- 76 - user lessees.22 Although Svoboda has over 25 years of appraisal experience, he had relatively little experience valuing residual interests in equipment with useful lives of 10 years or less. (a) Svoboda’s Opinions as to the Fair Market Values and Estimated Residual Values Svoboda concluded that, as of September 28, 1995, the K-Mart and Shared equipment had the following fair market values and estimated future residual values: Estimated Future Residual Value On: Equipment Fair Market Value 2-24-97 3-13-97 6-30-97 7-31-97 5-1-00 11-1-02 K-Mart No. 32 $116,844 –- -- -- $50,076 -- $8,346 No. 33 473,452 –- -- -- 295,908 -- 29,591 No. 34 1,215,504 –- -- $759,690 -– -- 151,938 Shared No. 5 567,521 –- $133,471 -- –- -0- -- No. 6 143,052 $30,654 -– -- –- -0- –- Svoboda primarily used the sales comparison approach to value the Shared computer equipment. His opinion was based on published market data on this equipment, including reports published by respondent’s expert, Daley. Svoboda concluded that the Shared computer equipment would have no residual value by May 1, 2000, the date when petitioner’s over lease residual interest in that equipment began. 22Svoboda also assumed that petitioner was contractually entitled to income from the over lease residual interest periods, a fact that is not supported by the operative documents.Page: Previous 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011