|
February 2004 Reconciling Conflicting Value Estimates
The valuation of a
business is more art than science, and the reconciliation of differing value
conclusions is an invaluable step in the valuation process
A thorough
business valuation will
consider three approaches to value:
-
the income approach,
-
the market
approach, and
-
the asset approach.
Each may have one or more
methodologies that are utilized in estimating the value of a business; thus, an
appraiser may end up using multiple methodologies in the process of arriving at
a value. In a perfect world, all of the methods used would
result in the same value. Unfortunately, given the nature of business valuation,
it is inevitable that each methodology will generate a unique value estimate
that differs from each of the other methodologies. Sometimes the differences are
minor, but in many cases the contrast in value estimates can be quite
significant. This article attempts to explain the manner in which a business
appraiser should reconcile these differences and explain the reconciliation
process to the reader of a business appraisal report. Weighting vs. Not Weighting
Some business appraisers maintain that it is not
appropriate to “weight” the various value conclusions in determining the final
estimated value of the business, as they believe that for each valuation there
is one methodology that provides the best measure of the subject company’s
value. These appraisers often cite I.R.S. Revenue Ruling 59-60, which states:
“Because valuations cannot be
made on the basis of a prescribed formula, there is no means whereby the
various applicable factors in a particular case can be assigned mathematical
weights in deriving the fair market value. For this reason, no useful
purpose is served by taking an average of several factors (for example, book
value, capitalized earnings and capitalized dividends) and basing the
valuation on the result. Such a process excludes active consideration of
other pertinent factors, and the end result cannot be supported by a
realistic application of the significant facts in the case except by mere
chance.”
It is our viewpoint, and the opinion of many other
business appraisers, that Revenue Ruling 59-60 appears to discourage a straight
mathematical average or a prescribed, “one size fits all” formula that is used
to weight valuation conclusions for each and every valuation engagement.
However, a weighting that takes into account the specific facts and
circumstances of the particular company can and should be used. This is
supported by the American Society of Appraisers’ Business Valuation Standards,
which state:
“The appraiser must use informed
judgment when determining the relative weight to be accorded to indications
of value reached on the basis of various methods, or whether an indication
of value from a single method should dominate. The appraisers judgment may
be presented either in general terms or in terms of mathematical weighting
of the indicated values reflected in the conclusion. In any case, the
appraiser should provide the rationale for the selection or weighing of the
methods or methods relied on in reaching the conclusion.”
Additionally, the American Society of Certified
Public Accountants (AICPA) has released draft business valuation standards that
also stipulate the appropriateness of using weighting in determining a value
conclusion. The Reconciliation Process
A major advantage of weighting the various value
conclusions is that it forces the business appraiser to reconsider the methods
used and to develop supportable justifications for including or excluding
certain methods, as well as determining reasons why certain methods may be more
relevant than others. The valuation of a business is more art than science, and
the reconciliation of value conclusions is an invaluable step in the valuation
process. The valuation conclusions that are initially
determined using the various methods provide feedback to the appraiser, and the
value conclusions first determined are almost never the final conclusions
presented to the client. The reconciliation process forces the appraiser to
revisit the assumptions and judgment calls made during the initial process, and
the initial value conclusions can provide a roadmap to refining certain
assumptions. It is through this reconciliation process that the appraiser
develops a comfort level with the relevance and applicability of the various
methods, and this is eventually reflected in the weightings applied. Furthermore, as long as the reasons for weighting some methods more heavily than
others are documented within the valuation report, the reader should have a
greater understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of each methodology.
Conversely, if an appraiser always relies on only one value conclusion, it could
be very easy for that appraiser to simply pick one method without fully
understanding why other value conclusions may be significantly different. Suffice it to say that, if the appraiser does not
fully grasp the underlying reasons why the various value conclusions are
significantly different, the reader of the valuation report will also not
understand these differences. Summary
The valuation of a business is a complex process
involving the application of professional judgments by the appraiser at various
points in the process. While it would be convenient if the value of a business
could be determined by simply entering data into a “black box” that generates a
valid value conclusion, the intricacies of the real world prohibit such a
simplistic process. The development of a single point value derived
from the multiple value estimates of various methodologies is just one more step
in which the appraiser must use sound judgment and rationale. Sometimes one
method may be, by far, the most relevant and supportable among the various
methods used, and in such a case it may be appropriate to use only that method
in estimating the final value conclusion. However, in many cases, more than one
of the various methodologies will have some degree of relevance and reliability,
and in such cases the value conclusions determined by these methods should not
be ignored. After all, actual buyers and sellers of businesses
use a wide variety of techniques in deciding on a price for a company, and the
sale of stock or an entire business is just as likely to happen at a value
derived from a weighted analysis as from the value of a single valuation method.
As one business valuation book succinctly states, “There is no magical formula
to the weighting process. It is entirely up to the appraiser’s good judgment as
to where the final value estimate will come in.” ■ |