A note on the workflow behind The Valuation Strategist — and why the rest of the industry should catch up.
The Valuation Strategist is produced by one person working with modern tools. The tools include large language models. I use them the way a serious analyst uses everything else available to them: research assistants, Excel, structured frameworks, editorial review. I am open about this not because it requires defense but because the rest of the industry has not yet caught up to what production looks like in 2026, and I would rather lead that conversation than wait for it.
The valuation profession is full of senior people who have figured out, quietly, that AI is a force multiplier. Almost none of them are saying so in public. That gap is the opportunity. The professionals who build durable reputations over the next five years will be the ones who treat their workflow as an asset to be talked about, not a secret to be guarded. This publication is one bet on that thesis.
The thesis of each issue, the positions taken, the predictions made, the calls on what matters and what doesn't — that is the work. It comes from twenty years in and around the valuation profession, from current practice in commercial property tax appeal, and from the rare vantage point of having worked the appraisal side, the institutional ownership side, and now the brokerage side of the same asset class. The tools support the work. They are not the work.
Every number is sourced. Every prediction is one I will be held to. Every position is one I can argue, in person, with a sophisticated reader. The standard for serious work has never been which tools touched it. The standard is whether the analysis holds up under questioning. That standard does not change because the production process has.
Every issue is read, revised, and finished by me before it is published. The publication speaks in one voice because one person is responsible for what it says. If a sentence does not sound like something I would say in a serious conversation, it does not get published.
My name is on every issue. Errors are mine. Predictions that fail are mine. Positions that prove unpopular are mine. The byline is the thing that makes the publication accountable, and accountability has not been redistributed by any tool, ever.
The CRE industry is having a quiet version of the conversation that tech, finance, and journalism are having openly. Brokers are using AI tools to draft offering memoranda. Appraisers are using AI tools to accelerate report production. Lenders are running AI-assisted underwriting. Consultants are publishing thought leadership produced with significant AI involvement. Almost none of them are saying so.
That opacity is going to age badly. The professionals who earn outsized trust over the next five years will be the ones who treat their workflow as visible and accountable — the way the best consultants have always treated their use of research staff, Excel models, and editorial review. The standard of trust has never been about which tools sat on the desk. It is about whether the person at the desk could defend the result.
This publication takes the visible position. The tools are part of the workflow. The judgment, the analysis, and the accountability are mine. If the industry follows, that will be a small contribution worth making. If it doesn't, the people who do will compound an advantage faster than the ones who don't.