- 117 -
Petitioners’ expert valued the DHL trademark using separate
assumptions for the domestic and foreign portions of its value.
Using a .31-percent royalty rate (based on a 14.1-percent
discount rate to the .75 percent rate agreed to by the parties
beginning in 2007), future revenue estimates, a 7.6-percent
growth rate, and a 14.1-percent weighted average cost of capital
and/or discount rate, he concluded that the U.S. trademark rights
had a maximum value of $24.2 million. Using a .31-percent
royalty rate, future revenue estimates, and a 13.4-percent
discount rate, he concluded that the non-U.S. trademark rights
had a maximum value of $31 million. As noted above, that results
in a worldwide value of $55.2 million for the DHL trademark.
Thus, each of the trademark valuation experts has used
assumptions, rates, and factors that were useful in reaching the
grossly disparate amounts to “assist” the Court as a fact finder
in these cases. In particular, however, we feel that
respondent’s experts have used more reasonable rates and factors,
and their assumptions and approach are not as flawed as
petitioners’ expert’s because of his acceptance that the
transaction was at arm’s length. We find it peculiar that
petitioners’ expert could expect to derive an independent fair
market value by accepting the parties’ values and rates, because
his objective was to reach a fair market value. However,
petitioners’ expert accepted rates used in the transaction under
consideration and then reduced their effect by discounting them
Page: Previous 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011