Volume 13, Issue 1 -

In this paper, we empirically examine whether there is evidence to support the hypothesis that a size premium is impounded in valuation multiples. Overall, we find essentially no evidence to support the hypothesis. One interpretation of this finding is that there is no size effect in current U.S. data. If that is true, then size premiums should not be added to the discount rate and there is no potential inconsistency with the market multiples approach. However, if an appraiser chooses to add a size premium to the discount rate based on historical return data such as that reported by Ibbotson, it raises the possibility the DCF value indicator will be inconsistent with the value indicator based on market multiples. Given the fact that virtually all corporate appraisals include both a DCF and a market multiples analysis our work suggests that the two approaches should be blended with care in situations where a size premium is contemplated.

The DCF method or multiples are used to value companies in practice. Starting with the value additivity principle, the paper presents a general framework for DCF valuation. This framework allows defining stepwise and aggregated approaches to value risky cash flows and identifying inconsistent approaches. The framework helps to integrate sales, contribution margin, operating leverage, and financial leverage into valuation approaches and shows the assumptions implied when multiples are used.

There have been numerous historical claims by First Nations across Canada for damages resulting from the taking of land and the resulting loss of use of such land. Many of these cases have come before the courts. Generally in such cases, there is agreement that either the Federal Government and/or a provincial government has not fulfilled its fiduciary duty. Hence, the disputes before the courts usually pertain to valuing the losses of the First Nation(s) who is (are) the Plaintiff(s) in these cases. Since the original taking of the lands occurred many decades in the past, the court is challenged with difficult valuation issues, which are complicated by a lack of historical data and transaction records. Hence, even if the parties agree on the methodology for valuing the losses and on an annual lease rate, they still need to determine the annual price of the land. A common practice for generating a price trajectory for the land is to use a very small sample of land prices, and interpolate between these prices to estimate the intervening land prices. This practice does not generate the expected trajectory given the known observations. It implicitly assumes a deterministic price process with an annual fixed appreciation of the asset throughout the period. These assumptions are inconsistent both with realistic price movements and the literature modeling asset price processes. Consequently this practice can, and mostly does, generate a very significant bias in the value of the loss. This paper suggests a loss of use valuation method that is based on a land price process consistent with the literature modeling asset price processes.

The discounted cash flow model (DCFM) views the intrinsic value of common stock as the present value of its expected future cash flows. This paper analyses whether the equity terminal value (EqTV) of the firm calculated by fundamentals is appreciated by the market. It also studies the impact of variations in EqTV and the extent to which the market perceives these variations. Using a sample of 62 Spanish listed companies, this paper shows that EqTV and its variations are positively and significantly correlated with EqTV assigned by the market and its corresponding variations. It therefore corroborates the validity and relevance of the valuation model.