- 77 - In valuing the K-Mart photo processing equipment, however, Svoboda was unable to find published market data. Accordingly, he relied on (1) discussions with equipment brokers and used equipment dealers and (2) information on that equipment from the market at the time he prepared his report. His research uncovered very little information regarding the equipment during the mid-1990s. Although the manufacturers’ representatives for the K-Mart equipment indicated that the K-Mart equipment might have either a 5- to 7-year life or an 8- to 10-year life, Svoboda determined that the K-Mart equipment had a 10-year useful life. He set a 5- or 10-percent “floor” or selling price for the K-Mart equipment at the end of its useful life and developed a depreciation curve to reach the K-Mart equipment’s fair market values and future residual values. (b) Svoboda’s Fair Market Value for the Over Lease Residual Interests Svoboda opined that the residual interests in the K-Mart and Shared equipment had a fair market value ranging from $122,000 to $263,000. He considered the three traditional approaches (i.e., sales, income, and cost) for valuing equipment and chose the income approach, explaining that “the cost approach was not applicable and comparable sales were not available.” Svoboda chose the income approach because “Ultimately the value of the over lease residual * * * [interests] equates to the present worth of future benefits”. His “goal was to quantify thePage: Previous 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011