- 105 - 1984 $367,841,000 1985 431,929,000 1986 534,283,000 1987 687,427,000 1988 832,879,000 1989 974,050,000 1990 1,146,312,000 1991 1,404.800,000 1992 1,725,850,000 The expert’s computations imply that the income earned is from the trademark and not from other intangibles or assets. We do not agree that these income figures show only the value of the trademark, but they do reflect that DHLI’s revenues were generally increasing and substantial. There is no question that the DHL name had some role in DHL’s, DHLI’s, and the DHL network’s success. Petitioners proffered one valuation expert, an economist, who used the relief-from-royalty income approach to value the trademark and two additional economists who opined on whether valuable intangibles existed in the context of the DHL network. One of petitioners’ experts concluded that DHLI had valuable intangible assets including a cost advantage from its volume and its reputation for reliable performance and that it was those attributes and not the DHL name that had value to DHLI. Another of petitioners’ experts, using a different methodology, similarly opined that it was the DHLI infrastructure that made the difference and that DHL did not possess an intangible (including the trademark) that caused DHLI’s success. Finally, petitioners’ valuation expert opined that the DHL trademark had $55.2 millionPage: Previous 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011