In Part One of this paper, the logical basis of the conventional approach was examined and found to be wanting. The contemporary approaches have a more logical basis but the application of technique has a serious flaw in the analysis stage. While the conventional techniques require no subjectivity at the analysis stage of the valuation process, the contemporary models require a subjective choice of an equated yield, prior to calculation of implied growth rate and capitalisation rate. This choice of equated yield must be made regardless of whether the comparable is rack rented or reversionary. In the use of comparables, both conventional and contemporary techniques do not have any serious flaws when the comparison is perfect. To be perfect the comparison must not only be similar in locational and physical characteristics, but it must also be identical in lease structure, that is to say it must have the same unexpired term and rent received to CRV ratio. Where the perfect comparison exists, investment valuation techniques are irrelevant: direct capital comparison can take over. The debate regarding the use of techniques for market valuation must therefore revolve around the use and manipulation of non perfect comparables and the second part of this paper investigates the objectivity and logic of the application of technique to the valuation of reversionary freehold investments.
CROSBY, N. (1986), "THE APPLICATION OF EQUATED YIELD AND REAL VALUE APPROACHES TO MARKET VALUATION: 2: Equivalent Yield or Equated Yield Approaches?", Journal of Valuation, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 261-274. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb007995
MCB UP Ltd
Copyright © 1986, MCB UP Limited