Is the term 'price point' value a dangerous term.

[J Grant]

j Grant, i have a degree in special ed. You definitely have HATD. Hyper active typing disorder. You have gone into some hyper typing mode since trump won. Too funny, but you are sometimes the only person dissenting against the mob.
With posting, go for the killer punch, instead of words pummeling us to death. I like your passage/aggressive one liners, being of that nature myself.

Put aside any one liners, which both are guilty of and the distraion of Trump - I stick to USPAP, I do not make up words and invent definitions (which the URAR prohibits ) and there is a lot of bad exuxes going on wrt not some either twisted by the business pressures or not understanding appraisal concepts - you have the education, apply the concepts!

 

[TerryRohrer]

It seems to me that the analogy was pointing out that, no matter how good the practitioner, they are only as precise as the data allows them to be.

So if you round and widen the range and discount the precision of your opinion of value due to the "quality of your data", do you still certify that you have "obtained the information, estimates, and opinions furnished by other parties and expressed in this appraisal report from reliable sources that I believe to be true and correct."?

I see appraisers justifying a lot of things because all the data they rely on is suspect, then in the next breath, asserting the above.

"Definition: True and correct means that something is authentic, accurate, and unaltered."

true and correct definition · LSData

Definition: True and correct means that something is authentic, accurate, and unaltered.

www.lsd.law

 

[alebrewer]

So if you round and widen the range and discount the precision of your opinion of value due to the "quality of your data", do you still certify that you have "obtained the information, estimates, and opinions furnished by other parties and expressed in this appraisal report from reliable sources that I believe to be true and correct."?

I see appraisers justifying a lot of things because all the data they rely on is suspect, then in the next breath, asserting the above.

Haha. I think a more accurate rendering would be that we rely on that data furnished by other parties that we believe to be least incorrect...

 

[alebrewer]

Put aside any one liners, which both are guilty of and the distraion of Trump - I stick to USPAP, I do not make up words and invent definitions (which the URAR prohibits ) and there is a lot of bad exuxes going on wrt not some either twisted by the business pressures or not understanding appraisal concepts - you have the education, apply the concepts!

You need to lay off the grog this early in the AM, J.

 

[Tom D]

You need to lay off the grog this early in the AM, J.

She not that old, or is that medieval humor on your part. At that time i got paid 200 copper coins to do the cookie cutter castle.

 

[Artemis Fowl]

Put aside any one liners, which both are guilty of and the distraion of Trump - I stick to USPAP, I do not make up words and invent definitions (which the URAR prohibits ) and there is a lot of bad exuxes going on wrt not some either twisted by the business pressures or not understanding appraisal concepts - you have the education, apply the concepts!

Words fail me...I have no idea what to do with this.

 

[J Grant]

Why are we using the specific term, 'price point' with value . Why not call it MPP, 'Most probable price' value, not necessarily the exact 'price point value'. Nowhere on the form, does it say 'price point'.
And every value law suite says, you said it was worth exactly $price point amount. Does not the word probable price give you some value wiggle room.

Is there a better wording to call our subject value, cause even i have been using it. Or am i being too picky.

Back to your original post: there is no approved term of "price point value" - USPAP references a value can be expressed as a point, or a range, or a benchmark.
There is your observation that nowhere on the form does it say price point. That is because MV is a concept, not a price fact. Even when we express it as a $amount. We express a $ amount as an opinion, and our opinion is literally the appraisal. (USPAP defines an appraisal as an opinion )

So no, there is no better wording to call our subject value. Any attempt to do so distorts the appraisal process. Stick to the USOAP terminology -it is correct and it protects us.

Why are you looking for value wiggle room? All the certs and limit conditions provide the "Wiggle room".

 

[alebrewer]

I love wiggle room.

 

[jay trotta]

IMO- the Grey Book is limited in some Rural areas and a value range may be most appropriate (wiggle room) but most lenders won't accept a range.