The Appraiser Shortage Myth Part 43

[timd354]

I never said you specifically advocated for zero regulation. I was commenting on the topic in general. People can be too quick to call for more regulations, but the last round of regulations, though they might have gone over board, largely worked- hopefully now the imbalance can be addressed sensibly .

How has AMC regulation worked out for you? Has AMC regulation resulted in increased fees paid by AMC's to appraisers or has it just resulted in helping to legitimize the AMC model to
banks/lenders (who would much rather deal with regulated and licensed entities than unlicensed and unregulated entities? Has AMC regulation resulted in more AMC's which provide additional competition or has it accelerated the consolidation of the industry, resulting in less competitiion? Has increased regulation erected high barriers to entry that will choke off future additional competition or does it encourage new entrants that will provide more potential sources of business to appraisers?

I personally know the previous owners of two small, regional AMC's who paid their appraisers very well who folded up their AMC's specifically because of the added expense of AMC licensing and regulation which they simply could not absorb like the big boys due to economies of scale. My former mentor ran one of these small, regional AMC's and he realized that that the economics of the business would no longer work unless he could expand to a national footprint. Unfortunately, after he did an exhaustive analysis of what it would take to do that, he determined that the first year licensing and compliance costs alone to expand to a national level would likely exceed $1 million dollars....he decided that those numbers were just too daunting to deal with, so he shut it down...I know that StreetLinks picked up his biggest client.

 

[J Grant]

AMC regulation ( and enforcement ) stinks. I never said I supported this particular piece of regulation. It stank from the moment it hit the ground. Not all regulation is created equal (or effective ). We've touched on this topic before- if there was to be firewall /third party by regulation, I believe it should have been a round robin non profit panel, as VA is run or similar to how the old FHA panel pre lender select was run, as well as other options.. You disagreed. Fine, we disagree on round robin. But this current system is a disaster, certainly for appraisers and apparently for some smaller AMC's since they are closing.

Most appraisers, including myself, who signed the appraiser petition, and spoke out against value pressure, wanted sanctions and enforcement against mtge brokers or individuals who value pressured , and we wanted a hot line and independent agency dedicated to that. It never happened, this crazy firewall allowing for profit AMC's was the result. I am not happy with it nor are most appraisers.

 

[Deleted member 130081]

Once again we have a thread where appraisers who have never worked at an AMC assert what they believe certain AMC positions to be and then attack those alleged positions, with nothing to indicate those supposed views even accurately reflect actual AMC positions.

Can you cite cases of AMCs voicing opposition to cost plus? I do actually interact with senior managers from various AMCs on a regular basis, and most that I talk with would LOVE cost plus.

WOW. Once again an insulting post from a representative of an AMC, who thinks the plight of the modern appraiser is simply a perception problem. I asked you to cite an example of another industry that pools labor against itself the way AMCs do and all I (we) got is crickets. Now you want to copy my tactic without responding your self.

Point #1 - Appraisers who have worked for AMCs have chimed in on this thread, and your response to there was (if any)? Politifuddle.

Point #2 - Sure, maybe AMCs "...would love..." a cost plus model - they just love the skim/extortion model a little more, no?

Point #3 - You want to call someone out, call them out, your general attacks hit everyone.

Look DW, I am not saying things are not tough all over or suggesting any solution is easy or feasible or preferable within the current legislative landscape (don't let my debunk of your nonsense(s) allude to that). What I would like to see or hear, is a spade be called a spade. Own what you are a part of, rather than defending it with nonsense that as someone else noted, sounds a lot like what/how a politician would answer a tough question. On a later post you go on to say how the "credibility" of posters on this thread is being deteriorated by what they have said - again another insult instead of honesty from you as far as I am concerned. That's a defensive tactic from the corner instead of an offensive tactic rendered from a position of truth. You dodge around the truth, as far as I am concerned, because the truth is ugly.

Q - "Hey Don, how do you sleep at night"
A - "On a bed made of money"

Madmen Season 1

So lets really be honest, the cost plus model is not impossible, or even that tough to implement really, but it is less profitable for AMCs and the banks that hold interest in the AMCs, which is the true primary reason it is not implemented. Why work a bit harder to make less money right?

Lets be honest again, AMCs pool labor in a way that is not typical in another industry in the US, with a result that comes very close (if not hitting it on the head) to a monopoly on labor.

And lets end this with a point to the thread title, that trainees are not entering the industry because the margin that used to pay for trainees is now absorbed by the AMC, who survive from the skim, and makes more profit by a larger skim, possible by the pooling of labor.

So a cop shoots an innocent person dead. Then a member of the police force shows up at the funeral and says "Gee I sure am sorry, but it is really tough being a police officer."

 

[timd354]

AMC regulation ( and enforcement ) stinks. I never said I supported this particular piece of regulation. It stank from the moment it hit the ground. Not all regulation is created equal (or effective ). We've touched on this topic before- if there was to be firewall /third party by regulation, I believe it should have been a round robin non profit panel, as VA is run or similar to how the old FHA panel pre lender select was run, as well as other options.. You disagreed. Fine, we disagree on round robin. But this current system is a disaster, certainly for appraisers and apparently for some smaller AMC's since they are closing.

Most appraisers, including myself, who signed the appraiser petition, and spoke out against value pressure, wanted sanctions and enforcement against mtge brokers or individuals who value pressured , and we wanted a hot line and independent agency dedicated to that. It never happened, this crazy firewall allowing for profit AMC's was the result. I am not happy with it nor are most appraisers.

That's what happens when people push for increased regulations without thinking things through and without providing a viable and realistic plan for regulations that make sense and that actually have a chance of being adopted. A round robin not for profit panel was not a realistic solution since it had zero chance of ever being adopted, so this is what you got. BTW, Maybe you did not personally support the type of AMC regulation that now exists, but there were plenty of appraisers eagerly cheering on this exact type of regulation on as it was being adopted, including many here on the AF.

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

AMCs are certainly a hot button issue causing some to see insults where there are none. The Pavlovian response to anything AMC is pretty hilarious, and sad as it makes normally sensible individuals virtual lunatics (now that last part could be construed as an insult--nothing Mr. Wiley posted remotely comes close).

 

[TRESinc]

Denis, it sounds like you're talking about AMCs choosing their appraiser (my bold) and not lenders choosing their AMC ... oh wait, that's right ... it's a business decision and is the same either way! (again, my bold)

there it is again... now both you AND denis are spouting off facts and making sense, which typically has no place here with those who just like to argue and whine...

 

[J Grant]

That's what happens when people push for increased regulations without thinking things through and without providing a viable and realistic plan for regulations that make sense and that actually have a chance of being adopted. A round robin not for profit panel was not a realistic solution since it had zero chance of ever being adopted, so this is what you got. BTW, Maybe you did not personally support the type of AMC regulation that now exists, but there were plenty of appraisers eagerly cheering on this exact type of regulation on as it was being adopted, including many here on the AF.

There were viable plans for round robbin, I believe George Hatch favored them- You advocated against it, did you not? If RR had "zero" chance of passing, it was because business interests did not want it to pass. It could have been modeled along the VA panel lines or former FHA panel model- in any case, I personally wanted a hot line and agency dedicated to appraiser independence , not this POS we got stuck with. I don't recall many appraisers eagerly cheering on the exact type of regulation passed establishing for profit AMC's as a firewall, but perhaps we recall things differently.

 

[ucbruin]

AMCs are certainly a hot button issue causing some to see insults there are none. The Pavlovian response to anything AMC is pretty hilarious, and sad as it makes normally sensible individuals virtual lunatics (now that last part could be construed as an insult--nothing Mr. Wiley posted remotely comes close).

 

[Non Sequitur]

Increased regulation always kills the little guys and is good for big business...I don't get why so many people don't seem to understand that

They don't care until the regulations affect their bottom line. And let's be honest, most residential appraisers chasing lender work aren't running anything remotely similar to a traditional business. They sign up with a few clients, scream and holler if anything other than a copy of their license is required during the process, then they wait for assignments to pop up in their emails. Wash, rinse, and repeat. And when business is good, the email address is dinging all day long, they consider themselves some sort of genius.

And when the assignments don't show up it's always someone else's fault; crooked mortgage brokers, greedy AMCs, dastardly out of area appraisers, skippies, etc. It's never the man/woman in the mirror's fault.

 

[J Grant]

AMCs are certainly a hot button issue causing some to see insults there are none. The Pavlovian response to anything AMC is pretty hilarious, and sad as it makes normally sensible individuals virtual lunatics (now that last part could be construed as an insult--nothing Mr. Wiley posted remotely comes close).

There is nothing Pavlovian about most responses to AMC issues- appraisers state the reality as they and colleagues experienced it over the years. . Appraisers can get heated since AMC gain in market share has destroyed livelihoods and adversely impacted so many.

I think what bothers appraisers is the spin put forward by DW and others with AMC interests behind their posts. Personally he sounds like a great guy to sit down and have a beer with, or talk about appraisals with. However his posts on the topic serve a purpose- has anybody wondered why a chief appraiser for a national AMC, who surely must be very busy, spends so much time on a BB board ? Though he does post ( and they are excellent)) about general appraisal topics, a great deal of his participation is in AMC related posts, and I assume that is by intention of his company to get their "alternate facts" message across.