Site Vs. Location

[Mike Garrett RAA]

But Bill.....it didn't come across that way. Please remember we have a vast audience including lots of newbies who take things read here as gospel.

 

[xm72mhd]

Originally posted by Bill Geiger@Nov 15 2005, 07:40 AM
I think I know enough about the decorum necessary in a courtroom setting...

I was just having fun.

Here I find myself once again agreeing with Mike! Why don't you off-set your "fun" with a description of what professional demeanor in court really is, other than a game of one-up-manship, having the last word or embarrasing someone?

 

[Willie]

Originally posted by Bill Geiger@Nov 15 2005, 08:40 AM
Hey guys, it was sarcasm! Loosen up!

I was just having fun.

No it wasn't. You meant it. Admit it. And that Judge and them lawyers is going to show you, big fellow.

 

[incognito]

Sorry, I guess I just don't understand the rules here, yet, or I am not a "member" of the club yet, or something...

I sort of thought the "Sherlock Holmes" reference gave it away.

This forum is SO full of sarcasm, inuendo, and such that I think that a reader must be prepared for that. Frankly, that is one of the things I have found interesting about the forum.

So far, my favorite response seen in the froum was by Oregon Doug, responding to "what $/sq.ft. adjustment factor do you use" question:

ALWAYS USE $31.23 PER SQUARE FOOT! NEVER EVER DEVIATE FROM THAT AND NEVER QUESTION IT! (my Ouija board told me).

Always use that #, regardless of whether you are appraising a new house, custom house, tract house, old house, urban, rural, manufactured house , trouse..... Try not to make your appraisal too confusing with all that "market place" gobblygook.

I guess I shouldn't have taken that as sarcasm, and will start using $31.23 on every appraisal from now on, because Doug says so (and he has more posts than I do).

 

[xm39hnu]

Bill,
I kinda figured you were exaggerating a little. But you left in just enough credibility that some newbie might've taken as factual. I think that's the reason most of us chimed in with, "No, no! Bad practice." That, and some of us weren't absolutely sure you were kidding, 'specially when you said USPAP was Federal law.

 

[incognito]

Yeah, in that context, I see your point. I'm learning... :idea:

 

[Willie]

Bill, welcome to this Forum. I've just noticed your last couple of days posts.

 

[Bill Baughn]

Originally posted by Mike Garrett, RAA@Nov 14 2005, 07:58 AM
Bill...I am not really disagreeing with you BECAUSE I don't know your market. I basically did the same thing you did when I bought our new home three years ago. We have a 4,000SF lot with very little yard, but then...I am not the typical buyer either. Demographics show I am way past the "typical age" of a new home buyer. Ask one of your builders for a buyer profile. Most of the really good national builders know their markets and what buyers are looking for and larger lots or "more land" is right up there as a preference. The builder then prices accordingly.

We have two families living on our cul-de-sac that have small children. Used to be we had three. The third family moved away because the lot was too small and they didn't have a big enough back yard for their kids to play in. I have heard this from the other two families with kids also. This subdivision is more suited for an old **** like me!

I would ask the question again...."if all other things were equal, would the typical buyer pay a little more for a larger lot?" REALTORS® must think so. Just look that the listings on MLS and see how many emphasize that point.

Mike,

Just to let you know my "village" is in Lost Wages, NV.

Nowadays, with the "water drought", if there is any landscaping done, it is desert landscaping with minimal water usage. Not the idea playing area for kids. When we were kids, our lawns front and back were all grass. That just isn't the case any more. Not only that but builders are trying to squeeze as many homes into their developments as they can. In the past you might get four homes in a culdesac but today in the same area, you get eight. Many as a zero-lot-line development. We rarely get the open range developments I saw back east years ago. Different people have different wants and needs. All I was trying to do was to provide an example of one non-conforming area that probably only applied to that one assignment.


Bill Baughn