The RTAF analysis process is created as a full, complete and tested feasibility analysis of the market opportunity of a given business or commercial income-producing property business operation. The market feasibility analysis is dependent upon the manipulation of raw data that is either legacy data or real-time data. Legacy data is generally demographics data that has been collected and processed by a demographics data vendor that sells that data to INVIZEN under a license for INVIZEN to manipulate for the purposes of creating a forecast of potential future market opportunity. Real-time data is generally data that is less than 90 days old, as companies report this data on a weekly, monthly or quarterly basis depending upon the type of data being used. INVIZEN purchases, surveys or obtains this data through Internet searches from open sources and then manipulates this data as well. The intention is to replace human interviews which can be fraught with errors with data that is actually reported to management, shareholders, creditors, and/or agencies of government, as this data tends to be more accurate, thus creating the propensity for a more meaningful market analysis output.
The manipulation of this data is based upon certain empirical assumptions made in the given INVIZEN model. Like all empirical assumptions, these assumptions are subject to controversy as they constitute the opinion of the analyst – which is no more valuable than anyone else’s opinion on a given matter. This creates a potential problem in every market feasibility analysis that is prepared by any market feasibility analysis consulting firm and can lead to underwriting rejections (as the underwriter has his/her own opinions on these matters as well, and since they control the money, their opinion has more weight than anyone else’s). The only realistic solution for the use of these empirical assumptions is to test them to see if a reasonable basis may exist for their use in the resulting analyses that manipulate the data. The INVIZEN model undertakes this testing process by virtue of using it as inputs into a pro forma financial analysis model to see if the results in fact meet with the capital market expectations of developers, sponsors, investors and lenders, each in terms of the others. Where these empirical assumptions result in a reasonably-conservative outcome that demonstrates their potential viability, they are retained in the analysis. Where these empirical assumptions fail, they are modified to determine if there is a basis where any reasonable empirical assumption can be made to create the desired outcome. If this cannot be attained, then the feasibility analysis results in a failure and the feasibility study report shows the project as not being potentially economically feasible at this time to undertake. What this process does accomplish is to provide demonstrable proof that a reasonable basis in fact may exist for their inclusion in the resulting feasibility process – a much more desirable outcome than creating a market model that has nothing supporting it other than someone’s opinion on what should be the result and how they got to that result.
The net result of the INVIZEN model’s approach is to reduce the use of empirical assumptions wherever possible by replacing them with actual data, as data represents – more or less – a factual set of circumstances. This speaks to the approach of winning any resulting debate based upon the facts, as you may have your own opinion, but you cannot generally have your own set of facts.