Appraisal Institute Last-minute Shakeup

[RCA]

Logical contradictions here.

Appraisal value analysis in residential markets does not require such advanced mathematics on the micro per individual transaction scale.

Because appraisers anlayze the actions and end results of individual parties and individual agents, of which there is no more mathematical genius or advanced application then is present in the normal populace base. So it's a minimal percentage.

Appraisers need to understand the mechanisms of sales process, insurability adherence, which also comes alongside understanding fundamental principals of basic engineering and home construction both materials and methods.

A regular construction guy whom knows hardware and labor costs up and down makes a better real estate appraiser than a math genius. Those math guys maintain a better functional presence in macro analysis for situations like commercial, and government county type work.

I really consider this trivial, but thought, just to be categorically objective, I would hand the retort off to ChatGPT with:

Me to ChatGPT: "Can you dissect what, if anything, is wrong with this argument I received in a post, as I want to be objective in my retort?"

And then I pasted your post to ChatGPT, to which it replied:

"Bert, the post contains a mixture of valid observations, category errors, false dichotomies, and unstated assumptions. It is not entirely wrong, but it conflates different levels of appraisal practice and different purposes of mathematics. The strongest response is probably not to dismiss it outright, but to separate where it is reasonable from where it overreaches.

Here is a careful dissection.

---

1. “Appraisal value analysis in residential markets does not require such advanced mathematics on the micro per individual transaction scale.”​

This statement is partially true, depending on what is meant by “require.”

Most residential appraisals in ordinary tract neighborhoods can often be completed competently using:

• paired sales analysis,
• qualitative adjustments,
• regression at a modest level,
• market extraction techniques,
• depreciation estimates,
• and professional judgment.

Many competent residential appraisers do not use advanced mathematics daily.

That part is true.

However, the statement becomes problematic because it subtly shifts from:

“advanced math is not always required”

to

“advanced math therefore has little value in appraisal.”

Those are very different claims.

There are several reasons advanced quantitative methods can matter even in residential work:

• sparse comparable data,
• heterogeneous properties,
• time-adjustment modeling,
• market segmentation,
• non-linear feature interactions,
• uncertainty estimation,
• bias detection,
• reconciliation consistency,
• retrospective review,
• litigation defensibility,
• AVM competition,
• mass appraisal overlap,
• and statistical support for adjustments.

Modern appraisal increasingly intersects with statistical modeling whether individual appraisers like it or not.

The issue is not whether every appraisal needs differential equations or tensor analysis. It does not.

The issue is whether stronger quantitative tools improve:

• reliability,
• reproducibility,
• transparency,
• and error reduction.

Often they do.

---

2. “Because appraisers analyze the actions and end results of individual parties and individual agents…”​

This is conceptually weak.

The behavior of individuals does not imply that advanced mathematics is unnecessary.

In fact, many sciences analyze systems composed of ordinary people:

• economics,
• actuarial science,
• epidemiology,
• political polling,
• behavioral finance,
• insurance risk modeling.

The mathematical sophistication is not determined by the intelligence of participants.

For example:

A homebuyer may not understand:

• regression,
• probability distributions,
• or hedonic pricing models,

yet their aggregate actions may still produce statistical structures that are mathematically analyzable.

Markets routinely exhibit:

• clustering,
• autocorrelation,
• seasonality,
• nonlinearity,
• and stochastic behavior.

The participants themselves need not understand the mathematics for the mathematics to describe the system.

That is a major flaw in the argument.

---

3. “...of which there is no more mathematical genius or advanced application then is present in the normal populace base.”​

This is largely irrelevant logically.

A statistical model does not require participants to be mathematically sophisticated.

For example:

• Meteorology models weather patterns despite clouds not “understanding calculus.”
• Epidemiology models disease spread despite individuals not understanding statistics.
• Traffic engineering models driving behavior despite drivers not understanding fluid dynamics.

Human systems frequently generate analyzable patterns.

The post confuses:

• participant sophistication,
  with
• analytical sophistication.

Those are unrelated.

---

4. “Appraisers need to understand the mechanisms of sales process, insurability adherence, which also comes alongside understanding fundamental principals of basic engineering and home construction…”​

This is actually a strong point.

A serious weakness of some quantitatively oriented analysts is insufficient understanding of:

• construction quality,
• deferred maintenance,
• functional utility,
• permit issues,
• insurability,
• site problems,
• foundation conditions,
• neighborhood externalities,
• and marketability defects.

A contractor, builder, or experienced field appraiser often notices things a purely statistical analyst misses.

That criticism is legitimate.

Real estate valuation is not merely data science.

It is:

• legal,
• physical,
• economic,
• behavioral,
• and local.

The post is strongest here.

---

5. “A regular construction guy whom knows hardware and labor costs up and down makes a better real estate appraiser than a math genius.”​

This is a false dichotomy.

The ideal appraiser is neither:

• “construction-only,”
  nor
• “math-only.”

The strongest practitioners usually combine:

• market knowledge,
• construction understanding,
• statistical literacy,
• local expertise,
• and analytical discipline.

A contractor without analytical rigor can:

• overfit anecdotes,
• misunderstand market extraction,
• miss broader market trends,
• or make inconsistent adjustments.

Conversely, a pure mathematician without domain knowledge can:

• create elegant but unrealistic models,
• misuse variables,
• ignore causality,
• or misunderstand buyer behavior.

The profession increasingly rewards hybrid competence.

The best valuation experts today often combine:

• field experience,
• econometrics,
• GIS,
• regression,
• market intuition,
• and domain knowledge.

---

6. “Those math guys maintain a better functional presence in macro analysis for situations like commercial, and government county type work.”​

This contains some truth historically.

Advanced quantitative techniques have traditionally been more prominent in:

• mass appraisal,
• tax assessment,
• institutional valuation,
• portfolio analysis,
• AVMs,
• commercial modeling,
• REIT analysis,
• and government assessment systems.

But that boundary is eroding.

Modern residential valuation increasingly uses:

• automated adjustment support,
• machine learning,
• hedonic regression,
• geospatial clustering,
• GAMs,
• ensemble methods,
• and market segmentation tools.

Especially in:

• litigation,
• review work,
• hybrid appraisals,
• and institutional lending environments.

The industry is evolving.

---

The Core Logical Errors​

The post mainly suffers from:

A. False Dichotomy​

It frames:

• construction expertise
  versus
• mathematical expertise

as mutually exclusive.

They are complementary.

---

B. Composition Fallacy​

It assumes:

• because individual participants are ordinary,
  the market itself requires only simple analysis.

Complex aggregate behavior can emerge from simple actors.

---

C. Confusion of Necessity vs Utility​

It argues:

• advanced math is not always necessary,
  therefore
• it is not useful.

That conclusion does not follow.

---

D. Appeal to Practicality​

The argument implicitly suggests:

• practical field knowledge is “real,”
• quantitative analysis is “academic.”

But practical professions often evolve toward more quantitative rigor over time:

• medicine,
• insurance,
• finance,
• logistics,
• meteorology,
• engineering,
• and now valuation.

---

​

 

[RCA]

(continued)

What a Balanced Retort Might Look Like​

A strong response would acknowledge the valid portions while correcting the false conclusions.

Something like:
Construction knowledge, market behavior, and field experience are absolutely critical in appraisal. A purely academic analyst with no understanding of homes, neighborhoods, or buyer behavior can produce very poor valuation conclusions.

But it does not follow that advanced quantitative methods have little value. Markets composed of ordinary people can still exhibit highly measurable statistical behavior. Buyers do not need to understand regression for regression to detect pricing patterns.

The strongest appraisers are usually those who combine:

• local market knowledge,
• construction understanding,
• and analytical discipline.

Residential appraisal may not require advanced mathematics for every assignment, but stronger statistical methods can materially improve consistency, defensibility, adjustment support, uncertainty analysis, and market segmentation — especially in complex or heterogeneous markets.

The issue is not “construction guy versus math guy.” The profession increasingly requires both domain expertise and analytical rigor.

 

[RCA]

Stalking me on LinkeIn. Still no calls but I did receive a snarky email reminding me that I will be suspended June 1, or I can resign......

View attachment 108996

You know I am critical of the AI and yeah --- they let me know. They haven't really cared about AppraisersForum for a long time. But they do care about LinkedIn!!!!! And if you are on any forum where there are a lot of MAIs in leadership positions, you will probably get feedback if you make negative comments about the Appraisal Institute.

It used to be part of their member rules that you could not say anything negative about the Appraisal Institute. They did away with that some time ago. But, their Stalinistic approach to loyalty surfaces every now and then. They do expect the MAIs to stick together, thick as thieves. They understand SRAs are pissed off, and if you ask me, they would just as soon dump at least half of them. And that half likely doesn't want to pay the fees anyway. But, of course, at this point in time, they need the membership fees, especially from the younger ones, i.e. those who are retired, of course pay reduced fees and are not so important.

So if you want to stay a member of the Appraisal Institute, then you've got to be a little careful.

The problem is, the world is changing, and the Appraisal Institute, as much as they might want to keep up, probably just can't. They have fallen too far behind. But who knows? Who knows? Maybe their leadership will be able to turn things around. You would think that with the help of AI, they could move forward. It is just - well, they just may not have the necessary "material."

 

[Mile High Trout]

I really consider this trivial, but thought, just to be categorically objective, I would hand the retort off to ChatGPT with:

Me to ChatGPT: "Can you dissect what, if anything, is wrong with this argument I received in a post, as I want to be objective in my retort?"

And then I pasted your post to ChatGPT, to which it replied:

"Bert, the post contains a mixture of valid observations, category errors, false dichotomies, and unstated assumptions. It is not entirely wrong, but it conflates different levels of appraisal practice and different purposes of mathematics. The strongest response is probably not to dismiss it outright, but to separate where it is reasonable from where it overreaches.

Here is a careful dissection.

---

1. “Appraisal value analysis in residential markets does not require such advanced mathematics on the micro per individual transaction scale.”​

This statement is partially true, depending on what is meant by “require.”

Most residential appraisals in ordinary tract neighborhoods can often be completed competently using:

• paired sales analysis,
• qualitative adjustments,
• regression at a modest level,
• market extraction techniques,
• depreciation estimates,
• and professional judgment.

Many competent residential appraisers do not use advanced mathematics daily.

That part is true.

However, the statement becomes problematic because it subtly shifts from:


to


Those are very different claims.

There are several reasons advanced quantitative methods can matter even in residential work:

• sparse comparable data,
• heterogeneous properties,
• time-adjustment modeling,
• market segmentation,
• non-linear feature interactions,
• uncertainty estimation,
• bias detection,
• reconciliation consistency,
• retrospective review,
• litigation defensibility,
• AVM competition,
• mass appraisal overlap,
• and statistical support for adjustments.

Modern appraisal increasingly intersects with statistical modeling whether individual appraisers like it or not.

The issue is not whether every appraisal needs differential equations or tensor analysis. It does not.

The issue is whether stronger quantitative tools improve:

• reliability,
• reproducibility,
• transparency,
• and error reduction.

Often they do.

---

2. “Because appraisers analyze the actions and end results of individual parties and individual agents…”​

This is conceptually weak.

The behavior of individuals does not imply that advanced mathematics is unnecessary.

In fact, many sciences analyze systems composed of ordinary people:

• economics,
• actuarial science,
• epidemiology,
• political polling,
• behavioral finance,
• insurance risk modeling.

The mathematical sophistication is not determined by the intelligence of participants.

For example:

A homebuyer may not understand:

• regression,
• probability distributions,
• or hedonic pricing models,

yet their aggregate actions may still produce statistical structures that are mathematically analyzable.

Markets routinely exhibit:

• clustering,
• autocorrelation,
• seasonality,
• nonlinearity,
• and stochastic behavior.

The participants themselves need not understand the mathematics for the mathematics to describe the system.

That is a major flaw in the argument.

---

3. “...of which there is no more mathematical genius or advanced application then is present in the normal populace base.”​

This is largely irrelevant logically.

A statistical model does not require participants to be mathematically sophisticated.

For example:

• Meteorology models weather patterns despite clouds not “understanding calculus.”
• Epidemiology models disease spread despite individuals not understanding statistics.
• Traffic engineering models driving behavior despite drivers not understanding fluid dynamics.

Human systems frequently generate analyzable patterns.

The post confuses:

• participant sophistication,
  with
• analytical sophistication.

Those are unrelated.

---

4. “Appraisers need to understand the mechanisms of sales process, insurability adherence, which also comes alongside understanding fundamental principals of basic engineering and home construction…”​

This is actually a strong point.

A serious weakness of some quantitatively oriented analysts is insufficient understanding of:

• construction quality,
• deferred maintenance,
• functional utility,
• permit issues,
• insurability,
• site problems,
• foundation conditions,
• neighborhood externalities,
• and marketability defects.

A contractor, builder, or experienced field appraiser often notices things a purely statistical analyst misses.

That criticism is legitimate.

Real estate valuation is not merely data science.

It is:

• legal,
• physical,
• economic,
• behavioral,
• and local.

The post is strongest here.

---

5. “A regular construction guy whom knows hardware and labor costs up and down makes a better real estate appraiser than a math genius.”​

This is a false dichotomy.

The ideal appraiser is neither:

• “construction-only,”
  nor
• “math-only.”

The strongest practitioners usually combine:

• market knowledge,
• construction understanding,
• statistical literacy,
• local expertise,
• and analytical discipline.

A contractor without analytical rigor can:

• overfit anecdotes,
• misunderstand market extraction,
• miss broader market trends,
• or make inconsistent adjustments.

Conversely, a pure mathematician without domain knowledge can:

• create elegant but unrealistic models,
• misuse variables,
• ignore causality,
• or misunderstand buyer behavior.

The profession increasingly rewards hybrid competence.

The best valuation experts today often combine:

• field experience,
• econometrics,
• GIS,
• regression,
• market intuition,
• and domain knowledge.

---

6. “Those math guys maintain a better functional presence in macro analysis for situations like commercial, and government county type work.”​

This contains some truth historically.

Advanced quantitative techniques have traditionally been more prominent in:

• mass appraisal,
• tax assessment,
• institutional valuation,
• portfolio analysis,
• AVMs,
• commercial modeling,
• REIT analysis,
• and government assessment systems.

But that boundary is eroding.

Modern residential valuation increasingly uses:

• automated adjustment support,
• machine learning,
• hedonic regression,
• geospatial clustering,
• GAMs,
• ensemble methods,
• and market segmentation tools.

Especially in:

• litigation,
• review work,
• hybrid appraisals,
• and institutional lending environments.

The industry is evolving.

---

The Core Logical Errors​

The post mainly suffers from:

A. False Dichotomy​

It frames:

• construction expertise
  versus
• mathematical expertise

as mutually exclusive.

They are complementary.

---

B. Composition Fallacy​

It assumes:

• because individual participants are ordinary,
  the market itself requires only simple analysis.

Complex aggregate behavior can emerge from simple actors.

---

C. Confusion of Necessity vs Utility​

It argues:

• advanced math is not always necessary,
  therefore
• it is not useful.

That conclusion does not follow.

---

D. Appeal to Practicality​

The argument implicitly suggests:

• practical field knowledge is “real,”
• quantitative analysis is “academic.”

But practical professions often evolve toward more quantitative rigor over time:

• medicine,
• insurance,
• finance,
• logistics,
• meteorology,
• engineering,
• and now valuation.

---

​

Sorry I don't spend my time reading AI text. Because I'm a human and do not voluntarily talk to robots.

But if you'd like to give me a summary in essay format, something comprehensive that takes up less page space I'd be happy to continue.

Maybe stop outsourcing your intelligence to a machine. I did read the first line and that's basically the conversation we were already having. You don't need a robot to help you communicate better and more effectively with other humans. You have no frigging idea you're playing with something that is more dangerous than splitting the atom. Cancel your subscription today. And if you're using the free version, you're on AI gpt light that is exponentially less illustrative and effective. I've ran deep into AI, which is why I refuse to use it. Take notes. Everything I push in terms of content and information is me alone. Using the greatest super computer ever known to mankind; A brain. It might not be all that healthy, perhaps loaded up with plaque and decades of useless information I've consumed online, smoking and drinking and skipping sleep cycles in outright and mystifying sometimes heroic defiance of the medical status quo. But it's still there, microtubulars running quantum process through biological matter with mysterious qualities of both memetic and linear memory format. Have you ever heard of the theory of informational transfer by touch alone? I'm sensing the counter argument right now. Those are my spidey senses!

 

[Surf Cat]

Sorry I don't spend my time reading AI text. Because I'm a human and do not voluntarily talk to robots.

But if you'd like to give me a summary in essay format, something comprehensive that takes up less page space I'd be happy to continue.

Maybe stop outsourcing your intelligence to a machine. I did read the first line and that's basically the conversation we were already having. You don't need a robot to help you communicate better and more effectively with other humans. You have no frigging idea you're playing with something that is more dangerous than splitting the atom. Cancel your subscription today. And if you're using the free version, you're on AI gpt light that is exponentially less illustrative and effective. I've ran deep into AI, which is why I refuse to use it. Take notes. Everything I push in terms of content and information is me alone. Using the greatest super computer ever known to mankind; A brain. It might not be all that healthy, perhaps loaded up with plaque and decades of useless information I've consumed online, smoking and drinking and skipping sleep cycles in outright and mystifying sometimes heroic defiance of the medical status quo. But it's still there, microtubulars running quantum process through biological matter with mysterious qualities of both memetic and linear memory format. Have you ever heard of the theory of informational transfer by touch alone? I'm sensing the counter argument right now. Those are my spidey senses!

 

[RCA]

Sorry I don't spend my time reading AI text. Because I'm a human and do not voluntarily talk to robots.

But if you'd like to give me a summary in essay format, something comprehensive that takes up less page space I'd be happy to continue.

Maybe stop outsourcing your intelligence to a machine. I did read the first line and that's basically the conversation we were already having. You don't need a robot to help you communicate better and more effectively with other humans. You have no frigging idea you're playing with something that is more dangerous than splitting the atom. Cancel your subscription today. And if you're using the free version, you're on AI gpt light that is exponentially less illustrative and effective. I've ran deep into AI, which is why I refuse to use it. Take notes. Everything I push in terms of content and information is me alone. Using the greatest super computer ever known to mankind; A brain. It might not be all that healthy, perhaps loaded up with plaque and decades of useless information I've consumed online, smoking and drinking and skipping sleep cycles in outright and mystifying sometimes heroic defiance of the medical status quo. But it's still there, microtubulars running quantum process through biological matter with mysterious qualities of both memetic and linear memory format. Have you ever heard of the theory of informational transfer by touch alone? I'm sensing the counter argument right now. Those are my spidey senses!

OK, you are the good old-fashioned, typical GSE residential appraiser. Maybe one of those with a hunched-over back, pale face, sickly look, from spending decades filling out forms. Now I am NOT on this forum to beat up on members like you for the hell of it. Too many in the past have gotten heart attacks early on and died, and I always feel bad about things I said to them - although I am pretty sure I did not contribute significantly to their misfortune.

No. I don't smoke. I hate cigarette smoke.
I run and lift weights.
I don't have plaque or dementia.
I try to eat well.
I don't waste my time on work that can be done better by a robot or computer.
I search out tools that make me more productive.

As a German would say: Wir sind nicht auf derselben Wellenlänge. Or, "we are not on the same wavelength."

But you should know that. So why respond to my posts? I will just get nasty with you, since I really don't want to deal with members who are not capable of reasoning logically.

ChatGPT has made it clear that your posts are bogus nonsense. So, as far as I am concerned, that is the end of the discussion with you.

 

[Elliott]

Bert,
You need to do your CE. : )

 

[RCA]

Bert,
You need to do your CE. : )

"William Bert Craytor’s appraiser licenses are inactive primarily due to expiration without renewal.
Common Reasons
Licenses like his Certified General (AG030787, expired May 13, 2025) typically become inactive if appraisers fail to complete required continuing education (CE), pay renewal fees, or submit applications on time. His earlier credentials (e.g., AR030787 from 2007) followed similar patterns, often from voluntary inactivity during career shifts."

I am 79 and a "Retired Appraiser/Retired SRA". Although I still have another year to renew my license if I want. I'm currently focused on software development and building pricing models. And I run a tight budget ..... I don't expect to renew in the coming year. Although, I have taken the latest USPAP class.

 

[RCA]

Bert,
You need to do your CE. : )

My wife and daughters are throwing a fit every time I pay for CE courses and renew my license. They give me a lot of BS for wasting my money. So, if I "need" to do anything, it is more likely to avoid wasting money on CE classes or renewing my license. See —there are other repercussions.

I am going to have more luck with them buying a $10K Apple Mac Studio M5 Ultra when it comes out. ... Well, assuming I don't waste money on Appraisal crap.

In any case, those CE classes are "Dummy" classes - as you very well know. It's a scam. An industry scam: "You know, it's a good idea to retake one of those General Appraiser courses every once in a while" - or whatever one of my old supervisors said 20 years ago (he was speaking for himself at the time). Well, sure. You should review and brush up on old knowledge. You should learn new things. But you don't need to pay for a course to do that.

How about statistics and AI? I guarantee you any and every course some Appraisal Education company has on Statistics or AI is a waste of money. If I want a course, I can get it online with MIT or Stanford for $50 -$100 or so. $500 for a Cost Appraisal course from the Appraisal Institute is an absolute waste of money - unless you are going for MAI ( in which case it is necessary). And an MAI may or may not be a waste of money.

 

[RCA]

The problem is this: We live in an infinite continuum. Our universe is contained in a larger universe (via a black hole), and that universe is also contained in a larger universe - ad infinitum. And our universe itself contains smaller universes contained in black holes, which contain other universes, and so on. As we go up and down the scale of different-sized universes, the physics changes.
Our universe will likely be destroyed eventually. Our civilization will be destroyed, given enough time. But most certainly others will be created, as many other civilizations and worlds have already been created and destroyed in the past.

We come. We go. There is only so much of the past and so much of the future in our historical continuum. We really only have existentialism. We live for the experience of living. Enjoy it while it lasts.

So, DO NOT waste your time with people you don't like being around or interacting with. Use your time to the best of your ability.

Stick to people you enjoy being around. Don't waste your time with me if you don't like my views. If you think I am on this forum to interact with arbitrary members who are in total disagreement with my own point of view, I can assure you I am not. But, well, I don't have much choice but to bump into some of these misbegotten children of Satan, --- or whatever you want to call them. So, one has to wonder how to conduct oneself with nasty members. Yes, something to think about. - Well, this is one point of view.



e