- 66 -
In addition to not adjusting for the seasonal nature of short-
term debt, in our opinion, Mr. Much should not have discounted the
value of the Micron Technology stock by applying a 6-percent
minority discount. He valued both the operating assets of J.R.
Simplot Co. and its investment in Micron Technology on a minority
basis. Applying a 6-percent minority discount to the Micron
Technology stock has the effect of taking two minority discounts.
Although we agree with Mr. Much's argument that as a minority
shareholder in Micron Technology, J.R. Simplot Co. would lack
absolute control with regard to any disposition of the Micron
Technology stock, we do not believe a greater discount for an
investment asset than for an operating asset is justified when the
Company has already been valued on a minority basis.
To conclude this aspect of our valuation task, we believe Mr.
Much's determination of J.R. Simplot Co.'s equity value contained
two major flaws. Consequently, although we believe the equity
value of the Company may be greater than $830 million, we adopt Dr.
Spiro's $830 million equity value. (We note that Dr. Spiro stated
that if the Company's cash-flows could have been maximized, the
equity value of J.R. Simplot Co. would be greater than $830
million. Further, we are mindful that the Company is resource
rich, and as Gordon C. Smith, the CEO and president of the Company
in 1993, testified, the Company has assets worth substantially more
than their book values.)
We now turn our attention to the more difficult task--
ascertaining the amount of the collective voting premium (expressed
Page: Previous 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011