Regression for GLA Adjustment

[J Grant]

I don't know how you do it, but you somehow managed to highlighted the wrong clause. Again.

The "most probable price" clause is the operative lynchpin in the definition; everyhing else therein establishes the hypothetical transaction in which that "most probable price" would occur. Moreover, they couldn't very well use a different term such as "will being" instead of "should bring" there because that would literally be a contradiction insofar as the hypothetical sale the definition is referring to.

The market value is what it is.

And it is, SHOULD BRING. Not will bring, or would bring, or will sell for. SHOULD bring according to the appraisal !!

And lest we forget, the MV definition is the terms of sale for the hypothetical should of the most probable price, the MV definition is not the literal opinion of value itself.

 

[J Grant]

whether it is an AVM, an alternate valuation model or an appraisal, they all use the same data in a market area.

 

[TerryRohrer]

Those users just want to greenlight deals, that;s all. It is corrupt imo to entrust the lender with valuing their own deals but that is what a WAIVER does - the loan officer or lender's value estimate IS the property value (provided it falls within a fannie or Freddie AVM range )

The profiteers wanted to remove the speedbump of an appraisal. /Nothing laudable about it.

I agree. I think we are on the cusp of simply having the listing agent provide a statement that the list price is the value of the property for taxpayer backing. Clearly, we have lost the battle when most lending assignments include valuations completely outside the preview of USPAP and appraiser regulations. There is effectively no regulation of those valuations if the volumes being reported as being done by licensed appraisers from across the country are real, much less those self-fulfilling valuations you identify.

 

[George Hatch]

"Meaningful" is too subjective, soon to be verboten.

Okay, maybe it is too subjective. What would you suggest as being the alternative? What alternative benchmark do you think could be used as a defensible position for the entirey of appraisal practice; all property types, all users, all assignments?

Because nothing in "meaningful and not misleading" in USPAP prevents any user from adding their own additional user-driven expectations as an overlay or supplement. Which at that point appraisers might find themselves weighing where the dividing line is for "unreasonable assignment conditions".

 

[George Hatch]

The market value is what it is.

And it is, SHOULD BRING. Not will bring, or would bring, or will sell for. SHOULD bring according to the appraisal !!

And lest we forget, the MV definition is the terms of sale for the hypothetical should of the most probable price, the MV definition is not the literal opinion of value itself.

When you have been talking about the entire market being overvalued because of the supply/demand you are most definitely NOT talking about that "the market value is what it is" that you referred to above.

We talk about what the market is; what the prices are, what the financing is, how the market participants are acting, etc. According to them and what they're actually doing. But you talk about what the market should be, what the participants should do, how the lenders should act and how they should underwrite their loan decisions. According to you.

 

[Fernando]

Too much data is out there. Question is if a computer can analyze it better than an appraiser.
Not now for a human appraiser who can see the nuances for each property especially for non cookie cutters.
Not many cookie cutters where I work so I'm confident I'll be around for years to come.

 

[J Grant]

When you have been talking about the entire market being overvalued because of the supply/demand you are most definitely NOT talking about that "the market value is what it is" that you referred to above.

We talk about what the market is; what the prices are, what the financing is, how the market participants are acting, etc. According to them and what they're actually doing. But you talk about what the market should be, what the participants should do, how the lenders should act and how they should underwrite their loan decisions. According to you.

You are making an incorrect assumption about what I do - number one.

I am not talking about what the MARKET should be, I am giving a market value opinion of what the property SHOULD bring, ( the way we are asked to do with a MV definition se use)

Where do you imagine that I talk about what the market should be and what the participants should know, when you have not seen any of my appraisals ? I can send you one with a retracted address over the weekend if you want me to email it you then me your email by PM

We talk about what the market tis doing, but THEN we should also analyze it, correct? Or we just hold up a mirror to it and say nothing ?

If buyers are making high offers due to under supply we should talk about it just as when they make low offers due to an over supply.

The MV definition puts out a model set of actions and motivations at certain terms a well informed well advised buyer and seller (etc) that we are SUPPOSED to be using for our value- yes or no?

 

[George Hatch]

What are you talking about? I've watched you whine about the markets being out of control for years.

What we're SUPPOSED TO DO is emulate what the buyers and sellers are actually doing. What pricing is most likely to occur under the current market conditions. Not editorialize on what they should do if only they were as rational and as smart as us.

If I say the most probable price IS $150k and then our property sells for $150k then I was right.​

If you say the most probable price SHOULD BE $140k because the other buyers for the comparables are acting stupid and then our property sells for $150k then you were wrong. They're both opinions but the perspectives upon which they were based are obviously different.​

It doesn't get any simpler than that.

 

[J Grant]

What are you talking about? I've watched you whine about the markets being out of control for years.

What we're SUPPOSED TO DO is emulate what the buyers and sellers are actually doing. Not editorialize on what they should do if only they were as rational and as smart as us.

?? Where are the texts that teach appraisers are supposed to emulate what the buyers and sellers are actually doing? Show that to me.

We recognize and report what the market is doing but we also are supposed to analyze it

What you describe as my "whining" about the market being out of control were spot on comments made on a bulletin board during bubble periods. That does not mean those comments were in an appraisal. I offered to send you an appraisal or appraisals to look at and you decline, which is fine, but then dont' accuse me of something that exists in your imagination.

 

[George Hatch]

OMG

Do me a favor and break out a 1004 and read the entire definition of MV out loud to yourself, including all the assumptions. Then reconsider your question.

Whether an appraiser is right or wrong about the wisdom of the market or the morality of the lenders' actions is not an element of any appraisal assignment. Our job is to observe and report what the market participants are actually doing and what is most likely to happen with a price under the current environment, not editorialize on them being stupid or making bad choices.

We are not on the lender's team, we are not supposed to advocate for their interests or participate or sway their decision making. We do Observe. Report. Keep our personal opinions and moral judgements to ourselves. Keep our predictions to ourselves.