It is late and I could take your response line by line and respond, but again, it is late.
You asked an obtuse question and hopefully didn't really expect a response. Your question was never intended to have a response.
You can "call out" Danny for anything you want but that does not make you "correct" or mean you have any reasonable expectation of a response. He works for an AMC, he gives his views and sometimes he posts the "company line".
Danny does not "owe you" a response. He participates in this forum because he wants to. I can post something that you do not like and you can ask a question of me and I don't "owe you" a response either.
As to your claim that he has accused appraisers of being delusional he is correct. Some are. We are self-employed people and have to react to the market. In some areas there is an over-supply of appraisers and therefore fees will be low. It is basic economics we learned in the first year of college. AMCs are in the business of making money (just like all of us do) and they will do what they can to do that. I don't like some the tactics they use but it is what it is.
His time management argument is the "company line" selling his AMC's product. I am not interested and if you are not interested don't work for his company. The idea that most of us need better time management is garbage.
Our business can be ugly. Guess what? All businesses can be ugly. Supply and demand is a part of EVERY SINGLE BUSINESS. Danny's company can do what they can because of supply and demand but they have to adapt to regional or local situations as he has posted. Danny defends his company's 48-hour after inspection time very poorly multiple times but I would guess his company looks away in COW states if they are smart. He has to defend this "requirement", it is the company line.
Danny does own what he does. He has never been secretive about it. Does he sugar-coat? That is up for interpretation. He is part of an AMC. Take it for what it is worth.
The personal attacks on him are not warranted.
I doubt I would ever take work from his company but folks should at least appreciate that he posts here as he gives insight to the workings of one aspect of the AMC model.
So first off, thank you for your appropriate response - I truly appreciate that. And I suppose you are right, I did get a little personal at the end there. I suppose that can happen when I feel personally insulted. Something I have found interesting here, is that DW sure does have a lot of friends on tis forum. It has been amazing to read how many come to his defense instead of letting him stand up for himself and his views. And while I can give that some credit, its not enough for me to let the things that have been said, and just as importantly the way they have been said, in the context they are said, slide.
As far as all of the other stuff you have said about how things get said or conversed on this forum, I agree those things apply to me, though I would point out they apply to everyone else too (being owed, expectations, opinions, etc.). For the record, my expectations of others are low, but that is not going to stop me from engaging - the back and forth is why I come here in the first place and there is nothing I value more than learning something new (which usually equates to me being wrong). So on that note, if I have crossed the line of making it a bit too personal, on that score I apologize to you, this forum and DW. For all other counts, I make no apologies.
The biggest problem I have with what DW is saying on this thread, and he has finally addressed that specifically to me (thank you DW and Ill get to that next), is the lack of, or at the very least failing to acknowledge, the context when defining market value. We are appraisers and defining the context of market value is essential, as we all know. DW is trying to contend that the AMC behavior of pooling labor and forcing appraisers to compete against each other on a mass scale results in market value. He keeps ignoring the true context of that market and clearly wants to convince us that it is not only customary, but reasonable. I contend that reasonable is subjective, and will voice my opinion further on the matter to him directly and see where that goes.
Thanks again for responding in a thoughtful and contextual manner.
If somewhere between 50% and 80% of transaction are conducted a certain way, then what should establish the market rates for those transactions? The 50% to 80% or the remainder? I know how you will answer, but what would your answer be if the question was about real estate prices rather than appraiser fees?
