- 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 million
Page: Previous 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011