- 63 -
valuation methodologies. Therefore, as explained in more detail
infra, giving consideration to all the facts and circumstances
presented in this case (in particular, the ratio of the number of
outstanding shares of voting stock to that of the nonvoting shares,
1 to 1,848), and having dissected, analyzed, and evaluated the
reports as well as the testimony of all the experts, we find the
valuation methodology of respondent's experts (that is, a premium
should be accorded to the voting privileges of the class A stock
and the collective premium for those privileges should be expressed
in terms of a percentage of the equity value of J.R. Simplot Co.)
more persuasive than the valuation methodology of petitioner's
experts (that is, the premium, if any, to be accorded to the voting
privileges should be expressed in terms of a percentage of the
value of the class B nonvoting stock). Consequently, we adopt
respondent's experts' valuation methodology, with modifications, in
determining the fair market value of decedent's 18 shares of class
A voting stock and 3,942.048 shares of class B nonvoting stock of
J.R. Simplot Co. as of the valuation date.
We wish to stress at the outset that we are not valuing the
premium for controlling voting power, but rather the premium for
voting rights. The premium for controlling voting power would be
substantially greater than the premium we determine for voting
rights.
Having selected respondent's experts' valuation methodology,
we must now determine (1) the equity value of J.R. Simplot Co. as
of the valuation date, and (2) the appropriate collective voting
Page: Previous 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011