SlideShare uma empresa Scribd logo
1 de 65
Baixar para ler offline
ASA Wisconsin Chapter
Meeting
Friday, April 24, 2015
Residual Values for
Machinery and Equipment
ASA presents:
Presenter:
Sharon Desfor, ASA
Upon webinar completion, the participant will be better able to:
Define a residual value and assess when, why, and how is it used
Recognize common errors in residual values (how NOT to calculate
them)
Calculate equipment residual values
Determine other considerations (different depreciation rates, lease
return provisions, and using your own judgment)
Why Should You Perform
Residual Value Projections?
(Source: U.S. Equipment Finance Market Study 2012-2013 from the Equipment Leasing & Foundation)
5
Comments on methodology
6
The majority of banks do not account for any
further inflation in their calculations. This
conservatism can be used to mitigate their risk
factor. Some will then calculate their own present
values at various inflation rates just to see what
kind of margins they might enjoy at lease
termination, but then book the residual at the
uninflated number.
Comments on methodology
7
Sharon’s very opinionated opinion
8
What does “residual” mean?
What is a Residual Value?
“Essentially, the term residual value
means the value remaining after some
of the asset’s normal useful life has
been consumed. It can also refer to the
value of the asset at a defined future
point in time. Though the future value is
often defined as the future fair market
value, that’s not always the case.
Again, it is important that the pertinent
sections of the lease document be
reviewed prior to performing any
valuation in connection with a lease.”
(Valuing Machinery and Equipment: The Fundamentals
of Appraising Machinery and Technical Assets, Third
Edition, American Society of Appraisers)
10
Is it even valid to give a future FMV?
11
Who Uses Them?
Owners of an asset,
12
Who Uses Them?
Operators of those assets,
13
Who Uses Them?
Lenders to those owners,
14
Who Uses Them?
Taxing authorities (IRS, Inland Revenue)
15
Who Uses Them?
Lessees of the assets,
16
Who Uses Them?
but mostly Lessors of assets.
17
When are they used?
Lease inception
Annual FASB compliance
audit
Asset substitution in a
lease
18
Question
How often are you asked to perform a residual
value projection?
A. At least weekly
B. Every month or two
C.2 or 3 times a year
D.Once a year or less
E. I’ve never been asked for a residual value
projection before
19
What are Residual Value
Projections Used For,
Anyway?
Why & How Are They Used?
What are residual value projections used for,
anyway?
• Determining an assets’ end-of-lease value
21
Why & How Are They Used?
What are residual value projections used for,
anyway?
• Determining an assets’ end-of-lease value
• The ultimate purpose is developing the lease rate
22
Why & How Are They Used?
What are residual value projections used for,
anyway?
• Determining an assets’ end-of-lease value
• The ultimate purpose is developing the lease rate
• Fair rental calculations (remember ME204?)
23
Why & How Are They Used?
What are residual value projections used for,
anyway?
• Determining an assets’ end-of-lease value
• The ultimate purpose is developing the lease rate
• Fair rental (remember ME204?)
• Lease rate buildup
24
CONTROLLABLE NON-CONTROLLABLE
Lease Rate Buildup – An Oversimplification
25
Lease Rate Buildup An Over-Simplification
First - A Loan Example @ 7 year Fixed Rate
2.50
%
0.75
%
1.50
%
1.50
%
-.25%
6.00
%
COST OF
FUNDS
RISK [LOSS
PROVISION]
OPERATING
EXPENSES
PROFIT LESS: FEES
CLIENT
RATE
26
Lease Rate Buildup An Over-Simplification
Now – Price A Lease for 7 years
CLIENT
LOAN
RATE
LESS:
RESIDUAL
UPSIDE
BENEFITS
LESS:
PARTIAL
TAX
BENEFITS
LESS:
LIKE KIND
EXCHANGE
BENEFITS
LOWER
LEASE
RATE
27
Question
Have you ever been asked to participate or
consult in lease rate negotiations?
A. Yes
B. No
C. It’s been so long I’m a virgin again.
28
How NOT to Calculate
Residual Values
This is a blue book excerpt for the subject asset
2003 average Mid Time value is $1.52MM
2003 Factory List Price is $1.375MM
$1.52MM divided by $1.375MM is 110.5%
Therefore, in ten years the subject asset will be worth
110.5% of its new acquisition price
What is the error?
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
30
The example uses only current market data
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
31
The example uses only current market data
• There is no way of establishing from the given data
whether the current value of the asset is historically
relevant
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
32
The example uses only current market data
• There is no way of establishing from the given data
whether the current value of the asset is historically
relevant
The example uses an old historical price
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
33
The example uses only current market data
• There is no way of establishing from the given data
whether the current value of the asset is historically
relevant
The example uses an old historical price
• The correct price to use is the Replacement Cost New
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
34
• This is a compilation of past blue book data for the
subject asset
• What is the most common thing the asset manager
or appraiser will forget to do?
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
35
The inexperienced appraiser or the asset
manager often forgets to adjust the data for
inflation
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
36
Initial value at lease initiation
x
Does this look right? =
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
37
Failing to engage your brain to pick out
unrealistic projections
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
38
This particular asset ceased production in 1992
Once the resale values are adjusted for inflation, what
else needs adjustment?
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
39
Failure to adjust historical cost to a current
RCN is an incredibly common error for out-
of-production assets
Common Errors (How NOT to calculate)
40
We’re moving on next to calculating the
depreciation rate, or decline rate.
Any questions?
41
Calculating Residual Values
First Line Of Calculations
43
First line of calculations
• How to calculate the current value as a % of RCN
Year of Mfr CPI Trend FactorHistoric Cost
Trended
Historic Current Value % of RCN
2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 2,350,000 100.00%
2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 2,234,000 95.06%
2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 2,118,000 90.13%
2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 2,002,000 85.19%
2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,886,000 80.26%
2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,770,000 75.32%
2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 1,720,000 73.19%
2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 1,670,000 71.06%
2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 1,620,000 68.94%
2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 1,570,000 66.81%
First line of calculations
• Normalize known current sales to standard
Year of Mfr CPI Trend FactorHistoric Cost
Trended
Historic Current Value % of RCN
2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 2,350,000 100.00%
2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 2,234,000 95.06%
2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 2,118,000 90.13%
2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 2,002,000 85.19%
2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,886,000 80.26%
2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,770,000 75.32%
2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 1,720,000 73.19%
2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 1,670,000 71.06%
2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 1,620,000 68.94%
2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 1,570,000 66.81%
•The circled current values
are known, as is the RCN.
•The highlighted values may
be calculated by straight-line
depreciation or other means.
First line of calculations
• Trend historical cost to RCN as needed
Year of Mfr CPI
Trend
Factor x Historic Cost
Trended
Historic Current Value % of RCN
2013 230.28 100.00% * 2,350,000 2,350,000 2,350,000 100.00%
2012 226.4 101.71% * 2,280,000 2,319,074 2,234,000 95.06%
2011 219.1 105.10% * 2,202,000 2,314,361 2,118,000 90.13%
2010 216.6 106.32% * 2,125,000 2,259,211 2,002,000 85.19%
2009 215.3 106.96% * 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,886,000 80.26%
2008 211.1 109.09% * 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,770,000 75.32%
2007 202.4 113.77% * 1,750,000 1,991,057 1,720,000 73.19%
2006 198.3 116.13% * 1,390,000 1,614,166 1,670,000 71.06%
2005 190.7 120.76% * 1,325,000 1,600,005 1,620,000 68.94%
2004 185.2 124.34% * 1,300,000 1,616,436 1,570,000 66.81%
First line of calculations
• Simple division
Year of Mfr CPI Trend FactorHistoric Cost
Trended
Historic Current Value % of RCN
2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 2,350,000 100.00%
2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 2,234,000 95.06%
2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 2,118,000 90.13%
2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 2,002,000 85.19%
2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,886,000 80.26%
2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,770,000 75.32%
2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 1,720,000 73.19%
2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 1,670,000 71.06%
2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 1,620,000 68.94%
2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 1,570,000 66.81%
Divide Current Value by
Trended Historic Cost.
First line of calculations
• These percentages are your first line of calculations
Year of Mfr CPI Trend FactorHistoric Cost
Trended
Historic Current Value % of RCN
2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 2,350,000 100.00%
2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 2,234,000 95.06%
2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 2,118,000 90.13%
2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 2,002,000 85.19%
2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,886,000 80.26%
2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,770,000 75.32%
2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 1,720,000 73.19%
2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 1,670,000 71.06%
2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 1,620,000 68.94%
2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 1,570,000 66.81%
Second Line Of Calculations
49
Second line of calculations
• How to calculate the past value as a % of RCN
Year of Mfr CPI
Trend
Factor
Historic
Cost
Trended
HistoricPast Values
Trended
Past % of RCN
2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 1,370,000 1,370,000 58.30%
2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 1,375,000 1,398,564 59.51%
2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 1,455,000 1,529,244 65.07%
2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 1,455,000 1,546,895 65.83%
2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,685,000 1,802,238 76.69%
2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,237,500 1,349,936 57.44%
2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 987,500 1,123,525 47.81%
2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 987,500 1,146,755 48.80%
2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 987500 1,192,457 50.74%
2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 912500 1,134,614 48.28%
Normalize past sales to standard
Year of Mfr CPI
Trend
Factor
Historic
Cost
Trended
HistoricPast Values
Trended
Past % of RCN
2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 1,370,000 1,370,000 58.30%
2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 1,375,000 1,398,564 59.51%
2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 1,455,000 1,529,244 65.07%
2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 1,455,000 1,546,895 65.83%
2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,685,000 1,802,238 76.69%
2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,237,500 1,349,936 57.44%
2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 987,500 1,123,525 47.81%
2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 987,500 1,146,755 48.80%
2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 987500 1,192,457 50.74%
2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 912500 1,134,614 48.28%
•The circled past values are
known, as is the current
value.
•Highlighted values may be
calculated by straight-line
depreciation or other means.
Second line of calculations
51
Second line of calculations
Trend past values as needed
Year of Mfr CPI
Trend
Factor
Historic
Cost
Trended
HistoricPast Values
Trended
Past % of RCN
2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 1,370,000 1,370,000 58.30%
2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 1,375,000 1,398,564 59.51%
2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 1,455,000 1,529,244 65.07%
2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 1,455,000 1,546,895 65.83%
2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,685,000 1,802,238 76.69%
2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,237,500 1,349,936 57.44%
2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 987,500 1,123,525 47.81%
2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 987,500 1,146,755 48.80%
2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 987500 1,192,457 50.74%
2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 912500 1,134,614 48.28%
52
Second line of calculations
Trend historical cost to RCN if needed
Year of Mfr CPI
Trend
Factor
Historic
Cost
Trended
HistoricPast Values
Trended
Past % of RCN
2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 1,370,000 1,370,000 58.30%
2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 1,375,000 1,398,564 59.51%
2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 1,455,000 1,529,244 65.07%
2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 1,455,000 1,546,895 65.83%
2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,685,000 1,802,238 76.69%
2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,237,500 1,349,936 57.44%
2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 987,500 1,123,525 47.81%
2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 987,500 1,146,755 48.80%
2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 987500 1,192,457 50.74%
2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 912500 1,134,614 48.28%
53
Second line of calculations
Simple division
Year of Mfr CPI
Trend
Factor
Historic
Cost
Trended
HistoricPast Values
Trended
Past % of RCN
2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 1,370,000 1,370,000 58.30%
2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 1,375,000 1,398,564 59.51%
2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 1,455,000 1,529,244 65.07%
2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 1,455,000 1,546,895 65.83%
2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,685,000 1,802,238 76.69%
2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,237,500 1,349,936 57.44%
2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 987,500 1,123,525 47.81%
2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 987,500 1,146,755 48.80%
2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 987500 1,192,457 50.74%
2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 912500 1,134,614 48.28%
Divide Trended Past Value by
Trended Historic Cost.
54
Reconciliation
It is possible to reconcile to a most probable value
Trended Historic (TH)
2,350,000
Current % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
Most
Probable
Residual
Value Past % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000
95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86%
90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86%
85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86%
80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86%
75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86%
73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86%
71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86%
68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86%
66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86%
64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86%
55
Reconciliation
Take the trended historic price as RCN
Trended Historic (TH)
2,350,000
Current % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
Most
Probable
Residual
Value Past % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000
95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86%
90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86%
85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86%
80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86%
75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86%
73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86%
71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86%
68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86%
66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86%
64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86%
56
Reconciliation
Use first line of calculations as long as stable
Trended Historic (TH)
2,350,000
Current % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
Most
Probable
Residual
Value Past % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000
95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86%
90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86%
85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86%
80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86%
75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86%
73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86%
71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86%
68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86%
66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86%
64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86%
57
Reconciliation
End with second line of calculations
Trended Historic (TH)
2,350,000
Current % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
Most
Probable
Residual
Value Past % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000
95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86%
90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86%
85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86%
80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86%
75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86%
73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86%
71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86%
68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86%
66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86%
64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86%
58
Reconciliation
SLN or appropriate choice of market depreciation from last
of 1st to 2nd line of calculations
Trended Historic (TH)
2,350,000
Current % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
Most
Probable
Residual
Value Past % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000
95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86%
90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86%
85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86%
80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86%
75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86%
73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86%
71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86%
68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86%
66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86%
64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86%
59
Reconciliation
Now look at it. Is it sensible? Realistic?
Trended Historic (TH)
2,350,000
Current % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
Most
Probable
Residual
Value Past % of RCN * TH
Annual
depreciation
100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000
95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86%
90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86%
85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86%
80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86%
75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86%
73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86%
71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86%
68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86%
66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86%
64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86%
60
Other considerations
Different rates of depreciation for options and extras
Trended Historic (TH)
2,350,000
Current % of RCN
Annual
deprec. Most Likely
Residual
Value
Optional
equipment Past % of RCN
Annual
deprec.
100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% $ 300,000 58.30% 1,370,000
95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% $ 250,000 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86%
90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% $ 200,000 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86%
85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% $ 150,000 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86%
80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% $ 100,000 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86%
75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% $ 80,000 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86%
73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% $ 70,000 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86%
71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% $ 65,000 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86%
68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% $ 65,000 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86%
66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% $ 65,000 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86%
64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% $ 65,000 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86%
61
Other considerations
Different ages of parts of
line or asset:
2008 Sikorsky S92A,
Corporate/VIP
configured, factory
demonstrator
Purchased in 2011
Corporate configuration
removed, replaced
with offshore interior
Interior is 3 years
younger than the
airframe
62
Other considerations
63
Questions?
64
Upcoming ASA Education
For a complete listing of ASA’s upcoming educational offerings, visit
www.appraisers.org.
Let’s Connect!
• Facebook.com/ASAappraisers
• @ASAappraisers
• Linkedin.com/company/american-society-of-appraisers
• Youtube.com/ASAappraisers
• Appraisersnewsroom.org
Thank you for joining us!
65

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Infomedia (IFM) - equity research initiation report
Infomedia (IFM) - equity research initiation reportInfomedia (IFM) - equity research initiation report
Infomedia (IFM) - equity research initiation reportGeorge Gabriel
 
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 11 February 2016
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 11 February 2016EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 11 February 2016
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 11 February 2016epicresearchsgmy
 
How to Prepare Budgets & Projections
How to Prepare Budgets &  ProjectionsHow to Prepare Budgets &  Projections
How to Prepare Budgets & ProjectionsTraklight.com
 
Legal Investigation PowerPoint Presentation Slides
Legal Investigation PowerPoint Presentation SlidesLegal Investigation PowerPoint Presentation Slides
Legal Investigation PowerPoint Presentation SlidesSlideTeam
 
FifthThird 3Q08 Release_Final
FifthThird 3Q08 Release_FinalFifthThird 3Q08 Release_Final
FifthThird 3Q08 Release_Finalfinance28
 
BoyarMiller Breakfast Forum: The Current State of the Capital Markets 2010
BoyarMiller Breakfast Forum: The Current State of the Capital Markets 2010BoyarMiller Breakfast Forum: The Current State of the Capital Markets 2010
BoyarMiller Breakfast Forum: The Current State of the Capital Markets 2010BoyarMiller
 
Michael Durante Western Reserve 1Q05
Michael Durante Western Reserve 1Q05Michael Durante Western Reserve 1Q05
Michael Durante Western Reserve 1Q05Michael Durante
 
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 25 February 2015
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 25 February 2015EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 25 February 2015
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 25 February 2015Epic Research Singapore
 
FiBAN's business angel training "Effective Business Angel Investing Strategie...
FiBAN's business angel training "Effective Business Angel Investing Strategie...FiBAN's business angel training "Effective Business Angel Investing Strategie...
FiBAN's business angel training "Effective Business Angel Investing Strategie...FiBAN
 
REIT_SPG_Jianhao Zeng
REIT_SPG_Jianhao ZengREIT_SPG_Jianhao Zeng
REIT_SPG_Jianhao ZengJianhao Zeng
 
Internal cashflow and investment decisions: Case of Pakistani sugar sector.
Internal cashflow and investment decisions: Case of Pakistani sugar sector.Internal cashflow and investment decisions: Case of Pakistani sugar sector.
Internal cashflow and investment decisions: Case of Pakistani sugar sector.Mitsui & Co., Ltd.
 
Finance Risk And Return PowerPoint Presentation Slides
Finance Risk And Return PowerPoint Presentation SlidesFinance Risk And Return PowerPoint Presentation Slides
Finance Risk And Return PowerPoint Presentation SlidesSlideTeam
 
Planning Strategies Q410
Planning Strategies Q410Planning Strategies Q410
Planning Strategies Q410Barry Mendelson
 
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 27 February 2015
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 27 February 2015EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 27 February 2015
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 27 February 2015Epic Research Singapore
 
Monthly Alco Package August 2010
Monthly Alco Package August 2010Monthly Alco Package August 2010
Monthly Alco Package August 2010dongross
 
Whats In Play November 23rd 2015 - SP1500 -
Whats In Play November 23rd 2015 - SP1500 -Whats In Play November 23rd 2015 - SP1500 -
Whats In Play November 23rd 2015 - SP1500 -Steve Cossettini, CFA
 
Michael Durante Western Reserve 2Q05 letter
Michael Durante Western Reserve 2Q05 letterMichael Durante Western Reserve 2Q05 letter
Michael Durante Western Reserve 2Q05 letterMichael Durante
 
Prosper Keynote FintechRevolution NYC
Prosper Keynote FintechRevolution NYCProsper Keynote FintechRevolution NYC
Prosper Keynote FintechRevolution NYCSarah Cain
 

Mais procurados (19)

Infomedia (IFM) - equity research initiation report
Infomedia (IFM) - equity research initiation reportInfomedia (IFM) - equity research initiation report
Infomedia (IFM) - equity research initiation report
 
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 11 February 2016
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 11 February 2016EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 11 February 2016
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 11 February 2016
 
How to Prepare Budgets & Projections
How to Prepare Budgets &  ProjectionsHow to Prepare Budgets &  Projections
How to Prepare Budgets & Projections
 
Legal Investigation PowerPoint Presentation Slides
Legal Investigation PowerPoint Presentation SlidesLegal Investigation PowerPoint Presentation Slides
Legal Investigation PowerPoint Presentation Slides
 
FifthThird 3Q08 Release_Final
FifthThird 3Q08 Release_FinalFifthThird 3Q08 Release_Final
FifthThird 3Q08 Release_Final
 
BoyarMiller Breakfast Forum: The Current State of the Capital Markets 2010
BoyarMiller Breakfast Forum: The Current State of the Capital Markets 2010BoyarMiller Breakfast Forum: The Current State of the Capital Markets 2010
BoyarMiller Breakfast Forum: The Current State of the Capital Markets 2010
 
Michael Durante Western Reserve 1Q05
Michael Durante Western Reserve 1Q05Michael Durante Western Reserve 1Q05
Michael Durante Western Reserve 1Q05
 
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 25 February 2015
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 25 February 2015EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 25 February 2015
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 25 February 2015
 
FiBAN's business angel training "Effective Business Angel Investing Strategie...
FiBAN's business angel training "Effective Business Angel Investing Strategie...FiBAN's business angel training "Effective Business Angel Investing Strategie...
FiBAN's business angel training "Effective Business Angel Investing Strategie...
 
REIT_SPG_Jianhao Zeng
REIT_SPG_Jianhao ZengREIT_SPG_Jianhao Zeng
REIT_SPG_Jianhao Zeng
 
Rethinking risk in a more uncertain world
Rethinking risk in a more uncertain worldRethinking risk in a more uncertain world
Rethinking risk in a more uncertain world
 
Internal cashflow and investment decisions: Case of Pakistani sugar sector.
Internal cashflow and investment decisions: Case of Pakistani sugar sector.Internal cashflow and investment decisions: Case of Pakistani sugar sector.
Internal cashflow and investment decisions: Case of Pakistani sugar sector.
 
Finance Risk And Return PowerPoint Presentation Slides
Finance Risk And Return PowerPoint Presentation SlidesFinance Risk And Return PowerPoint Presentation Slides
Finance Risk And Return PowerPoint Presentation Slides
 
Planning Strategies Q410
Planning Strategies Q410Planning Strategies Q410
Planning Strategies Q410
 
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 27 February 2015
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 27 February 2015EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 27 February 2015
EPIC RESEARCH SINGAPORE - Daily SGX Singapore report of 27 February 2015
 
Monthly Alco Package August 2010
Monthly Alco Package August 2010Monthly Alco Package August 2010
Monthly Alco Package August 2010
 
Whats In Play November 23rd 2015 - SP1500 -
Whats In Play November 23rd 2015 - SP1500 -Whats In Play November 23rd 2015 - SP1500 -
Whats In Play November 23rd 2015 - SP1500 -
 
Michael Durante Western Reserve 2Q05 letter
Michael Durante Western Reserve 2Q05 letterMichael Durante Western Reserve 2Q05 letter
Michael Durante Western Reserve 2Q05 letter
 
Prosper Keynote FintechRevolution NYC
Prosper Keynote FintechRevolution NYCProsper Keynote FintechRevolution NYC
Prosper Keynote FintechRevolution NYC
 

Semelhante a Asa wisconsin chapter april 2015 meeting presentation: residual values for machinery and equipment

May 2018 Investor Conference Presentation 2018
May 2018 Investor Conference Presentation 2018May 2018 Investor Conference Presentation 2018
May 2018 Investor Conference Presentation 2018corporationlkq
 
The CECL Workshop Series Part II: Vintage Analysis
The CECL Workshop Series Part II: Vintage AnalysisThe CECL Workshop Series Part II: Vintage Analysis
The CECL Workshop Series Part II: Vintage AnalysisLibby Bierman
 
IEDC Real Estate Training Course Financial Feasibility - 2018
IEDC Real Estate Training Course Financial Feasibility - 2018IEDC Real Estate Training Course Financial Feasibility - 2018
IEDC Real Estate Training Course Financial Feasibility - 2018Economic Development Navigator
 
Introduction to Financial modeling
Introduction  to Financial modelingIntroduction  to Financial modeling
Introduction to Financial modelingKevin Crosby
 
Maintaining Credit Quality in Banks and Credit Unions
Maintaining Credit Quality in Banks and Credit UnionsMaintaining Credit Quality in Banks and Credit Unions
Maintaining Credit Quality in Banks and Credit UnionsLibby Bierman
 
Connecting Apache Kafka to Cash
Connecting Apache Kafka to CashConnecting Apache Kafka to Cash
Connecting Apache Kafka to Cashconfluent
 
Business and Data Analytics Collaborative April Meetup
Business and Data Analytics Collaborative April MeetupBusiness and Data Analytics Collaborative April Meetup
Business and Data Analytics Collaborative April MeetupKen Tucker
 
RR - Technicals 1.pdf
RR - Technicals 1.pdfRR - Technicals 1.pdf
RR - Technicals 1.pdfmerag76668
 
P&g presentation
P&g presentationP&g presentation
P&g presentationElisa Reyes
 
Procter and Gamble Financial Report
Procter and Gamble Financial ReportProcter and Gamble Financial Report
Procter and Gamble Financial ReportElisa Reyes
 
Credit risk scoring model final
Credit risk scoring model finalCredit risk scoring model final
Credit risk scoring model finalRitu Sarkar
 
Factor Fiction - Final.pdf
Factor Fiction - Final.pdfFactor Fiction - Final.pdf
Factor Fiction - Final.pdfdcvengros
 
Value based management of Union pacific corp and UPS
Value based management of Union pacific corp and UPSValue based management of Union pacific corp and UPS
Value based management of Union pacific corp and UPSSayedSadullahSadat
 
Di Bacco Brochure Services PowerPoint
Di Bacco Brochure Services PowerPointDi Bacco Brochure Services PowerPoint
Di Bacco Brochure Services PowerPointJoe Mcgough
 
Empowering Innovation Portfolio Decision-Making through Simulation
Empowering Innovation Portfolio Decision-Making through SimulationEmpowering Innovation Portfolio Decision-Making through Simulation
Empowering Innovation Portfolio Decision-Making through SimulationSopheon
 
Performance Shares: Perspectives from the morning after 24May2016 final
Performance Shares: Perspectives from the morning after 24May2016 finalPerformance Shares: Perspectives from the morning after 24May2016 final
Performance Shares: Perspectives from the morning after 24May2016 finalJames Sillery
 
Know Your Valuation for Equity Compensation (And Avoid the Perils of 409A)
Know Your Valuation for Equity Compensation (And Avoid the Perils of 409A)Know Your Valuation for Equity Compensation (And Avoid the Perils of 409A)
Know Your Valuation for Equity Compensation (And Avoid the Perils of 409A)The Capital Network
 

Semelhante a Asa wisconsin chapter april 2015 meeting presentation: residual values for machinery and equipment (20)

May 2018 Investor Conference Presentation 2018
May 2018 Investor Conference Presentation 2018May 2018 Investor Conference Presentation 2018
May 2018 Investor Conference Presentation 2018
 
The CECL Workshop Series Part II: Vintage Analysis
The CECL Workshop Series Part II: Vintage AnalysisThe CECL Workshop Series Part II: Vintage Analysis
The CECL Workshop Series Part II: Vintage Analysis
 
AUDITO TOOLS
AUDITO TOOLSAUDITO TOOLS
AUDITO TOOLS
 
IEDC Real Estate Training Course Financial Feasibility - 2018
IEDC Real Estate Training Course Financial Feasibility - 2018IEDC Real Estate Training Course Financial Feasibility - 2018
IEDC Real Estate Training Course Financial Feasibility - 2018
 
COF2015-10 (1)
COF2015-10 (1)COF2015-10 (1)
COF2015-10 (1)
 
Introduction to Financial modeling
Introduction  to Financial modelingIntroduction  to Financial modeling
Introduction to Financial modeling
 
Maintaining Credit Quality in Banks and Credit Unions
Maintaining Credit Quality in Banks and Credit UnionsMaintaining Credit Quality in Banks and Credit Unions
Maintaining Credit Quality in Banks and Credit Unions
 
Connecting Apache Kafka to Cash
Connecting Apache Kafka to CashConnecting Apache Kafka to Cash
Connecting Apache Kafka to Cash
 
Business and Data Analytics Collaborative April Meetup
Business and Data Analytics Collaborative April MeetupBusiness and Data Analytics Collaborative April Meetup
Business and Data Analytics Collaborative April Meetup
 
RR - Technicals 1.pdf
RR - Technicals 1.pdfRR - Technicals 1.pdf
RR - Technicals 1.pdf
 
P&g presentation
P&g presentationP&g presentation
P&g presentation
 
Procter and Gamble Financial Report
Procter and Gamble Financial ReportProcter and Gamble Financial Report
Procter and Gamble Financial Report
 
Credit risk scoring model final
Credit risk scoring model finalCredit risk scoring model final
Credit risk scoring model final
 
Factor Fiction - Final.pdf
Factor Fiction - Final.pdfFactor Fiction - Final.pdf
Factor Fiction - Final.pdf
 
psk 319660 Algorithm Investment Report
psk 319660 Algorithm Investment Reportpsk 319660 Algorithm Investment Report
psk 319660 Algorithm Investment Report
 
Value based management of Union pacific corp and UPS
Value based management of Union pacific corp and UPSValue based management of Union pacific corp and UPS
Value based management of Union pacific corp and UPS
 
Di Bacco Brochure Services PowerPoint
Di Bacco Brochure Services PowerPointDi Bacco Brochure Services PowerPoint
Di Bacco Brochure Services PowerPoint
 
Empowering Innovation Portfolio Decision-Making through Simulation
Empowering Innovation Portfolio Decision-Making through SimulationEmpowering Innovation Portfolio Decision-Making through Simulation
Empowering Innovation Portfolio Decision-Making through Simulation
 
Performance Shares: Perspectives from the morning after 24May2016 final
Performance Shares: Perspectives from the morning after 24May2016 finalPerformance Shares: Perspectives from the morning after 24May2016 final
Performance Shares: Perspectives from the morning after 24May2016 final
 
Know Your Valuation for Equity Compensation (And Avoid the Perils of 409A)
Know Your Valuation for Equity Compensation (And Avoid the Perils of 409A)Know Your Valuation for Equity Compensation (And Avoid the Perils of 409A)
Know Your Valuation for Equity Compensation (And Avoid the Perils of 409A)
 

Último

NewBase 25 March 2024 Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...
NewBase  25 March  2024  Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...NewBase  25 March  2024  Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...
NewBase 25 March 2024 Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...Khaled Al Awadi
 
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..dlewis191
 
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...TalentView
 
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...AustraliaChapterIIBA
 
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISINGUNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISINGlokeshwarmaha
 
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdf
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdfTalent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdf
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdfCharles Cotter, PhD
 
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZ
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZMihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZ
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZKanakChauhan5
 
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003believeminhh
 
PDT 89 - $1.4M - Seed - Plantee Innovations.pdf
PDT 89 - $1.4M - Seed - Plantee Innovations.pdfPDT 89 - $1.4M - Seed - Plantee Innovations.pdf
PDT 89 - $1.4M - Seed - Plantee Innovations.pdfHajeJanKamps
 
Developing Coaching Skills: Mine, Yours, Ours
Developing Coaching Skills: Mine, Yours, OursDeveloping Coaching Skills: Mine, Yours, Ours
Developing Coaching Skills: Mine, Yours, OursKaiNexus
 
BCE24 | Virtual Brand Ambassadors: Making Brands Personal - John Meulemans
BCE24 | Virtual Brand Ambassadors: Making Brands Personal - John MeulemansBCE24 | Virtual Brand Ambassadors: Making Brands Personal - John Meulemans
BCE24 | Virtual Brand Ambassadors: Making Brands Personal - John MeulemansBBPMedia1
 
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking ApplicationsUpgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking ApplicationsIntellect Design Arena Ltd
 
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdf
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdfAMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdf
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdfJohnCarloValencia4
 
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup BerlinSlicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup BerlinAnton Skornyakov
 
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerakTata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerakEditores1
 
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyAnyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyHanna Klim
 
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...IMARC Group
 
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023Steve Rader
 
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxCracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxWorkforce Group
 
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for BusinessQ2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for BusinessAPCO
 

Último (20)

NewBase 25 March 2024 Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...
NewBase  25 March  2024  Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...NewBase  25 March  2024  Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...
NewBase 25 March 2024 Energy News issue - 1710 by Khaled Al Awadi_compress...
 
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
Team B Mind Map for Organizational Chg..
 
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...
TalentView Webinar: Empowering the Modern Workforce_ Redefininig Success from...
 
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
 
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISINGUNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
 
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdf
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdfTalent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdf
Talent Management research intelligence_13 paradigm shifts_20 March 2024.pdf
 
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZ
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZMihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZ
Mihir Menda - Member of Supervisory Board at RMZ
 
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
 
PDT 89 - $1.4M - Seed - Plantee Innovations.pdf
PDT 89 - $1.4M - Seed - Plantee Innovations.pdfPDT 89 - $1.4M - Seed - Plantee Innovations.pdf
PDT 89 - $1.4M - Seed - Plantee Innovations.pdf
 
Developing Coaching Skills: Mine, Yours, Ours
Developing Coaching Skills: Mine, Yours, OursDeveloping Coaching Skills: Mine, Yours, Ours
Developing Coaching Skills: Mine, Yours, Ours
 
BCE24 | Virtual Brand Ambassadors: Making Brands Personal - John Meulemans
BCE24 | Virtual Brand Ambassadors: Making Brands Personal - John MeulemansBCE24 | Virtual Brand Ambassadors: Making Brands Personal - John Meulemans
BCE24 | Virtual Brand Ambassadors: Making Brands Personal - John Meulemans
 
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking ApplicationsUpgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
Upgrade Your Banking Experience with Advanced Core Banking Applications
 
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdf
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdfAMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdf
AMAZON SELLER VIRTUAL ASSISTANT PRODUCT RESEARCH .pdf
 
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup BerlinSlicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
Slicing Work on Business Agility Meetup Berlin
 
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerakTata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
 
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agencyAnyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
Anyhr.io | Presentation HR&Recruiting agency
 
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
Boat Trailers Market PPT: Growth, Outlook, Demand, Keyplayer Analysis and Opp...
 
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
NASA CoCEI Scaling Strategy - November 2023
 
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxCracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
 
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for BusinessQ2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
 

Asa wisconsin chapter april 2015 meeting presentation: residual values for machinery and equipment

  • 2. Residual Values for Machinery and Equipment ASA presents: Presenter: Sharon Desfor, ASA Upon webinar completion, the participant will be better able to: Define a residual value and assess when, why, and how is it used Recognize common errors in residual values (how NOT to calculate them) Calculate equipment residual values Determine other considerations (different depreciation rates, lease return provisions, and using your own judgment)
  • 3. Why Should You Perform Residual Value Projections?
  • 4. (Source: U.S. Equipment Finance Market Study 2012-2013 from the Equipment Leasing & Foundation)
  • 5. 5
  • 7. The majority of banks do not account for any further inflation in their calculations. This conservatism can be used to mitigate their risk factor. Some will then calculate their own present values at various inflation rates just to see what kind of margins they might enjoy at lease termination, but then book the residual at the uninflated number. Comments on methodology 7
  • 10. What is a Residual Value? “Essentially, the term residual value means the value remaining after some of the asset’s normal useful life has been consumed. It can also refer to the value of the asset at a defined future point in time. Though the future value is often defined as the future fair market value, that’s not always the case. Again, it is important that the pertinent sections of the lease document be reviewed prior to performing any valuation in connection with a lease.” (Valuing Machinery and Equipment: The Fundamentals of Appraising Machinery and Technical Assets, Third Edition, American Society of Appraisers) 10
  • 11. Is it even valid to give a future FMV? 11
  • 12. Who Uses Them? Owners of an asset, 12
  • 13. Who Uses Them? Operators of those assets, 13
  • 14. Who Uses Them? Lenders to those owners, 14
  • 15. Who Uses Them? Taxing authorities (IRS, Inland Revenue) 15
  • 16. Who Uses Them? Lessees of the assets, 16
  • 17. Who Uses Them? but mostly Lessors of assets. 17
  • 18. When are they used? Lease inception Annual FASB compliance audit Asset substitution in a lease 18
  • 19. Question How often are you asked to perform a residual value projection? A. At least weekly B. Every month or two C.2 or 3 times a year D.Once a year or less E. I’ve never been asked for a residual value projection before 19
  • 20. What are Residual Value Projections Used For, Anyway?
  • 21. Why & How Are They Used? What are residual value projections used for, anyway? • Determining an assets’ end-of-lease value 21
  • 22. Why & How Are They Used? What are residual value projections used for, anyway? • Determining an assets’ end-of-lease value • The ultimate purpose is developing the lease rate 22
  • 23. Why & How Are They Used? What are residual value projections used for, anyway? • Determining an assets’ end-of-lease value • The ultimate purpose is developing the lease rate • Fair rental calculations (remember ME204?) 23
  • 24. Why & How Are They Used? What are residual value projections used for, anyway? • Determining an assets’ end-of-lease value • The ultimate purpose is developing the lease rate • Fair rental (remember ME204?) • Lease rate buildup 24
  • 25. CONTROLLABLE NON-CONTROLLABLE Lease Rate Buildup – An Oversimplification 25
  • 26. Lease Rate Buildup An Over-Simplification First - A Loan Example @ 7 year Fixed Rate 2.50 % 0.75 % 1.50 % 1.50 % -.25% 6.00 % COST OF FUNDS RISK [LOSS PROVISION] OPERATING EXPENSES PROFIT LESS: FEES CLIENT RATE 26
  • 27. Lease Rate Buildup An Over-Simplification Now – Price A Lease for 7 years CLIENT LOAN RATE LESS: RESIDUAL UPSIDE BENEFITS LESS: PARTIAL TAX BENEFITS LESS: LIKE KIND EXCHANGE BENEFITS LOWER LEASE RATE 27
  • 28. Question Have you ever been asked to participate or consult in lease rate negotiations? A. Yes B. No C. It’s been so long I’m a virgin again. 28
  • 29. How NOT to Calculate Residual Values
  • 30. This is a blue book excerpt for the subject asset 2003 average Mid Time value is $1.52MM 2003 Factory List Price is $1.375MM $1.52MM divided by $1.375MM is 110.5% Therefore, in ten years the subject asset will be worth 110.5% of its new acquisition price What is the error? Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 30
  • 31. The example uses only current market data Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 31
  • 32. The example uses only current market data • There is no way of establishing from the given data whether the current value of the asset is historically relevant Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 32
  • 33. The example uses only current market data • There is no way of establishing from the given data whether the current value of the asset is historically relevant The example uses an old historical price Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 33
  • 34. The example uses only current market data • There is no way of establishing from the given data whether the current value of the asset is historically relevant The example uses an old historical price • The correct price to use is the Replacement Cost New Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 34
  • 35. • This is a compilation of past blue book data for the subject asset • What is the most common thing the asset manager or appraiser will forget to do? Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 35
  • 36. The inexperienced appraiser or the asset manager often forgets to adjust the data for inflation Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 36
  • 37. Initial value at lease initiation x Does this look right? = Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 37
  • 38. Failing to engage your brain to pick out unrealistic projections Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 38
  • 39. This particular asset ceased production in 1992 Once the resale values are adjusted for inflation, what else needs adjustment? Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 39
  • 40. Failure to adjust historical cost to a current RCN is an incredibly common error for out- of-production assets Common Errors (How NOT to calculate) 40
  • 41. We’re moving on next to calculating the depreciation rate, or decline rate. Any questions? 41
  • 43. First Line Of Calculations 43
  • 44. First line of calculations • How to calculate the current value as a % of RCN Year of Mfr CPI Trend FactorHistoric Cost Trended Historic Current Value % of RCN 2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 2,350,000 100.00% 2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 2,234,000 95.06% 2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 2,118,000 90.13% 2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 2,002,000 85.19% 2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,886,000 80.26% 2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,770,000 75.32% 2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 1,720,000 73.19% 2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 1,670,000 71.06% 2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 1,620,000 68.94% 2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 1,570,000 66.81%
  • 45. First line of calculations • Normalize known current sales to standard Year of Mfr CPI Trend FactorHistoric Cost Trended Historic Current Value % of RCN 2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 2,350,000 100.00% 2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 2,234,000 95.06% 2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 2,118,000 90.13% 2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 2,002,000 85.19% 2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,886,000 80.26% 2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,770,000 75.32% 2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 1,720,000 73.19% 2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 1,670,000 71.06% 2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 1,620,000 68.94% 2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 1,570,000 66.81% •The circled current values are known, as is the RCN. •The highlighted values may be calculated by straight-line depreciation or other means.
  • 46. First line of calculations • Trend historical cost to RCN as needed Year of Mfr CPI Trend Factor x Historic Cost Trended Historic Current Value % of RCN 2013 230.28 100.00% * 2,350,000 2,350,000 2,350,000 100.00% 2012 226.4 101.71% * 2,280,000 2,319,074 2,234,000 95.06% 2011 219.1 105.10% * 2,202,000 2,314,361 2,118,000 90.13% 2010 216.6 106.32% * 2,125,000 2,259,211 2,002,000 85.19% 2009 215.3 106.96% * 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,886,000 80.26% 2008 211.1 109.09% * 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,770,000 75.32% 2007 202.4 113.77% * 1,750,000 1,991,057 1,720,000 73.19% 2006 198.3 116.13% * 1,390,000 1,614,166 1,670,000 71.06% 2005 190.7 120.76% * 1,325,000 1,600,005 1,620,000 68.94% 2004 185.2 124.34% * 1,300,000 1,616,436 1,570,000 66.81%
  • 47. First line of calculations • Simple division Year of Mfr CPI Trend FactorHistoric Cost Trended Historic Current Value % of RCN 2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 2,350,000 100.00% 2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 2,234,000 95.06% 2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 2,118,000 90.13% 2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 2,002,000 85.19% 2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,886,000 80.26% 2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,770,000 75.32% 2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 1,720,000 73.19% 2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 1,670,000 71.06% 2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 1,620,000 68.94% 2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 1,570,000 66.81% Divide Current Value by Trended Historic Cost.
  • 48. First line of calculations • These percentages are your first line of calculations Year of Mfr CPI Trend FactorHistoric Cost Trended Historic Current Value % of RCN 2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 2,350,000 100.00% 2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 2,234,000 95.06% 2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 2,118,000 90.13% 2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 2,002,000 85.19% 2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,886,000 80.26% 2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,770,000 75.32% 2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 1,720,000 73.19% 2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 1,670,000 71.06% 2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 1,620,000 68.94% 2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 1,570,000 66.81%
  • 49. Second Line Of Calculations 49
  • 50. Second line of calculations • How to calculate the past value as a % of RCN Year of Mfr CPI Trend Factor Historic Cost Trended HistoricPast Values Trended Past % of RCN 2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 1,370,000 1,370,000 58.30% 2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 1,375,000 1,398,564 59.51% 2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 1,455,000 1,529,244 65.07% 2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 1,455,000 1,546,895 65.83% 2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,685,000 1,802,238 76.69% 2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,237,500 1,349,936 57.44% 2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 987,500 1,123,525 47.81% 2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 987,500 1,146,755 48.80% 2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 987500 1,192,457 50.74% 2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 912500 1,134,614 48.28%
  • 51. Normalize past sales to standard Year of Mfr CPI Trend Factor Historic Cost Trended HistoricPast Values Trended Past % of RCN 2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 1,370,000 1,370,000 58.30% 2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 1,375,000 1,398,564 59.51% 2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 1,455,000 1,529,244 65.07% 2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 1,455,000 1,546,895 65.83% 2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,685,000 1,802,238 76.69% 2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,237,500 1,349,936 57.44% 2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 987,500 1,123,525 47.81% 2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 987,500 1,146,755 48.80% 2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 987500 1,192,457 50.74% 2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 912500 1,134,614 48.28% •The circled past values are known, as is the current value. •Highlighted values may be calculated by straight-line depreciation or other means. Second line of calculations 51
  • 52. Second line of calculations Trend past values as needed Year of Mfr CPI Trend Factor Historic Cost Trended HistoricPast Values Trended Past % of RCN 2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 1,370,000 1,370,000 58.30% 2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 1,375,000 1,398,564 59.51% 2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 1,455,000 1,529,244 65.07% 2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 1,455,000 1,546,895 65.83% 2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,685,000 1,802,238 76.69% 2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,237,500 1,349,936 57.44% 2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 987,500 1,123,525 47.81% 2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 987,500 1,146,755 48.80% 2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 987500 1,192,457 50.74% 2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 912500 1,134,614 48.28% 52
  • 53. Second line of calculations Trend historical cost to RCN if needed Year of Mfr CPI Trend Factor Historic Cost Trended HistoricPast Values Trended Past % of RCN 2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 1,370,000 1,370,000 58.30% 2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 1,375,000 1,398,564 59.51% 2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 1,455,000 1,529,244 65.07% 2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 1,455,000 1,546,895 65.83% 2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,685,000 1,802,238 76.69% 2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,237,500 1,349,936 57.44% 2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 987,500 1,123,525 47.81% 2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 987,500 1,146,755 48.80% 2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 987500 1,192,457 50.74% 2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 912500 1,134,614 48.28% 53
  • 54. Second line of calculations Simple division Year of Mfr CPI Trend Factor Historic Cost Trended HistoricPast Values Trended Past % of RCN 2013 230.28 100.00% 2,350,000 2,350,000 1,370,000 1,370,000 58.30% 2012 226.4 101.71% 2,280,000 2,319,074 1,375,000 1,398,564 59.51% 2011 219.1 105.10% 2,202,000 2,314,361 1,455,000 1,529,244 65.07% 2010 216.6 106.32% 2,125,000 2,259,211 1,455,000 1,546,895 65.83% 2009 215.3 106.96% 1,965,000 2,101,719 1,685,000 1,802,238 76.69% 2008 211.1 109.09% 1,855,000 2,023,541 1,237,500 1,349,936 57.44% 2007 202.4 113.77% 1,750,000 1,991,057 987,500 1,123,525 47.81% 2006 198.3 116.13% 1,390,000 1,614,166 987,500 1,146,755 48.80% 2005 190.7 120.76% 1,325,000 1,600,005 987500 1,192,457 50.74% 2004 185.2 124.34% 1,300,000 1,616,436 912500 1,134,614 48.28% Divide Trended Past Value by Trended Historic Cost. 54
  • 55. Reconciliation It is possible to reconcile to a most probable value Trended Historic (TH) 2,350,000 Current % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation Most Probable Residual Value Past % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation 100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000 95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86% 90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86% 85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86% 80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86% 75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86% 73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86% 71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86% 68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86% 66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86% 64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86% 55
  • 56. Reconciliation Take the trended historic price as RCN Trended Historic (TH) 2,350,000 Current % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation Most Probable Residual Value Past % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation 100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000 95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86% 90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86% 85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86% 80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86% 75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86% 73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86% 71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86% 68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86% 66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86% 64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86% 56
  • 57. Reconciliation Use first line of calculations as long as stable Trended Historic (TH) 2,350,000 Current % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation Most Probable Residual Value Past % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation 100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000 95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86% 90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86% 85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86% 80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86% 75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86% 73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86% 71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86% 68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86% 66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86% 64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86% 57
  • 58. Reconciliation End with second line of calculations Trended Historic (TH) 2,350,000 Current % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation Most Probable Residual Value Past % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation 100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000 95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86% 90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86% 85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86% 80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86% 75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86% 73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86% 71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86% 68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86% 66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86% 64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86% 58
  • 59. Reconciliation SLN or appropriate choice of market depreciation from last of 1st to 2nd line of calculations Trended Historic (TH) 2,350,000 Current % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation Most Probable Residual Value Past % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation 100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000 95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86% 90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86% 85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86% 80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86% 75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86% 73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86% 71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86% 68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86% 66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86% 64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86% 59
  • 60. Reconciliation Now look at it. Is it sensible? Realistic? Trended Historic (TH) 2,350,000 Current % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation Most Probable Residual Value Past % of RCN * TH Annual depreciation 100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% 58.30% 1,370,000 95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86% 90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86% 85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86% 80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86% 75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86% 73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86% 71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86% 68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86% 66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86% 64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86% 60
  • 61. Other considerations Different rates of depreciation for options and extras Trended Historic (TH) 2,350,000 Current % of RCN Annual deprec. Most Likely Residual Value Optional equipment Past % of RCN Annual deprec. 100.00% 2,350,000 $2,350,000 100.00% $ 300,000 58.30% 1,370,000 95.06% 2,234,000 4.94% $2,234,000 95.06% $ 250,000 57.30% 1,346,458 0.86% 90.13% 2,118,000 4.94% $2,118,000 90.13% $ 200,000 56.29% 1,322,916 0.86% 85.19% 2,002,000 4.94% $2,002,000 85.19% $ 150,000 55.29% 1,299,374 0.86% 80.26% 1,886,000 4.94% $1,886,000 80.26% $ 100,000 54.29% 1,275,832 0.86% 75.32% 1,770,000 4.94% $1,770,000 75.32% $ 80,000 53.29% 1,252,290 0.86% 73.19% 1,720,000 2.13% $1,642,916 69.91% $ 70,000 52.29% 1,228,748 0.86% 71.06% 1,670,000 2.13% $1,515,832 64.50% $ 65,000 51.29% 1,205,206 0.86% 68.94% 1,620,000 2.13% $1,388,748 59.10% $ 65,000 50.28% 1,181,664 0.86% 66.81% 1,570,000 2.13% $1,261,664 53.69% $ 65,000 49.28% 1,158,122 0.86% 64.68% 1,520,000 2.13% $1,134,580 48.28% $ 65,000 48.28% 1,134,580 0.86% 61
  • 62. Other considerations Different ages of parts of line or asset: 2008 Sikorsky S92A, Corporate/VIP configured, factory demonstrator Purchased in 2011 Corporate configuration removed, replaced with offshore interior Interior is 3 years younger than the airframe 62
  • 65. Upcoming ASA Education For a complete listing of ASA’s upcoming educational offerings, visit www.appraisers.org. Let’s Connect! • Facebook.com/ASAappraisers • @ASAappraisers • Linkedin.com/company/american-society-of-appraisers • Youtube.com/ASAappraisers • Appraisersnewsroom.org Thank you for joining us! 65

Notas do Editor

  1. Businesses, nonprofits and government agencies finance more than $725 billion every year through loans, leases and lines of credit in order to acquire new plants, equipment and software. (Source: U.S. Equipment Finance Market Study 2012-2013 from the Equipment Leasing & Foundation). The majority of the leases will require one or more residual value projections in order to build up the lease rate. While some equipment financiers calculate their own residual values in-house, many use the services of a professional appraiser. An experienced appraiser with an extensive value database can provide credible, reliable residual value projections; even less experienced appraisers can use commercially-provided databases when they’re available.
  2. At HeliValue$, we do residual value projections pretty much every day, but it’s only fair to warn you that our approach was developed for helicopters. We’ve looked carefully at what we do and how we do it, and the methodology looks valid to us for other forms of machinery and equipment. But we don’t do other M&E, so please bring your knowledge, your judgment, your historical data and your critical thinking to the table today. And please, if you have comments or arguments about our methodology, we’d be happy to hear it. Sharing methodology and critiquing it is how we as appraisers develop new methods and flesh out the old ones.
  3. HeliValue$ calculations are almost always given in constant dollars.  To reach these projections, we trend all historical values to today’s dollars, then give our projections still in current dollars.  This means the historical inflation over the past decade is taken into account; future inflation is not. 
  4. As appraisers who work for lessees as well as for lessors, we should worry about lessors who want to see 10-year projections with 3% annual inflation.  That’s incredibly aggressive pricing, and should be reserved as an incentive for a new client that they really want, like a HNWI (High Net Worth Individual).  If a lessor can’t get a deal without booking residuals that aggressive, they may be a high-risk source of capital.
  5. That which is left.
  6. At HeliValue$, we believe the answer is a resounding “Yes!” With a decade’s worth or two of historical pricing data, you can create a credible “depreciation rate” (as we call it in ME204) or “decline rate” as Peter Daley used in his January 2013 residual value webinar. (Which is available on the ASA website Marketplace) With just ten years’ data, you have a reasonable look at a period of time that reflects market cycles, economic cycles, socio-political cycles, and technological cycles. With that information and your understanding of market behaviors, you can both assemble and assess reasonable estimate of future value, based on past history but reflecting today’s market, and considering both aggressive and conservative risk positions or choosing a median risk position.
  7. Any other ideas? Those of you joining us virtually can feel free to use the Chat box to participate any time
  8. Please enter your answer into the Chat box
  9. A lease rate is built of both controllable and non-controllable elements. The lessor can adjust its internal structure, operating expenses, assessment of risk on the deal, and the ”haircut” it gives the appraiser’s residual value at lease termination. They have no ability to affect the deal price if it’s not a sale/leaseback. The tax benefits are mandated by federal and state taxing bodies. And the cost of funds is set on a bank-wide level.
  10. If we want to look at an example of a loan in comparison to a lease, a bank’s cost of funds is 2.5%. It’s fixed and non-controllable. Add the bank’s risk provision of 0.75%, which is controllable to a certain extent – within bank parameters anyway – to get 3.25%. Then add the bank’s operating expense of 1.5% which is also controllable to reach 4.75%. Add again for the bank’s profit of 1.5%, which is controllable depending on how influential the dealmaker may be on either side of the table (and never forget that sometimes it’s the guy on the other side of the table with the power. Even gazillionaires get loans) and you get 6.25%. Deduct the bank fees of 0.25% (controllable) and you end up with a loan rate to the client of 6% even.
  11. A lease rate, on the other hand, might look like this: The lessor starts with the client’s loan rate. He deducts the upside benefits to the residual value, less any haircuts mandated by internal policy. Then he deducts some of the tax benefits which accrue to the bank (he has to keep some to make a profit, you know). Finally he deducts any Like Kind Exchange benefits that come with the deal, for instance in a trade-up. The result is a lease rate which is almost invariably lower than the rate the same client would pay for a loan. It’s in that second circle there, that we appraisers have a chance to get a job. In order to calculate their upside benefits or downside risks, the lessor needs to discover the residual value at the end of the lease term before he can perform his magic. And the appraiser is the guy who can tell him with any degree of reasonable credibility just what the residual value will be when his lease ends.
  12. Here at HeliValue$, we find the greatest challenge is consistency. When you do residual values for multiple banks for a single project, or do multiple projects for a single bank, making sure the future values align with each other and make sense in context with each other is , to us, the hard part. Bankers rely on our residual values to book a deal,, to talk to credit, to create risk profiles for different models of equipment. Once your residual spreadsheet is set up, there shouldn’t be huge variances in the lease-termination values from year to year when you do the annual FASB updates (which, by the way, the bank won’t want to pay for. Just saying)
  13. Why it works this way I can’t begin to guess. You’d think that comparing each year ‘s value to its historical cost – trended for inflation – would make sense. But try it anytime. It returns nonsense values that will never work in the real world.
  14. Never compare 2002 dollars to 2008 dollars to 2015 dollars. Always bring your pricing data to a common date before proceeding
  15. We want you thinking generically here, which is why there’s no spreadsheet.
  16. Always remember to look at your results. After a while the formulae start to look alike. If you’re not paying attention, the result may not make sense Use your common sense; read what you wrote before you send it to your client
  17. I repeat: never compare 2002 dollars to 2008 dollars to 2015 dollars. Bring ALL your pricing data to a common date before proceeding
  18. *share other answers*
  19. Okay, now that you’re forewarned about possible mistakes, let’s learn how to calculate your depreciation rate, or decline rate.
  20. We’ll start with calculations for the current values – it’s not enough to find residual values, but you’ll need part of it. First you have to build a matrix that makes sense, of theoretical otherwise identical equipment that differ by year of manufacture only. You’ll need a column for year of manufacture, otherwise you’re going to get lost in the middle of the spreadsheet and have to start over. We’ll use the CPI here to calculate our trend factor. You can develop your own index as appropriate to your equipment type and industry. The trend factor is the current CPI divided by each annual CPI and converted to percentages.
  21. This column is for that matrix you built, of theoretical otherwise identical equipment that differ by year of manufacture only. Let’s say you have real sales data for earlier years of manufacture, but nothing of younger models because the buyers are still holding the newer machines . You can extrapolate values for those years with a straight-line depreciation from the known new price to the youngest known resale value.
  22. We’ll use the CPI here to calculate our trend factor. You can develop your own index as appropriate to your equipment type and industry. The trend factor is the current CPI / each annual CPI and converted to percentages. Multiply each year’s trend factor by the historic cost to find the trended historic cost.
  23. You’ll divide the current value for each year of manufacture by the trended historic cost, or the replacement cost new if it’s a current production model.
  24. This will give you a column with the percentage of RCN to apply to the subject asset’s acquisition price or fair market value.
  25. Now you start another set of calculations to accommodate the resale history of the machine. Here you’ll have to create another pricing matrix of past sales for each of the past ten or so years. How detailed you want to be will depend on the market nature of the asset you’re looking at. Some machines need you to create a matrix of values for the exact same age as the subject asset. Other machines can use an average age.
  26. Just like with the current values, you can fill in some of the missing years using various tools,. In this case we’ll use straight-line depreciation to keep the approaches similar.
  27. Don’t forget that the past values need to be trended up to current dollars. Don’t try to compare apples and municipal bonds.
  28. You can trend the historical costs to current dollars, or you can make these separate columns in the original spreadsheet.
  29. Divide the trended past values by the trended historical cost, or by the RCN if it’s a current production model.
  30. While it’s possible to end up with similar values for the current value matrix and the past value matrix, it’s equally possible to end up with wildly varying value. It depends on the current market for the model compared to past history, and market volatility for that model.
  31. Start by tucking the trended historical cost, or the RCN for a current production model, into a corner of your spreadsheet where you can reach it easily. You’ll take the percentages of RCN that you derived from both the current value calculations and the past value calculations, and multiply those by the trended historic cost or RCN, in order to find the projected values based on both the current market and the past markets.
  32. When you’re working with a new asset as the subject, start with the current values. This will give you the depreciation over the first few years as the asset burns off its warranty, its factory profit margin, and its newness, whether that’s mileage or usage hours or whatever measure of usage is common to that asset class. It also accommodates the incentive needed for an asset to sell from an end-user as opposed to the dealer or factory.
  33. Next, you’ll go to the last year for which you’re projecting. You’ll want to pick an appropriate percentage. You can choose the most conservative value of the decade, or the median value, or the value that best matches the contract and what you know of your client’s situation and needs.
  34. Lastly, you’ll fill in the missing years with a depreciation picture that looks right to you for the job. Straight-line depreciation is pretty safe, or some other method that emulates the market perception of age for your asset class. Divide all those reconciled values , which we’ve named “Most probable” here, by the trended historic cost that you tucked into the corner. This will give you the depreciation schedule, or decline rate, that you are going to apply to your subject asset.
  35. Before you go any further, take a look. Do you believe the bottom line? Does it match what you know of the market history for this model? In ten years, is it reasonable to think that someone will pay that much for this asset in used condition? If not, you’ll need to go back to look for errors in math, in assumptions, or in depreciation schedules. If so, you’re ready to apply the percentages to your subject asset.
  36. There are often other things you need to consider in a residual value projection. Options and accessories that have a different useful life, or different depreciation rate. Different ages for different components of the machine. Different return provisions written into the lease. Prepaid service agreements. Maintenance reserve payments. In this example, we’re looking at optional equipment that matures at a different rate and different market level than the base machine. You can create calculations for these items similar to the other calculation lines, or you can do a straight-line depreciation from the new cost of the option to the amount it will add to the value of the base machine in some number of years.
  37. This is an example of a helicopter that had a complete configuration change at 3 years old. In the actual transaction the work was completed prior to closing and was calculated into the FMV, BUT had the work been planned for part-way through the lease contract, we could have calculated for it using a variation of the methodology on the previous slide.
  38. Always read as much of the lease contract as you can get your hands on. Excerpts of the maintenance and return provisions are a minimum requirement. Different leases with different return provisions (such as 50% used, 20% used, requirement for a prepaid maintenance program or maintenance reserve account to a certain age or to lease termination) will impact the bottom line, and therefore your depreciation schedule, or decline rate. Read the darn contract already.