Voice of Appraisal

[bluechip]

Love him or hate him he is not wrong:

 

[alebrewer]

The reason experience doesn't matter is because 'experience' is not a quantifiable term. Some appraisers have 'really good' experience. Some appraisers have 'really bad experience' and most appraisers are somewhere between the two. If you could somehow 'grade' experience, then I might be on board. Sans quantification of the term, however, using 'the appraiser's experience' as a basis for discrete adjustments is meaningless.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

The reason experience doesn't matter is because 'experience' is not a quantifiable term.

So, do we assume that because we use math via dubious "adjustments", that adjustment is credible as a mathematically precise calculation? So, everything is an algorithm. Does experience means nothing because we disguise it under a flurry of pseudo-mathematics? Are we calculating an adjustment without any experience input? Or, more likely, we are hiding experience under the false flag of a dubious calculation?

How do you compare two pools on two different properties?

One has a pool room, diving board on each end, lights, and is 18'x 36'. It is located in a subdivision in a small town. The other is on a farm, and is a kidney shaped pool with no pool room nor showers, no fence enclosure, and nothing else. Tell me you don't have to use your judgment (experience) to estimate an adjustment.

If we look at every adjustment, 9 of 10 are simply a range of possible values, or they are not always narrow ranges. If one were to apply a Monte Carlo simulation, then we can come out with an answer by inputting the range and seeing where the peak possibility lies. Not that it is any better than our "experience" but it is real math...and as they say, "Lies, damn lies, and statistics" - but at least we don't have to claim it is "experience". Is that the goal?

 

[Non Sequitur]

The reason experience doesn't matter is because 'experience' is not a quantifiable term. Some appraisers have 'really good' experience. Some appraisers have 'really bad experience' and most appraisers are somewhere between the two. If you could somehow 'grade' experience, then I might be on board. Sans quantification of the term, however, using 'the appraiser's experience' as a basis for discrete adjustments is meaningless.

I see your point but I agree with Phil, it was a loaded question. On one hand experience does matter, reference the AQB's latest working paper considering real estate sales, construction, etc. as alternate experience requirements for certification. On the other hand, experience doesn't matter in the most basic process of the main approach to value we develop?

I don't believe this particular question just fell out of the sky given "experience" is the main reason PAREA and practicum paths are lacking. And I don't think it's a coincidence experience, and another raging issue from years ago "geographic competency", are being minimized by the alphabet soup in DC and others like the institute. Either way, here we are, appraisers with decades of experience can't cite experience in their practice but a real estate agent who sold one used house to their unsuspecting cousin several years ago will be able to log that as experience in the future. One last point, the ageism disguised as "experience doesn't matter" is striking.

 

[Tim Hicks (Texas)]

Since they are trying to turn appraisals into quasi-AVMs with adjustment support software and monthly market trends, I think experience is not a requirement to the powers that be. Let's be serious the real powers that be are AMCs, HUD, Fannie and Freddie. In that order.

 

[alebrewer]

So, do we assume that because we use math via dubious "adjustments", that adjustment is credible as a mathematically precise calculation? So, everything is an algorithm. Does experience means nothing because we disguise it under a flurry of pseudo-mathematics? Are we calculating an adjustment without any experience input? Or, more likely, we are hiding experience under the false flag of a dubious calculation?

How do you compare two pools on two different properties?

One has a pool room, diving board on each end, lights, and is 18'x 36'. It is located in a subdivision in a small town. The other is on a farm, and is a kidney shaped pool with no pool room nor showers, no fence enclosure, and nothing else. Tell me you don't have to use your judgment (experience) to estimate an adjustment.

If we look at every adjustment, 9 of 10 are simply a range of possible values, or they are not always narrow ranges. If one were to apply a Monte Carlo simulation, then we can come out with an answer by inputting the range and seeing where the peak possibility lies. Not that it is any better than our "experience" but it is real math...and as they say, "Lies, damn lies, and statistics" - but at least we don't have to claim it is "experience". Is that the goal?

Don't disagree with any of that. My point was only that 'experience' cannot be a recognized methodology because 'experience' can't be quantified as relevant or non-relevant. If I've spent 15 years applying adjustments based on a cheat sheet given me by my supervisor appraiser 1.5 decades ago, then me stating that 'experience' is the basis for my adjustments is no more meaningful than saying my 6 year old kid is the basis for my adjustments.

 

[alebrewer]

I see your point but I agree with Phil, it was a loaded question. On one hand experience does matter, reference the AQB's latest working paper considering real estate sales, construction, etc. as alternate experience requirements for certification. On the other hand, experience doesn't matter in the most basic process of the main approach to value we develop?

I don't believe this particular question just fell out of the sky given "experience" is the main reason PAREA and practicum paths are lacking. And I don't think it's a coincidence experience, and another raging issue from years ago "geographic competency", are being minimized by the alphabet soup in DC and others like the institute. Either way, here we are, appraisers with decades of experience can't cite experience in their practice but a real estate agent who sold one used house to their unsuspecting cousin several years ago will be able to log that as experience in the future. One last point, the ageism disguised as "experience doesn't matter" is striking.

I don't disagree at all that there is a concerted effort to downplay the role of experience in applying recognized methodologies. I think he's spot on with that accusation.

 

[alebrewer]

As GH is want to state, experience isn't 'just' about learning how to do the math. It's about running a business. It's about learning to be professional with clients, Realtors, homeowners, etc. It's about learning how to market. It's about learning to be a tax pro. AND - it's about becoming proficient with recognized methodologies and techniques. Experience doesn't replace recognized methodologies and techniques - it (should be) the factor that sets the work of seasoned appraisers apart from newbies. Unfortunately, that's not always the case.

 

[ucbruin]

As GH is want to state, experience isn't 'just' about learning how to do the math. It's about running a business. It's about learning to be professional with clients, Realtors, homeowners, etc. It's about learning how to market. It's about learning to be a tax pro. AND - it's about becoming proficient with recognized methodologies and techniques. Experience doesn't replace recognized methodologies and techniques - it (should be) the factor that sets the work of seasoned appraisers apart from newbies. Unfortunately, that's not always the case.

Wow....
If I shut my eyes while I read your post....
I can hear George's voice....

 

[alebrewer]

If that was a compliment - unexpected from this poster.
If that was a jab - expected from this poster.