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.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

It is not about the word it is about the concept, and some appraisers ( are you one? ) have the concept WRONG.
If the concept of what we are trying to do is wrong, there never will be a "right word" for it.

I fear your conpet of what we are trying to do is wrong, We are a tually " the appraisal" The apprsisa is NOT trying to give a most probable price! (a most probable price value )

What, exactly, are we asked to provide in an appraisal? AN OPINION OF MARKET VALUE. Our opinion is expressed as a X$ point value. But it is STILL an opinion of value. This relieves the appraiser of the burden of trying to guestimate a mythical exact price because that is impossible. That is why it is an opinion.

USPAP defines an appraisal as an opinion. (opinion of value )

The TYPE of value sought then must be defined, and the definition of value must be included in the appraisal. The type of value sought is usually Market value. The definition of value contains the most probable price as what we seek in the opinion - and the definition of market value goes on to list the set of terms and conditions to reach that value ( a price unaffected by concessions, a typically motivated buyer and seller , etc) We also include an exposure time

Appraisers here are dead wrong when they say nobody is that good to opine X price because they fail t oundnersand we are not opinion a price, we are opining a value opionn ( expressed as a price or numerical point of X $ ( $200,000 for example. ) The point value is stil a POINT VALUE, Nobody, repeat nobody, except some confused appraisers think a point value is supposed to be a one god like price and only one price. The client needs a point value because at a closing, or asset division, or other goal, a point value ( a finite number, $200,000 ) is needed to divide and distribute funds.

The information and the point value in an appraisal allow the client to make a decision about the property. ( sell, it , rent it, loan on it, etc)

In a perfect world, a lender client would be easily allowed to lend within a percent of our point value ( lend within 3% up or down from it for example.

J.G., your perspective re the distinction between value and price expressed a few months weighs heavily every time I cross path with a . . . Value! I personally appreciate the nuances you discuss. And I'm wondering about your comments above as they pertain to appraisals for legal matters, i.e. is the significance of an Opinion elevated to became Fact once it is accepted, or confirmed, judicially? Way beyond my SOU (scope of understanding) but do court cases about appraisals cite prior legal cases, like in the movies???