New Orleans a few years back and find the newest originally Good or higher quality house that was under water and then had a remaining economic life of 0 years. If Economic life is typically 60 years then the 1-5 year old house was effectively 59-60 years old. QED.


So, here are your three types of Depreciation Ed:
a) Physical depreciation is loss in value due to physical deterioration.
b) Functional or technical obsolescence is loss in value due to lack of utility or
desirability of part or all of the property, inherent to the improvement or equipment.
c) External, locational or economic obsolescence is loss in value due to causes
outside the property and independent of it, and is not included in the tables.

Take a guess as to which of the three types of depreciation CONDITION is effectively part of

Condition, Quality and Age are three separate entry lines on the 1004 under Sales Comparison Approach.
Quality Rating is mentioned in the Cost Approach but there is no entry line mentioning Condition or Age so I wonder what line / entry they should be a part of? (rhetorical question)

Somebody drag Ed back to a class on Cost Approach & Depreciation as he is either one who delights in playing the obnoxious troll trying to bring pain, anger, and waste everyone's time OR is only as old as his monicer (15) and should be "banned for being underage" )

Next!