Herbert V. Kohler, Jr., et al. - Page 36

                                        -36-                                          
          Mr. Schweihs also determined that the prices paid in the                    
          transactions were not justified by analyzing the company’s                  
          historical and expected future performance.                                 
               Mr. Schweihs also did not rely on the asset-based approach             
          because Kohler is a going concern operating company.  An asset-             
          based approach, in his view, generally is not a reliable                    
          indicator of value for going concern companies.                             
               Mr. Schweihs applied a 45-percent lack of marketability                
          discount to the values he determined under the DCF method and the           
          capital market method, and a 10-percent lack of marketability               
          discount to the values he determined under the discounted                   
          dividend method and the capitalization of dividends method.  He             
          used a lower discount for lack of marketability under the                   
          dividend methods because, in his view, the dividend method more             
          directly reflected the value of the shares.  Mr. Schweihs also              
          determined that a 26-percent discount for lack of control applied           
          to the value he determined under the DCF method.                            
               Mr. Schweihs weighted the DCF method and the capital market            
          method each 20 percent in his final analysis, and gave 30 percent           
          weights to each of the dividend methods.  He concluded that the             
          fair market value of the Kohler stock the estate owned on the               

               13(...continued)                                                       
          the stock we value in this case.  For example, the pre-                     
          reorganization stock did not have the same transfer restrictions            
          and purchase option (thus affording purchasers more liquidity),             
          and the capital structure was different.                                    





Page:  Previous  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011