Valuing Liabilities Differs from Valuing Assets Valuing contingent/unliquidated liabilities raises some interesting questions. Do contingent/unliquidated liabilities have liability-specific risk? If yes, does liability-specific risk result in lower or higher obligations? Why do contingent/unliquidated liabilities related to lawsuits tend to settle as opposed to go through verdict and appeals? This article addresses these questions. Valuing contingent/unliquidated liabilities raises some interesting questions. Do contingent/unliquidated liabilities have liability-specific risk? If yes, does liability-specific risk result in lower or higher obligations? Why do contingent/unliquidated liabilities related to lawsuits tend to settle as opposed to go through verdict and appeals? This article addresses these questions.…
-
-
Part II of II This is a two-part article. In this second part, the authors discuss valuation and the approaches used to value contingent assets and liabilities. Read Part I here.
-
Part I of II This is a two-part article. A variety of methods may be appropriate, depending on the context, to value contingent or disputed assets or claims in solvency opinions. These include probability discount, hindsight, and traditional valuation of future earnings. Other possibilities are the cost of insurance or Monte Carlo simulation. The authors discuss the cases and the uses and limitations of the various methods.
-
Asset Accumulation Method This discussion is the third part of a series. Previous discussions introduced the theoretical concepts and the practical applications of the asset-based business valuation approach. This discussion describes one common Asset-based Approach valuation method: the asset accumulation (AA) method.