DCF Projections Failed to Reflect Target’s Operative Reality, Chancery Says

BVLaw
Court Case Digests
July 21, 2017
4812 Radiotelephone Communications
517312 Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite)
dissenting shareholder
expert testimony, fair value, breach of fiduciary duty, discounted cash flow (DCF), merger, merger price, minority interest, statutory appraisal, projections, controlling interest

ACP Master, Ltd. v. Sprint Corp.
2017 Del. Ch. LEXIS 125
US
State Court
Delaware
Court of Chancery of Delaware
Prof. Gregg Jarrell (plaintiffs/petitioners/dissenting shareholders); Prof. Bradford Cornell (defendant/respondent)
Laster

Summary

In joint fiduciary-appraisal action centering on Sprint’s acquisition of minority interest in related entity, Chancery says merger was entirely fair and adopts respondent expert’s DCF analysis; huge value gap is 90% due to experts’ choice of projections.

See Also

ACP Master, Ltd. v. Sprint Corp.

In joint fiduciary-appraisal action centering on Sprint’s acquisition of minority interest in related entity, Chancery says merger was entirely fair and adopts respondent expert’s DCF analysis; huge value gap is 90% due to experts’ choice of projections.

DCF Projections Failed to Reflect Target’s Operative Reality, Chancery Says

In joint fiduciary-appraisal action centering on Sprint’s acquisition of minority interest in related entity, Chancery says merger was entirely fair and adopts respondent expert’s DCF analysis; huge value gap is 90% due to experts’ choice of projections.