- 30 -
Dorman’s analysis and conclusions. The divergent valuation
approaches by the parties’ experts force the Court to choose one
method over the other without necessarily fully accepting that
method or approach. Accordingly, we use Mr. Dorman’s table
merely as a guide to assist in our analysis of the facts
presented in the record of these cases.
The first category of the matrix rates the subject’s
financial information availability and reliability with a range
from one discount point for the best to five discount points for
the poorest condition. Mr. Dorman selected an above-average 2-
percent rating, noting that Godfrey had available financial
statements that were audited by independent public accounts. It
is enigmatic that Mr. Dorman would assign a less than favorable
rating under these circumstances. Moreover, there is no reason
provided as to why any discount should be attributable here,
where the subject has ample and quality financial information
available. Accordingly, we do not attribute any discount to this
factor.
The scale provided to rate investment size is an arithmetic
progression by 2, starting with one and proceeding to eight
discount points. Mr. Dorman explains that this adjustment is
made to reflect the premise that the larger the necessary capital
investment, the less likely a buyer would be willing to place it
at risk. Because Mr. Dorman reached a $3,466,000 undiscounted
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011