community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.
haha - exactly my point.
I like to think of it more as using the tool most appropriate for the job - which, in residential appraisal is always going to be the SCA or the IA. But - I do appreciate you giving me the green light to go ahead and do what I was going to do anyway.
So, what textbook supports that assumption? I mean doesn't USPAP require you to "be aware of, understand, and correctly employ those recognized methods and techniques...."? Dismissing certain methods and techniques doesn't sound like that to me.
And why does a market so small a developer does not want to build tract homes mean "custom" homes (which vary from cheap like my house to mansions) are not the norm for construction?
I'm painfully aware of the CA. In fact, I've done some quite extensive research into developing a meaningful method of estimating physical depreciation using curvilinear analysis for different TEL's (as we all know that improvements don't depreciate in a straight line manner - even though 90+% of appraisers use the age/life method for estimating depreciation (yet another failure in the CA). And, when forced by a client to employ the CA, I 'correctly employ those recognized methods and techniques.' I just believe the CA to be made up - kind of like the tooth fairy.
Well..... it appears based on the op, that the area is devoid of any new construction. Even Big Box store material tract homes. Thus, a custom home, a property with more expensive, higher end, (excessive?) upgrades "for the area" or unusual customizations would have diminished returns.
Most homes built in rural are "custom" in that they are built for the owner of the land, not by Horton or Lennar. My home was "custom" - 1,200 SF square house 2 bath 3 bed, with few embellishments. That's the norm. They are building a house for their needs. So, few of these rural homes are over-built. They are often pretty ordinary. Like these. They are unique and "custom" - hardly expensive homes.
That makes sense...
Corrected or manipulated it to fit?
So there are basically two methods for estimating TEL - the one you describe above (dividing 1 by the annualized depreciation) and pulling the TEL from a cost guide (M&S for instance). Any idea how close those two estimates are? IOW - lets say you annualize the depreciation and take the inverse. How well does the resulting TEL estimate line up with that reflected in the cost guides?
Nope. We have a cost approach on everything as standard...it was pre-existing. The adjustment factors were all in place beforehand and we corrected some physical features based on the inspection. Post inspection SC was completed first. Factual CA corrections resulted in a nice tight grouping of values. I prefer to manipulate people not data thank you very much.