Alamode/Mercury Fee report

[OSU Beavers]

Yea I hate PCV with their $200 broadcast order too.

I don't have a problem with giving Dave $10 per report sent in, but paying $13.75 even if the order gets cancelled PLUS $300 before you can even get one assignment is just greedy!

If he has any shame he should offer the Mercury Network to all appraisers, not just those who buy ala mode or an xSite, at the flat per order fee.

 

[SutnNC]

Fortunately for me, the stats provided by Mr. Biggers show my area to be one of a few to have some of the highest volume of skippy's per square mile in the Nation (the Cape Fear Region of NC). They're cranking out $250's like they're going out of style, great job guys and gals.......What a bunch of efnmuthefnpeasezufefnsheetphkurs. What the.........is wrong with these stupid arse efnmuthefnpeasezufefnsheetphkurs? Tat is priority number 1 for them as they panic about where the next deal is coming from, their reports are no better than my number 2.

Not your fault Dave, but you could have called me before you published this thing, gdmit. If they use this against me, I'm dropping your software!!! I'll show you!

 

[Blueprint]

To give you some idea of the volume we handle, I saw a stat last week that in the last 12 months, our map servers (used in WinTOTAL, XSites, etc.) provided 196 million maps to our clients (not all appraisers, but you get the point). Mercury Network has handled over 11 million transactions and is growing rapidly since its rebranding as an HVCC compliant system for lenders. Even after removing all AMC orders, all non-URAR orders, all orders with any odd characteristics, all orders with extra requirements (more forms, etc.), and so on, we still had hundreds of thousands of clean, URAR-only orders spanning the last 12 months. Trust me, there's a lot of data.

The AFR specifically states that it's not an FHA-only report, nor does it attempt to calculate what extra fees are often added on to a URAR. Once you start doing that, the numbers would indeed become VERY unreliable. You'd be comparing apples to oranges. In order to have a baseline, you have to start with the easiest to identify, "cleanest" piece of data that can be analyzed, and I think we can all agree that that is naturally a plain Jane basic URAR. Right?

Also, as for small towns, realize that what appraisers may say their fees are when asked by another appraiser, and what they actually charge, may be two different things.

Note also that the report FAQ specifically notes the value of standard deviations; MOST (roughly 2/3rds) of all fees will be within one standard deviation plus or minus of the average fee. Nationally, that means that with an average of $351 and a standard deviation of $91, about 60% of fees will range from $260 to $442. Therefore, as we've said, "customary" and "reasonable" are two different things -- the median of $350 may be customary, but the range can be wide depending on circumstances. We've claimed no more than that.

Ultimately, the facts are what the facts are. We don't make them up. This report can be used to an appraiser's advantage in business planning and fee negotiation, or an appraiser can throw it away and work in the dark. People do both things with valuable data all the time in all sorts of industries, largely because I believe some people approach things analytically and others emotionally. There's nothing wrong with either approach, but I suspect a healthy mix of the two is valuable ("I see the data but it makes me mad -- so what do I do about it? Shoot the messenger or raise my fees?").

I sure hope you use the AFR and profit from it, but if you don't, then I'll refund what I charged you for it. Oh wait... that's right, it's free. (Just trying to inject a little humor in an otherwise stressful topic.)

Dave Biggers
Chairman
a la mode, inc.

Thanks Dave for the detailed reply. The numbers just do not match up in my experience for my area. I don't want to argue with you on that as it really does not matter at this point.

I am in high support of the Mercury Network. I would love to have all my required middleman style work at least come through Mercury. I am really trying right now to sell your service to two small locals banks who are seriously considering the AMC route because they think they have to. It is killing me, because they do not.

It's a tough sell though. I thought it would be easy, yet they are extremely hesitant. It seems like it is hard for them to perceive your service in the same "legal" fashion as if it had gone through an "AMC" per say. It's much tougher that I though it would be. You guys need a hardcore sales team to market Mercury in more mass style fashion. There are a lot of banks out there that would love to use your service, yet don't really understand how it truly complies with HVCC like an AMC does.

 

[Couch Potato]

That may have been true in the past, after all they are the "Lenders Choice™", but with Fannie requireing all reports to be submitted in AI Ready format it does not make a difference what software you use anymore. No more sending secure PDFs.

I started with WinTotal back in 1998 but it was crash happy and I had to switch to ACI. I am sure they are better now, but their software for Windows 98 was terrible.

Except for the fact Fannie is not requiring AI Ready you might have a point.

Fannie Mae will require lenders to submit electronic appraisal data for loans delivered to us beginning sometime in 2010 (not earlier than July 1, 2010). The submission system, called Collateral Data Delivery (CDD), will require submission of appraisal data in an acceptable XML format.

Any XML format is acceptable. In fact PDF is also acceptable as long as it is created directly rather than as an image of the report. Fannie has changed their minds several times on the issue as they realized they did not understand what they were doing. Initially they stated "MISMO XML" was the required format. It did not take them long to realize that did not include Lighthouse and AI Ready formats. They then changed their statement to allow "conversion" of other XML formats. Many clients are likely going to still want a PDF, and others may want a PDF with an XML file too.

Fortunately for me, the stats provided by Mr. Biggers show my area to be one of a few to have some of the highest volume of skippy's per square mile in the Nation (the Cape Fear Region of NC). They're cranking out $250's like they're going out of style, great job guys and gals.......What a bunch of efnmuthefnpeasezufefnsheetphkurs. What the.........is wrong with these stupid arse efnmuthefnpeasezufefnsheetphkurs? Tat is priority number 1 for them as they panic about where the next deal is coming from, their reports are no better than my number 2.

Not your fault Dave, but you could have called me before you published this thing, gdmit. If they use this against me, I'm dropping your software!!! I'll show you!

The market is what it is, so get over it.

 

[OSU Beavers]

I guess you didn't get the memo:

In addition, please remember that all LandSafe appraisal reports must be submitted in AI Ready format and no other formats such as Adobe (pdf.) will be permitted.

 

[Winston Wolf]

Winston have you looked at his fee report? Is it accurate for your area?

The regular fees seem to be accurate in my market area.

What's funny is that I'm on a broadcast list for a couple of AMC's I don't ever remember signing with. They are offering 1004's at 185 and 2055's at 125. REO's at 275 from another AMC list I'm on. I think the whole order broadcast deal is weak and unprofessional.

Anyway, every once in awhile I check the status for fun and they are always assigned. With overhead you just can't make any money at that rate. Seriously.

I have some good direct non-lender clients, ERC clients, and REO clients that pay higher. But the mortgage stuff seems in line.

 

[dbiggers]

You guys need a hardcore sales team to market Mercury in more mass style fashion. There are a lot of banks out there that would love to use your service, yet don't really understand how it truly complies with HVCC like an AMC does.

Each of our major markets has a separate dedicated sales team (agent/lender/appraisal). We have a large group dedicated to Mercury who do nothing but call lenders all day long, and they'd be happy to call your clients and talk to them. And yes, it is a tough sell because the GSEs and everyone else made it that way.

Call our sales line, ask for the Mercury sales team, tell them who to call, and they'll take it from there. All we need is the introduction.

Thanks for the support, BTW. We'll do our best.

Dave Biggers
Chairman
a la mode, inc.

 

[dbiggers]

Yea I hate PCV with their $200 broadcast order too.

I don't have a problem with giving Dave $10 per report sent in, but paying $13.75 even if the order gets cancelled PLUS $300 before you can even get one assignment is just greedy!

If he has any shame he should offer the Mercury Network to all appraisers, not just those who buy ala mode or an xSite, at the flat per order fee.

I think I've already posted here several times that as long as we don't see abuse of the system, we'll begin allowing free cancellations. Cancellations are running at 2% of orders, and if they spike after the change, then we'll know people are trying to use our services for free.

XSites are required because, many years ago at the loud request of hundreds of complainers right here in this forum for hate the fact that Mercury Network was between the client and the appraiser, we dismantled the Mercury Network front end and made it a back end service with XSites -- with your personal branding -- as the only public facing web front end. At the same time, we killed the Mercury Desktop product (with all the desktop conversions and review script/workflow plugins) and reworked it as the XSites Order Manager. That's what you asked for, not us.

When the HVCC created the need for the Mercury Network to be revived, we already had several tens of thousands of appraisers using XSites with a perfectly functional XSites Order Manager and plugins already installed on their PCs. Instead of converting it back to Mercury Desktop and charging $299 for it as a standalone product like we used to (you used to pay $299 for MD and separately for an XSite on top of that), we simply left it as a free bundled tool for XSites users, and even lowered the price of a standard XSite which includes the MD converters and plugins.

So, in the past I got $299 for the Mercury Desktop and an additional fee of up to $799 for an XSite. Now I give the Desktop away for free so the XSites users -- who already had bought an XSite before Mercury ever came back into being -- pay nothing to be on Mercury.

That's "shameful"?

As for "greedy", you do realize that it's the height of irony for you to say that I'm greedy for charging $299 for a year-long service, while simultaneously claiming as your main point in this entire thread that the stats are wrong in your area and that you won't do a basic appraisal for less than $500, right? Remember, I've been an appraiser. I know what it takes to do a report for $350 versus what it takes to build, market, support, and update a web and desktop system for tens of thousands of people a year for the same $350. Yep, I make a lot of money, but I have a lot of risk, capital, and other skin in the game too. Greed isn't the issue.

But again, I'll make the same consistent point I have all along: If you don't like it, don't use it. There's nobody forcing you to use or believe anything. If you prefer AMCs and AppraisalPort over XSites and Mercury, more power to you.

However, I do need to thank you for reminding me of the pricing model we used to have and why it was better. If I move back to charging for Mercury Desktop separately from the XSites, then nobody would be able to say that I "make" you have an XSite to use Mercury. Plus, I'd probably get at least 15,000 or so of the current XSites users to pay for Mercury Desktop. That would thin the herd a little on Mercury too. Even if I discounted Mercury Desktop to $199, I'd make another $3,000,000 a year by charging separately for it. I don't see any negatives (for me).

I'll send you a commission on it. Maybe you won't need those pesky Mercury orders after all!

Dave Biggers
Chairman
a la mode, inc.

 

[dbiggers]

Fortunately for me, the stats provided by Mr. Biggers show my area to be one of a few to have some of the highest volume of skippy's per square mile in the Nation (the Cape Fear Region of NC). They're cranking out $250's like they're going out of style, great job guys and gals.......What a bunch of efnmuthefnpeasezufefnsheetphkurs. What the.........is wrong with these stupid arse efnmuthefnpeasezufefnsheetphkurs? Tat is priority number 1 for them as they panic about where the next deal is coming from, their reports are no better than my number 2.

Not your fault Dave, but you could have called me before you published this thing, gdmit. If they use this against me, I'm dropping your software!!! I'll show you!

I hear you. I actually was struggling to figure out why NC had several low fee spots when it's a comparatively high volume "healthier" state overall. The same is true of some of the East North Central states (Ohio, Illinois, Indiana) -- I saw many areas where the number of appraisals per person was high (in other words, there's lots of work for the number of appraisers, not a dearth of assignments) and yet there were terribly low fees. It appears to literally just be a collective/cultural choice, not a purely market effect. I don't get it.

Dave Biggers
Chairman
a la mode, inc.

 

[dbiggers]

What you report as the median is incorrect due to your limited sample size for my rural area. You would need more Mercury Network appraisers doing more than a handful of URARs to give an authoritative figure. Also, since the GSEs require the 1004MC it should be included in with the URAR fee. Is it?

Maybe a running average would be better for rural areas as one or two high or low fees will skew your median for that month.

There are no appraisers in Grant County. You must be looking at what a Baker City appraiser charges for work in Baker County (listed as $350 on your sheet) and not including the travel fee to drive to Grant County. I charged AMCs more than double what you list for two of those vacant counties last month and got the orders.

Of course I won't give any weight to data which indicates fees lower than what they were 10 years ago, but you ARE making it worse for me by giving the AMCs a big crooked stick to beat our fees down with.

I have nothing against the Mercury Network. I think it is a great alternative to AMCs and would actually love to give it a try. However, I already have a hosted website that only costs me $5 per month and don't see why you want me to pay you $300 per year plus $13.75 per order.

AppraisalPort charges $10 per appraisal and $5 for other stand alone forms such as a 1004D. If the order is cancelled there is no charge which is why I think many appraisers get worked up over the Mercury charge. I am always looking for ways to expand my client base, especially since HVCC took over, but I don't want to fork over $300 and not receive any order because my fees are above what you report as the median.

Read the report and the FAQs. If specific instructions were placed for extra forms, it was not included. We're trying to get to the base.

You've got the math backwards. An average is skewed more readily by a few high or low fees, not a median. Again, it's explained in the FAQ in the report. Do the math: 200,300,300,300,500 has a median of 300 and an average of 320. Change the 500 to 1000 and the median is unchanged, but the average jumps by 100. Averages are far more volatile in populations than medians, which is why you see median used so much.

I see three appraisers covering Grant county. It's irrelevant as to whether they live there. As I said, you can look it up yourself on Mercury and even see what they state their fees are. Or, you can just not believe that it's possible.

Getting work or not getting work has nothing to do with whether or not your fees are above or below median, or whether you believe that THEY don't already know it. Remember, they have lots of data -- you don't. Or at least didn't until now. I'm a firm believer that if someone else has data and you don't, you lose. You're just guessing.

Rarely if ever do AMCs give you anything even approaching the non-AMC medians that we're reporting. The AFR is not the stick that's going get you beaten -- it's the one you can most likely use to fight back.

And, as I and others have said repeatedly, then don't use Mercury. But at least read the report and the FAQs, or log into the site and see for yourself as a lender, instead of raising repeated points which you'd see to be inaccurate if you'd just check it yourself. It takes less of your time than these posts, and you'd be able to stick to things you dislike but at least are accurately posed.

I love free and open debate, but this is like arguing about whether it's daytime or nighttime with someone in a room shuttered up like Elvis' hotel. Take the foil off the windows and see for yourself.

Dave Biggers
Chairman
a la mode, inc.