Appraised Value Below Contract Price

[J Grant]

After all this discussion, you ask that question? Well, there you go. Proof that not every Skippy realizes that they're a Skippy. :new_llying:

You're the skippy! I asked you a question, and you don't answer. You made a claim about appraisers skipping a step in the reconciliation.

I suppose, from this thread, you think the misseing step is reconcling the subject MVO and sale price? Problem is, that is nto a recognized step in a reconciliation.

What else was skipped? Analyzing the contract? That was already done.

So what are you talking about?

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

Really, ? Seems major skippiedom is apparent (from some) on the commercial side who do residential work. Taking an arrogant attitude is a poor substitute for good appraisal practice.

FYI, I reviewed a real skippy res report from a cert gen in my area a few years ago. Cherry picked comps and ignored market conditions. I did not agree with his value and derived my own well supported one. I did not report him to the board, left that up to his client , I just turned my review in.

Guess Mr arrogant did not like having his work reviewed by a lowly residential, so he reported my review to the board, as violating USPAP (for no good reason, he just wrote a bunch of gibberish). The investigator found his complaint groundless and dismissed it.

Those arguing so loudly about reconciling to SC prices and how appraisers are not "analyzing " the contract enough, as if that should affect value....as the bard said, thou dost protesth too much."

JGrant, you never cease to amaze me. I suspect I've forgotten more about appraisal theory and technique than you know. Good appraisal practice is to "analyze" (with all of the implications inherent in that word--see my prior post with the dictionary definitiion) the sales contract.

Love when someone disagrees with some of you yahoos that suddenly we are labeled "skippies"--for doing a more thorough job and delving into the "analysis" of the SC in greater detail than you. We do more yet get labeled as skippy! Too funny and more clueless by the day.

BTW--I only do residential appraisals for eminent domain and litigation. Generally standards are higher for such reports than for the FNMA work that is handled by too many "form fillers" intent on fullfilling what they see as the minimum requirements.

 

[mark hurlock]

Wow! Now I'm getting ID ten T errors on your posts too!

And yet you fail miserably to show any.

Post away my alias friend.

 

[J Grant]

See above...you don't need to "form an opinion of the contract price." You need to ANALYZE why it is different from your estimate...and report it. There is not one reason to look at a contract, other than concessions and personal property, to vet the contract EXCEPT to explain why your value is different from the contract....
__________________
This seems to be a client specific request and an expansion of the SOW. Nobody, including you, has provided any support in USPAP, appraisal coursework, a published advisory opinion, nothing from any source, indicating that the reason an appraiser analyzes a SC is to later explain why the SC price and MVO are different.

Personally, I don't mind explaining why they are different. However, I feel that if appraisers are going to be required to explain why a SC and MVO differ, then they should also be reqiured to explain why they are the same. The explanation of why they are the exact same amount will be more difficult, imo.

 

[mark hurlock]

Good appraisal practice is to "analyze" (with all of the implications inherent in that word--see my prior post with the dictionary definitiion) the sales contract.

.

Nice try Pete but yet another failure.

We were not discussing “good appraisal practice” or the standards by which it might be measured.

Maybe you should read the thread more thoroughly.

 

[residentialguy]

ad hominem attacks lend no credibility to your argument.

It is obvious why you post with an alias.

Post away my alias friend.

rich......

 

[Calvin the Airedale]

This still does not explain the separated at birth aspect, the fact that the SC price and MV are EXACTLY THE SAME, not similar. And, exactly the same when the terms were not MV, such as builder sales, short sales, etc.

Identical twins, mirror images of each other, the MVO and the SC price, concieved months apart. How is that possible?

How does a buyer of a builder home, who negotiated a contract a year ago, manage to arrive at the exact MVO the appriser will opine later? And the buyer of a short sale, contract signed 5 months ago, he manage to bid the the exact same amount the appraiser will opine months later? And then a first time homebuyer, not well informed, manages to negotiate a SC price that will also be exactly the same as the MVO? Wow! Do all these people all have mental telepathy, to be able to do come up with in advance ,the exact same purchase price an appraiser will opine?

All these buyers and sellers are geniuses, we should bring them to Vegas, let them pick the numbers, they always manage to be right.

The contract price is a fact, based on whatever the participants used to arrive at its conclusion. The market value is an opinion, based on a methodology. The coincidence that the numbers are the same does not (cannot) make them identical since they were both arrived at by different (albeit similar) processes.

 

[residentialguy]

You're the skippy! I asked you a question, and you don't answer. You made a claim about appraisers skipping a step in the reconciliation.

I suppose, from this thread, you think the misseing step is reconcling the subject MVO and sale price? Problem is, that is nto a recognized step in a reconciliation.

What else was skipped? Analyzing the contract? That was already done.

So what are you talking about?

[url]http://appraisersforum.com/showpost.php?p=2297152&postcount=130[/URL]

 

[AnonApprsr]

Hey Marky Mark, where's your funky bunch?

That makes about as much sense as "making fun" of someone using an alias on here. It's blatant retardation. Anonymity allows the discussion to be focused on the content of the argument, not from whose hands it was typed out.

And PittPete has been a part of way more failed ventures like ZAIO than you have even heard of J Grant. You're out of your league!

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

Nice try Pete but yet another failure.

We were not discussing “good appraisal practice” or the standards by which it might be measured.

Maybe you should read the thread more thoroughly.

Nope, can't have any of that!