Evaluating and Applying Control Premiums
In recent years, a greater amount of scrutiny has been placed on valuation analysts’ selection and use of control premiums. As a result, there has been a renewed interest in distinguishing acquisition premiums from control premiums and equity premiums from invested capital premiums. Join Timothy Meinhart for a comprehensive discussion of the proper quantification and application of acquisition premiums and control premiums and also learn about the benefits of using market-based invested capital premiums rather ...
In re Appraisal Solera Holdings, Inc.
In an appraisal proceeding, the Chancery finds the deal price minus synergies provides the best evidence of fair value; court says there was an efficient market and the sales process, though not perfect, was able to deliver the value generated in an arm’s-length transaction.
Delaware Chancery Says Reasonably Sound Sales Process Delivered Fair Value
In an appraisal proceeding, the Chancery finds the deal price minus synergies provides the best evidence of fair value; court says there was an efficient market and the sales process, though not perfect, was able to deliver the value generated in an arm’s-length transaction.
Blueblade Capital Opportunities LLC v. Norcraft Cos.
Chancery rejects deal price as indicator of fair value, citing problematic sales process, and rejects use of unaffected trading price, citing company’s lack of trading history; court instead relies on its own DCF analysis, drawing on the most credible aspects of each expert’s analysis.
Flawed Sales Process Has Chancery Revert to DCF to Determine Fair Value
Chancery rejects deal price as indicator of fair value, citing problematic sales process, and rejects use of unaffected trading price, citing company’s lack of trading history; court instead relies on its own DCF analysis, drawing on the most credible aspects of each expert’s analysis.
In re EM Lodgings, LLC
In granting creditor’s stay relief motion, court averages competing expert valuations and finds debtor has no equity in contested hotel; court says value gap is result of experts’ legitimate disagreements over hotel’s future performance as reflected in inputs for DCF-based analyses.
Court Accords Equal Weight to Competing DCF-Based Hotel Valuations
In granting creditor’s stay relief motion, court averages competing expert valuations and finds debtor has no equity in contested hotel; court says value gap is result of experts’ legitimate disagreements over hotel’s future performance as reflected in inputs for DCF-based analyses.
Wright v. Phillips
In fair value determination analogous to statutory appraisal valuation, Chancery says companies’ S corp status “has discrete value applicable here,” as captured in expert’s use of 14.5% tax rate (as opposed to 31%); court approves marketability discount.
S Corp Status Adds ‘Discrete’ Value to Business, Chancery Says
In fair value determination analogous to statutory appraisal valuation, Chancery says companies’ S corp status “has discrete value applicable here,” as captured in expert’s use of 14.5% tax rate (as opposed to 31%); court approves marketability discount.
Spouse’s Unilateral Stock Agreement Sets Value in Divorce Action
Appeals court agrees with trial court that valuation in stock agreement is binding in partition action even though non-owner spouse refused to sign agreement and agreement did not mention divorce as one of the circumstances in which valuation applied.
Daubert Flexible as to Solvency Determination for Multiple Debtor Entities
Court finds Daubert centers on reliability, not persuasiveness, and can accommodate experts’ different approaches to determining solvency in case with multiple debtor entities; court rejects exclusion of expert opinion relying on GAAP-based financials.
Bankruptcy Court’s Going-Concern Valuation Weathers Appeal
In Chapter 7 case, Bankruptcy Court finds trustee expert’s liquidation valuation fails to meet insolvency tests; court says expert’s substantial discounting of debtor’s assets is based on mistaken assumption and incompatible with going-concern valuation.
Bankruptcy Court’s Going-Concern Valuation Weathers Appeal
In Chapter 7 case, district court upholds Bankruptcy Court’s insolvency determination, which was a predicate to many of trustee’s claims; reviewing court says evidence supports use of going-concern valuation and rejection of liquidation discount.
Spouse’s Unilateral Stock Agreement Sets Value in Divorce Action
Appeals court agrees with trial court that valuation in stock agreement is binding in partition action even though non-owner spouse refused to sign agreement and agreement did not mention divorce as one of the circumstances in which valuation applied.
Baumboree v. Baumbouree
Appeals court agrees with trial court that valuation in stock agreement is binding in partition action even though non-owner spouse refused to sign agreement and agreement did not mention divorce as one of the circumstances in which valuation applied.
Daubert Flexible as to Solvency Determination for Multiple Debtor Entities
Court finds Daubert centers on reliability, not persuasiveness, and can accommodate experts’ different approaches to determining solvency in case with multiple debtor entities; court rejects exclusion of expert opinion relying on GAAP-based financials.
Burtch v. Opus, LLC (In re Opus East, LLC) (II)
In Chapter 7 case, district court upholds Bankruptcy Court’s insolvency determination, which was a predicate to many of trustee’s claims; reviewing court says evidence supports use of going-concern valuation and rejection of liquidation discount.
Post-Confirmation Comm. for Small Loans, Inc. v. Martin
Court finds Daubert centers on reliability, not persuasiveness, and can accommodate experts’ different approaches to determining solvency in case with multiple debtor entities; court rejects exclusion of expert opinion relying on GAAP-based financials.
Expert’s Application of Asset Approach ‘Defies Common Sense’
Court rejects income approach for valuing interest in business with low bar of entry and few repeat customers; court also says asset-based valuation following Section 179 tax treatment understates true value of the company and requires upward adjustment.
In re Marriage of Hartung
Court rejects income approach for valuing interest in business with low bar of entry and few repeat customers; court also says asset-based valuation following Section 179 tax treatment understates true value of the company and requires upward adjustment.
Burtch v. Opus, LLC (In re Opus East, LLC) (I)
In Chapter 7 case, Bankruptcy Court finds trustee expert’s liquidation valuation fails to meet insolvency tests; court says expert’s substantial discounting of debtor’s assets is based on mistaken assumption and incompatible with going-concern valuation.
‘Blurred’ Solvency Analysis Diminishes Expert’s Credibility
Bankruptcy court finds expert’s analysis “blurred the line” between going concern and liquidation value, detracting from opinion’s credibility; but court approves of expert’s “precise” time frame for capturing data with which to determine solvency.
Stadtmueller v. Fitzgerald (In re Epic Cycle Interactive, Inc.)
Bankruptcy court finds expert’s analysis “blurred the line” between going concern and liquidation value, detracting from opinion’s credibility; but court approves of expert’s “precise” time frame for capturing data with which to determine solvency.
M.I.C. Ltd. v Commissioner
The Tax Court determined that none of the price paid for the city’s threatened condemnation of property operated as a multipurpose adult entertainment complex was attributable to goodwill or going-concern value. In so doing, the Tax Court made its own determination of the fair market value of the real estate.
Tax Court Determines That Gain on Sale of Property to the City Is All Related to the Property and Therefore Is Deferred Under IRC Sec. 1033
The Tax Court determined that none of the price paid for the city’s threatened condemnation of property operated as a multipurpose adult entertainment complex was attributable to goodwill or going-concern value. In so doing, the Tax Court made its own determination of the fair market value of the real estate.