Human eyes, or "boots on the ground", are obviously better.  But as long as Z, T, and R are posting AVM's, that concept won't go away. 

Having a professional opinion is no doubt better than AVM, depending on who that professional is. I wonder how many agents would actually be willing to share their honest opinion after a visit?

Most of the computer valuation systems out there are merely bait to collect names and numbers to be sold to agents who will pay anything for leads.

I agree with Fred Griffin.  A

I really am not familiar enough with this to give an intelligent answer so I will read the others

I vote for boots on the ground, but I'd be cautious of agents giving a lower valuation to make their client's offer sound better.

I am so not a fan of AVM - it is never accurate from what I've seen so far.

Your blog may be a better place to promote your model.

Your site is down.

Boots on the ground. And the more stylish the boots, the better! 3:)

This smacks of self promotion and I don't think it should be on the Q&A.

I am afraid I am not familiar with this service

I will look into it

In many instances the AVM is not correct, best to look at comps! 

HOMEiZ.COM HOMEiZGROUP - allowing agents to share their opinion on valuation is a good thing - however, what if someone manipulates it?

Boots on the ground - hands down!

I have not seen your valuation model nor compared it to the AVMs used in our great nation.

Boots is always a more accurate and better option.  Mine are 5% above or below and usually even closer than that.

AVM's are so tricky and most often just inaccurate because they don't have the full picture.  I guess I'd have to see how it works with agents giving their own opinions of value, but even agents are often wrong.  CMA's take time, knowledge and reviewing of surrounding properties in the market.  But, like Fred said, I don't think they are going anywhere, so anything that makes them a bit more accurate is a plus I guess?  -Kasey