Any Luck Getting Realtors To "show Their Work" When Computing GLA?

[Howard Klahr]

The major things are location, price range, # of bedrooms AND Sf. It's not just about bedrooms. There's a big difference between a 1200 sf 3 bedroom home and a 2100 sf 3 bedroom home.

You just keep digging yourself deeper and deeper.

OK, we have already established that it is about location which basically equates to price range and the number of bedrooms. Your insistence that buyers care soooo much about sq ft in buying a home and that pricing is predicated on it, then why is it that all homeowners know the exact accurate size of their own property? They all know the bedroom/bath count, the neighborhood/development/project that they are so proud of and the abundance of amenities in their home, but how often do they know the correct size.

Your assertion is that size is the predicate to the pricing yet it would seem there are several other factors that participants in the market focus on much more than price. Not only that, if it is such an important factor why is it that in many cases of existing homes, the appraiser is the only participant in the transaction (at the tail end of the process I might add) that actually measures the home?

Oh and your example of a 1,200 sq ft home versus a 2,400 sq ft home is so absurd that it is almost not worth commenting on. But I hope that I can presume that you could not only tell the difference between the two but that buyers looking for one would not even consider the other.

 

[CANative]

Any one that thinks GLA doesn't matter is off their rockers.

They need s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6 to rate their stupidity.

Thank you once again for your *cough* "contribution."

 

[djd09]

You are welcome

 

[J Grant]

Again, let's ask the folks here who are also agents or brokers if buyers are interested or not in size/sf

On appraisal form there is a line on the sales comparison grid for adjustment, the top of the field has a $ per sf analysis, the cost approach is based in part on $ per sf, but Howard says it does not matter.... everyone has a right to their opinion.

 

[J Grant]

In new home developments, builders charge more for bigger models of homes with same # of bedrooms/garage space. The 2000 sf model with 4 bedrooms 2.1 bath sells for less than the 2300 sf model with 4 bedrooms 2.1 baths. Why would buyers pay more for the 2300 sf model than the 2000 sf model both having same bedroom/bath count, if it wasn't important to them?

 

[Howard Klahr]

In new home developments

You don't believe in new home developments. Afterall developers just rip people off with their upcharges and amenity prices. How addressing the examples I provided?

You should run for office. You address the topic at hand just was well as they do with all your red herrings.

Oh and to address the obvious, a 300 sq ft differential between to two floor plans in the same developent seems like one has an additional room that the other does not, but i'm sure you never thought of that

 

[J Grant]

http://www.carolinajoe.com/blog/ind...ould-Ask-Buyers-Prior-To-Starting-Home-Search

Sf is among the searchlist above.

I do new home appraisals on a frequent basis, Did 2 in the last two weeks. Just because I want to research how builder premiums and options perform in market on resale vs when new does not mean I "don't believe in new home developments". Which still leaves that builders, who research what buyers will pay for, price similar bedroom/bath count homes higher for models with more SF. If you read my posts about new construction, I never mentioned SF as one of the builder "rip off " items. Because SF is one of the things they build that usually does retain value on resale. In my posts about builder upcharges , the "rip offs" (your term) I refer to are over charges for things lot premiums or certain upgrades or options which often (not always, but often, or at least in some developments) lose a lot of value relative to what buyer paid for them.

 

[J Grant]

Not only that, if it is such an important factor why is it that in many cases of existing homes, the appraiser is the only participant in the transaction (at the tail end of the process I might add) that actually measures the home?

RE agents have been advised not to measure homes for liability reasons, (as noted in many posts here). ( topic of the thread, how to get Realtors to "show their work" computing GLA)

BTW I have "liked" a number of your posts in the past.....Of course I recognize a buyer for a 1200 sf home would not typically consider a 2300 sf home, I used as an example here about sf, I did not indicate anything about it relating to how I select comps for an appraisal.

 

[Eli]

Bathrooms and kitchens or bedrooms and maybe laundry might be different when it comes to room count but most of the time the comps are the same or bracket the subject in rooms. Laundry would have to be a separate line item because it is not shown on the room count line. I don't do room count adjustments quantitavely very often except for baths. I do GLA adjustments based on sensitivity analysis in every report in SC approach. I use GLA to extract depreciation for an indication of Effective age and REL and land value sometimes. GLA or GBA is very important in the cost and income approaches. If the market shows a particular room is very valuable, then I would take that into consideration either quantitatively or qualitatively, being careful not to double dip.

Layout of rooms or size of certain rooms can be very significant, similar to how a house sets on a lot and lot size.

 

[Mike Garrett RAA]

IN MY MARKET square footage is a consideration; however, minor size differences usually aren't. I can tell you, as a real estate broker of more than 40 years experience including training agents in 5 different states, buyers will typically tell an agent...."we are looking for a 3 bedroom, 2 bath ranch style with a 2 car garage in the XYZ area". That would be the basic criteria. Following that the agent probes for more desires such as larger lot, mountain view, schools district, etc.