If an asset manager’s buy-sell agreement is going to specify reasonable expectations for the value of the firm, what are they? We think there are at least four elements that should be clearly stated in each buy-sell agreement to ward off costly ambiguity. Read this guest post by Matthew R. Crow, ASA, CFA, President of Mercer Capital.
When I began testifying, I looked for guidance, which I found in the booklet, “Testifying with Impact,” by a former professor and speech coach. Foremost, I learned the objective of testimony is not to read words or testify without notes, but to communicate thoughts, ideas, and knowledge. In this post, I reflect on the other simple but powerful lessons I learned from this booklet.
We continue with our discussion of getting command of the numbers by discussing income statement adjustments. Normalizing adjustments are made in valuations to separate unusual or non-recurring or management discretionary items of income or expense on the income statement. The objective of normalizing adjustments is to develop historical, adjusted income statements and percentage income statements that can be used in the valuation process.
The following ten comments should provide a good overview of the concept of income statement (normalizing) adjustments for business appraisers and for attorneys.
We continue the series begun in the previous post based on my long-ago staff memo regarding “The ABZs of Solid Valuation Conclusions and Reports.”
The most frequent and often embarrassing errors that occur in valuation reports are the result of obvious issues or elementary mistakes. This happens when appraisers fail to “get command of the numbers.” Based on years of experience, I’ve listed 10 things a business appraiser must do to get command of the numbers.
While I am speaking from the viewpoint of a business appraiser in this series, the information provided will be helpful to attorneys who deal in matters pertaining to valuation.
In this walk down memory lane, I share excerpts from a piece I originally wrote for business appraisers in 1989 and updated in the mid-1990s entitled “The ABZs of Solid Valuation Conclusions and Reports.” If you were in business in the 1990s, this post will bring back memories. If you were not, you might enjoy an inside look at the climate of the time. Either way, it’s a fun journey.
In the 8th post in my Statutory Fair Value and Business Valuation Series, we focus on the case Verghetta v. Lawlor. We consider five valuation issues this case raises: reasonableness of valuation conclusions, reasonableness of normalization adjustments, reasonableness of projections, whether the earnings of tax pass-through entities should be tax-effected, and appropriateness of a marketability discount.
Considering the formal proceeding of an expert deposition, I created a list of thoughts on giving an effective deposition from my own experience. I hope you find it helpful.
An expert deposition is a formal proceeding. I created this list of deposition preparation items from my own experience in having my deposition taken and in attending a number of depositions of other experts or parties to various matters. I hope you find it helpful.
The first time I testified in court was in 1981, the year before I started Mercer Capital. I had participated in the preparation of a fairness opinion in a going private transaction while at Morgan Keegan, my employer at the time. A shareholder dissented, and the Chancery Court in Memphis was charged to determine the (statutory) fair value of the company’s shares in accordance with Tennessee statutory law and judicial interpretation. There has to be a first time for everything.
The discounted cash flow model as summarized by the Gordon Model provides an ideal basis for discussing what we call an integrated theory of business valuation. In this post, we begin with a bit of introduction for perspective.
