We have to start acting as ONE industry. I realize that Scumbag NAHI will never get on board, but ASHI looks like it will.
To get there we have to start somewhere and co-op marketing is a start.
AMEN! 
Jason,
You might want to read through all the CMI threads. It seems that even though previous CMI’s will be grandfathered, Michael says they will still be subject to review of their qualifications to see if indeed they do qualify for CMI. There’s alot going on so if you’ve missed all this, you want to check it out.
The www.masterbuildinginspector.com site is for finding CMI’s and it has a store on it for Inspection Depot - It seems that CMI’s can only get on it if they do something that is under construction.
And then we have the “NETWORK” and the BB that I just joined to find out that no one cared about.
Something is telling me that Mike has too much time on his hands. One should never put a web site on line that is as messed up as [FONT=Times New Roman][size=3]www.masterbuildinginspector.com](http://www.masterbuildinginspector.com/) is.[/size][/FONT]
It is making home inspectors and Inspection Depot look very unprofessional
rlb
Because it is still under construction and not functional
at this time. The forum is of poor quality also.
oh well…:roll:
Wendy,
In the brochure that Michael was publishing (but now taken
down from his site) he listed some inspectors in his “Ameripro”
company, as CMI qualified.
One CMI was listed with only 300 inspections performed.
Two CMI were listed as being inspectors with only one year
experience.
Do you have a problem with Michaels own inspectors?
dont feel bad John…I have not been accepted to it yet either…
I have been accepted and read the Rowan forum postings.
Readers Digest version:
NHIE - EBPHI Lawyers and ASHI are after Michael.
Michael said it will all work out.
OK… hmmm.
Michael said in another post that his
new forum is like talking into an empty
warehouse.
Give it time… I guess.
If they were being listed as CMI and not the ASCMI’s or whatever that was, then yes I do have an issue with that.
However, the biggest issue is double standards for me. If they are going to allow some CMI’s with minimal experience, that should be the standard for all. If they are only going to allow CMI’s with 1000 hours or inspections, then that should be the standard for ALL CMI’s.
The site is not of the quality that is professional. A site that is under construction should not be on the Internet to represent a professional.
It has incorrect and confusing information. He is trying to charge $300 plus a year for a CMI to be listed. He has a store on it for a ID. He has a members only section. He has incorrect English right in the title line. “an Master Inspector”
The use of the CMI log and then reff to the ASCMI. Plus the change in qualifications and the requirement that one be a member of an inspector association.
Not that my site does not have some areas that need to be change but I am not representing a group of very professional people that are paying big bucks to someone
Shall I go on??
rlb
Richard
The hardest part of the technology is complete, the engine that runs behind the scenes. The functions will allow inspectors to list and edit their profiles with logos and head shots, access CMI information, upload reports and more. We uploaded John M. on there, just search under zip code 11111! www.masterbuildinginspector.com
The easiest part is the front end, but the hardest as it requires text and information. The message board is being tested and I am still not sure if it is the one or not. All in good time. We will start uploading CMI’s onto the system next week and they will have back end access to other functions.
John, your old age must be getting to you as far as the accurate account of the inspectors listed on the Master Inspector booklet. It is still available on www.choosenachi.com. I also know that you take joy out of always looking for the negative side of every position. But that is ok, we are here to help.
Here is an accurate account of the inspectors listed. Most have many other qualifications, from licensed contractors, engineers and more.
If you calculate the average numbers you will find it to be over 6 years in the business and I believe over 2200 inspections with the listed inspectors. Not a bad number!
David Jolly = 3 years / 600 inspections
Gary Clarke = 8 Years / 3000 inspections
Tabor K Hill = 14 years / 6000 inspections
Alan Hertz = 7 years/ 2500 inspections
John Feehan = 5 Years / 1000 inspections
Paul Erickson = 5 Years / 2500 inspections
Tony Arnold = 2 years / 300 inspections – level 1 & 2 IR / Building science and more
Rod James = 6 Years / 2000 inspections
Bobby Mayes = 8 years / 1600 inspections
Guillermo Vargas = 3 years / 500 inspections – PHD engineering
Marty Cohen = 14 years / 3000 inspections
Tom Richie = 6 years / 2000 inspections
Rob Stubberfield = 7 years / 2000 inspections
Carl Sanders = 2 years / 750 inspections
Daniel Jardine = 1.5 years / 500 inspections
John Ahern = 2.5 Years / 1200 inspections
Martin Sloan = 2.5 years / 1000 inspections
Brian Thomee = 7 years / 2000 inspections
Gerald Fox = 8 years / 2000 inspections
Michael rowan = 21 years / 10000 inspections
Michael
Mike
476.19 payed inspections per year as an average for 21 years!! That is a record that is going to be hard to beat.
I think we need to perhaps honor you as Masters of Masters. When did you ever sleep??
It is still a bad site
I can’t even hack into the members only area
rlb
Keep trying.
Keep trying.
A CMI thread is being created on the NACHI website. It will be open to everyone, absent of permissions or moderation. You will not need to log on to read it or participate. It will be the official CMI message board site.
The requirements for inclusion as a CMI is not changing. It will remain at 1000. There may be a tweak, requiring a threshold of education and experience, but the number is NOT changing.
Educational requirements, educators, courses, qualifications, etc will also not be changing. CMI will not have a formalized test. We already have one on the shelf, created by NACHI, and another created by Gerry. Neither will be implemented.
As to co-operative marketing and business opportunities, all are free to roll their own, including Mike. However, the program as it currently exists will primarily remain intact.
This I predict. This, I’ll almost guarantee.
Those who wish to participate may. Those who do not, are free to. No pressure. Eventually, there will be enough wanting the CMI designation where more and more will follow. We are seeing it every day.
Anither valuable lesson from all of this , is that it doesnt pay to try and kiss the collective a$$es of members of other orgs who are jealous of NACHI (because they are) and seek to create a super-class of inspectors, real or imagined, as members of an exclusive group that they feel they deserve to belong to.
You see, by doing this, they PROVE that CMI is a valuable marketing designation. They are liars and charletans. They PRETEND that CMI doesnt matter. MAybe they’ll be proven right. My money is on CMI
To the rest of it, exclusionary tactics is the road that some envisioned CMI to soon be. Not at a cost to NACHI inspectors. Over my dead body.
But again, I applaud Mike for coming up with some real opportunities for co-operative marketing. To that, bravo. Keep going. For Mike to concentrate on co-operative marketing, he realizes that CMI is a marketing designation.
To all the rest, fooey…
And…
As to privately run and controlled message boards, all I can say is that it takes great big balls to commandeer CMIs. CMIS are currently listed on www.certifiedmasterinspector.org.
The other boards are neither owned, sponsoered, nor controlled by the CMI Advisory Board. IMO, they should be ignored.
CMI, despite all efforts, will not be hijacked. Entry dues should be reasonable. Recurring charges, if any, should be super reasonable. Peer review should be limited to those seeking the CMI designation by exception.
All the rest, including the manifesto/fantasy as to the description of what a “true” CMI is is nonsensical, altruistic, and non-measureable. Pure crap.
PS: Another total load of crap is this…ASMBI.
ASMBI stands for “American Society of Master Building Inspectors”. This is a creation of Mike R, as well. He claims that this org’s charter is to administrate the CMI program. More bull****…
He’s free to create it, but not free to administrate it.
Thank you Joe
It is time for mike to understand how the gov regulates not for profit corporations and how the board of directors controls same.
He can not do it his way and to mix for profit and personal companies with a non profit corp might even get us to lose our tax exempt status
CMI is a good thing. It is not mikes to make $'s off of.
If anything it is an area for masters to create more masters. We have to create our replacements.
Education is part of the package and it better be low $$ and high quality. Right now NACHI membership and its educational benefits are building more CMI’s that mike will ever hope to. CMI is not to make $'s for anyone but CMI’s
Just look at mike himself —400 plus inspections per year for 20 plus years – the master of masters – This would be a real project for a peer review board.
I think mike might want to recheck his records to make sure he has everything in order for a public review
And why not have it a requirement that all review records be made public??
Anyone have thoughts on this one??
rlb
Go NACHI… CMI…!!!
I am in agreement with Joe Fersetta’s comments…
and… I think I heard a “boom”.
Joe Farsetta has just posted the most intelligent posting on this thread.
Mike ,
You stated…
[/size][/FONT]
You have the incorrect avatar for Contact SpongePatrick Bob /See bio. Here’s a better avatar for that 11111 listing…
I don’t think that anyone would object to having “CMI” marketed, as long as each person marketing it (Rowan) is not allowed to revise the program and its criteria in order to fit his marketing plan.