Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Appellate court rules on valuation of inventory in Sears bankruptcy

Sears (the Amazon of its day) recently emerged from bankruptcy after four years and thousands of court filings.

ESL Invs., L.P. v. Sears Holdings Corp. Debtor-Appellee (In re Sears Holdings Corp.)

Second-lien holders, entitled to payment only after the debts of first-lien holders have been discharged, argued that the value of the collateral that secured their claims, as measured on the petition date, vastly exceeded what they had been paid and that they were accordingly entitled to priority payment of the difference. At trial, all parties put on evidence as to the value of the assets at the petition date. The differences varied widely. “The differences among these values turned primarily on how the experts calculated the revenue Debtors could expect to earn from selling their inventory.” The appeal dealt primarily with this inventory issue and how it should be valued.

Valuation of Inventory Key to Decision on Collateral Value in Bankruptcy

Second-lien holders, entitled to payment only after the debts of first-lien holders have been discharged, argued that the value of the collateral that secured their claims, as measured on the petition date, vastly exceeded what they had been paid and that they were accordingly entitled to priority payment of the difference. At trial, all parties put on evidence as to the value of the assets at the petition date. The differences varied widely. “The differences among these values turned primarily on how the experts calculated the revenue Debtors could expect to earn from selling their inventory.” The appeal dealt primarily with this inventory issue and how it should be valued.

In Re S-Tek 1, LLC

The debtor, S-Tek 1 LLC, submitted a motion to value to the Bankruptcy Court to determine the value of the collateral of Surv-Tek Inc. as to debt owed it by the debtor pledged as collateral for debt owed by S-Tek to Surv-Tek. The valuation was to be used in the confirmation of a Chapter 11 reorganization of S-Tek. The court used the replacement value standard of value instead of the “ongoing concern” value since the replacement value provided a value greater than the “enterprise value” (i.e., ongoing concern value).

Bankruptcy Court Uses the ‘Replacement Value Standard’ as It Determines That Debtor ‘Enterprise Value’ Is Lower and Inappropriate

The debtor, S-Tek 1 LLC, submitted a motion to value to the Bankruptcy Court to determine the value of the collateral of Surv-Tek Inc. as to debt owed it by the debtor pledged as collateral for debt owed by S-Tek to Surv-Tek. The valuation was to be used in the confirmation of a Chapter 11 reorganization of S-Tek. The court used the replacement value standard of value instead of the “ongoing concern” value since the replacement value provided a value greater than the “enterprise value” (i.e., ongoing concern value).

Business Combinations and Fair Value for Financial Reporting

Are you confused by business combinations? Join William Kennedy for this engaging session covering GAAP fair value standards and their application in business combinations. Hear a discussion of the nuances of the GAAP fair value standard and history of how it was developed as part of the GAAP-IFRS convergence project. Also learn how the valuation approaches and methods used in fair value assessment differ from valuation approaches used in a fair market value appraisal.

In re Kinser Group LLC

In § 506(a) hotel valuations, bankruptcy court finds creditor’s experienced expert premised appraisals on “fundamentally flawed” base assumption that hotels would be sold on the valuation date, where debtor’s plan said debtor would retain and operate hotels; court said replacement value applied.

Expert’s Failure to Review Debtor’s Reorganization Plan Results in ‘Defective’ Hotel Appraisals

In § 506(a) hotel valuations, bankruptcy court finds creditor’s experienced expert premised appraisals on “fundamentally flawed” base assumption that hotels would be sold on the valuation date, where debtor’s plan said debtor would retain and operate hotels; court said replacement value applied.

8 results