Regression for GLA Adjustment

[J Grant]

wipe your glasses JG

The easy way is sensitivity analysis, then copy as picture and paste into the report.

I described in my post # 3 a sensitivity analysis that was done using the comps right there on the grid.
Wipe your glasses, T- extracting the contributory value of the residual after making other adjustments IS a sensitivity analysis.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

I described in my post # 3 a sensitivity analysis that was done using the comps right there on the grid.
Wipe your glasses, T- extracting the contributory value of the residual after making other adjustments IS a sensitivity analysis.

I am talking about your horrible spelling. Are you typing on a tablet?

 

[Elliott]

From a George Dell article on correlation:

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

 

[Tom D]

i like putting the regression or sensitivity analysis charts in my appraisal. at least it looks like i did something beside guess at a number. regression & sensitivity kinda give you a head start to where the number could be. the problem with many appraisals is too much written language where you phase out after a few paragraphs. breaking up pages of words with graphs or charts is the easier way for the reader to learn what you are saying.

 

[George Hatch]

I still think ~95% of the appraisal occurs at the problem identification phase and the subsequent comp selection. The adjustments are just a refinement of the resulting dataset.

 

[George Hatch]

While we're at it, I think where a lot of (bad) appraisals go wrong is in the problem identification phase. Not developing a solid grasp of what the neighborhood is and what the pricing trends have been for the neighborhood as a whole, where the subject fits within that neighborhood, and what the subject's market segment has been doing in particular. The most recent comps are the result of those trends, not a freestanding dataset that stands in isolation of everything else.


.

 

[djd09]

the waivers are making it like 2004...can't analyze fraud

 

[George Hatch]

Nobody ever said the lenders were more moral than the loan originators. The rationale has been that it's easier to regulate and enforce at the lender level where everything they do leaves a paper trail with the name of the responsible party on it.

The play these lenders were using back then was one of plausible deniability:

"This appraiser and this loan originator conspired to cheat me. I had no idea what was going on. I'm a victim, they lied to me."​

​

If you hate the lenders then you will have no trouble believing that the above was an obvious lie being told in order to avoid responsibility for anything that happened in that appraisal they were using. That they knew better but went along with it anyway because it was profitable to do so. It is that plausible deniability that D-F stripped from them. Now they can only use appraisals that were engaged either directly or via their designated agent acting in their direct authority (the AMC).

That doesn't necessarily stop them from making bad deals but it does prevent them from pointing the finger at anyone outside of their direct control. If/when these cases come under scrutiny.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Nobody ever said the lenders were more moral than the loan originators.

Really? Loan officers I am familiar with get fired for making bad loans. They are not working towards making lots of loans. They are geared to making money overall and having too many defaults means losing money and in turn, fired. I recall one Lender VP who was fired twice. Once when the board didn't think he should have made a loan he did, and it went horribly wrong as the guy turned out to be a fraud. The bank lost about 1 mil in that deal. Then he got canned after a series of poor performing loans at a second bank. Another got banned from banking for life when the FDIC stepped in. Really wasn't his fault as the bank owner had told him to make the loan when the poultry farmer had lost his contract. To not lose the whole mess he proposed becoming an independent egg seller and that venture only got the bank in deeper. Then the "old man" (owner) died and the bank was audited and since the appraisals did not add up to the debt and they had not reserved 100% as required, the VP had to go. Another one had so many bad loans his own father who was the loan VP (now the pres) asked him to find another job. Years ago when I and a bank were sued along with a chicken company, an ex-employee who was fired after losing too many consumer loans, the plaintiffs claimed that this guy told them that the bank told me what amount to value a farm at...which of course, was untrue. So when the guy was challenged to put that on record, he refused to be subpoenaed from out of state, knowing good and well he was just a lying embittered ex-employee selling lawnmowers in Kansas. I haven't forgot the little bastid since his father in law and I were good friends.

Loan officers are not commission driven. They get bonuses based upon the profit the loan department makes. No profit, no bonus. And loan defaults are not profit. My brother was a LO for 40 years. He never earned a commission one. It was always a year end bonus.