Looking for your opinion on adjustments

[Zoe]

I didn't understand ur recent comment about the relationship of size to MV but the article cited in Post35 explained it.

yeah, but he is bringing more in special use but it correlates with MV definition. MV definition is very unique value definition. @Terrel L. Shields is one most knowledgeable appraisers on this forum.

 

[RCA]

Classical residential appraisal theory is based upon an Opinion, which is based upon a logical, sequential process that includes two seminal procedures--both termed "Reconciliation"--among comparables and among approaches, the latter that provides lip service. Does your premise eliminate the role of Reconciliation in the SCA by providing a level of precision that contradicts the definition of "Appraisal"?

You have things a bit mixed up. I am only talking about the SCA, that is only getting to the value conclusion presented by the SCA. Reconciliation has to do with reconciling the value conclusions from the SCA, CA and IA. This VERY BASIC appraisal theory.

Given that you are one of the more talented of the appraisers on this forum, well, you are smart enough to know what I think about it all. "Good Grief!"

As to your so-called "reconciliation among comparables," USPAP does not say anything about reconciling values between comparables, only the quality and quantity of data between them: For example, it doesn't make sense to compare comps A and B, if. A has a GLA and B doesn't - at least you need to figure a way around that, such as maybe sneaking into property B and doing building measurements, deducting the estimated size of the garage, or calculating the dimensions from an aerial photo.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

You have things a bit mixed up. I am only talking about the SCA, that is only getting to the value conclusion presented by the SCA. Reconciliation has to do with reconciling the value conclusions from the SCA, CA and IA. This VERY BASIC appraisal theory.

Given that you are one of the more talented of the appraisers on this forum, well, you are smart enough to know what I think about it all. "Good Grief!"

As to your so-called "reconciliation among comparables," USPAP does not say anything about reconciling values between comparables, only the quality and quantity of data between them: For example, it doesn't make sense to compare comps A and B, if. A has a GLA and B doesn't - at least you need to figure a way around that, such as maybe sneaking into property B and doing building measurements, deducting the estimated size of the garage, or calculating the dimensions from an aerial photo.

Tell you one thing: You got a myriad of skill sets, sincerely! In retrospect I appear to have amended the classical theory that I cite, without realizing that I have done so, to the extent that all of my appraisal reports include two Reconciliation sections, with a caveat that results of the two might be identical but not necessarily so... probably a reason that Another potential source of business advised me to STFU and stop pontificating, although I've also received several lender conditions during the past year that required a reconciliation among comps, to the extent that now that I offer a caveat that describes why it wasn't prudent to do so because none were significantly more influential than the others. [But somewhere I just realized that I have full text access to the LUMM library of which I wasn't aware, so I'll be busy busy busy reading scholarly articles that I won't fully understand, while trying to determine whether I can/may upgrade to AG, and wondering how TF I am broke AF after working 7 days a week for 30 years, even playing the hole card and praying for work!!!!

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Does your premise eliminate the role of Reconciliation in the SCA by providing a level of precision that contradicts the definition of "Appraisal"?

Bingo

 

[RCA]

It's as if "somebody" knew the real truth about appraisal 30 years ago, and decided that appraisers willing to accept the low pay to do the work were not smart enough to handle the truth, needed simplistic methods that didn't require, for example, skill in using MARS regression or programming skills. So, USPAP does not contra

Tell you one thing: You got a myriad of skill sets, sincerely! In retrospect I appear to have amended the classical theory that I cite, without realizing that I have done so, to the extent that all of my appraisal reports include two Reconciliation sections, with a caveat that results of the two might be identical but not necessarily so... probably a reason that Another potential source of business advised me to STFU and stop pontificating, although I've also received several lender conditions during the past year that required a reconciliation among comps, to the extent that now that I offer a caveat that describes why it wasn't prudent to do so because none were significantly more influential than the others. [But somewhere I just realized that I have full text access to the LUMM library of which I wasn't aware, so I'll be busy busy busy reading scholarly articles that I won't fully understand, while trying to determine whether I can/may upgrade to AG, and wondering how TF I am broke AF after working 7 days a week for 30 years, even playing the hole card and praying for work!!!!

Most appraisers are preyed upon. You only do good if you can figure out how to get out from under the vulchers. Ain't easy!

"Reconciliation" of comparables should be restricted to just quality and quantity of data.