- 111 -
other intangibles represent the entire amount of any excess over
the shareholders’ equity.
The evidence supports a finding that the know-how and system
in place that facilitated the ability to make timely and
efficient deliveries is at least as important as the name “DHL”.
The parties’ experts attempted to use professional and
“scientific”-appearing techniques to compute and reach their
conclusions; they exercised substantial latitude in selecting the
variables that control the outcome. There is no exactitude to
their theories or methodology. In each instance, their results
appeared to depend on variables, the estimate of which seemed to
favor the party they “represented”.
Petitioners rely on examples of companies that sought to
purchase infrastructure and placed no emphasis/value on the
trademark of the target company. In that regard, one particular
potential buyer of DHL entities or assets was not interested in
acquiring the DHL name and intended to phase it out over
approximately 1 to 3 years. That, however, does not mean that
the DHL name had no value. In that context, the potential buyer
already had a name (United Parcel Service or UPS) that was better
known domestically, and possibly internationally, than DHL. Its
focus was access to the international document and package
delivery market by the acquisition of the DHLI network
infrastructure and ability to deliver.
Page: Previous 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011