Search results

In January 2005, the International Valuation Standards Committee (IVSC) published the International Valuation Guidance Note No. 8 entitled The Cost Approach for Financial Reporting – (DRC). This guidance note provides background to the use of depreciated replacement cost (DRC) in connection with International Valuation Application 1 (IVA 1), Valuation for Financial Reporting and suggests that the valuer reports the result of a DRC valuation as market value subject to the test of adequate profitability or service potential. This suggestion has caused a lot of debate and consternation in the UK where the DRC approach has always been considered as a method of last resort and not a market valuation. However, in continental Europe the cost approach (DRC) is often the principal method of valuation and has always been considered to produce market value. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the impact of this change to valuation practice in the UK.

In this paper, we discuss the concept of market value and its relationship to DRC in an attempt to identify the principal areas of concern in the UK and, through the use of an Italian case study, show how the DRC approach can be adopted as an appropriate method (not basis) for calculating Market Value.

It is probable that most valuers will still provide the DRC valuation using exactly the same calculation as they did before. They are likely to provide the same (relative to the valuation date) figure; the difference is that they will feel less easy about the robustness of that figure

It is argued that the UK market has, for too long, hidden behind DRC being a basis of value that UK valuers now feel uncomfortable in reporting DRC as market value. They are uncertain with the valuation figure. However, this uncertainty can be addressed in other ways and a suggested “solution” to help the valuer overcome their discomfort with the market valuation is proffered.

Since the global financial economic crisis hit the world markets in 2007/2008, the role of property valuation has been under greater and greater scrutiny. The process of valuation and its quality assurance has been addressed by the higher prominence of the International Valuation Standards Council (IVSC). This is a significant initiative worldwide. However, there has been little written on the appropriate use of valuation approaches and methods in market valuations. There is now a hierarchy of valuation definitions. In order, there are valuation approaches, valuation methods and, as a subset of the methods, techniques or models. The purpose of this paper is to look at the importance of identifying the appropriate approach to be adopted in market valuations and the methods, techniques and models that should be applied to determine market value.

This practice briefing is an overview of the valuation approaches, methods and models available to the valuer and comments on the appropriateness of valuation each in assessing market value.

This paper reviews the IVSC-recognised approaches and prompts the valuer to be careful with the semantics involved so that they are better placed to provide an unambiguous service to their clients.

The role of the valuer in practice is to identify the appropriate approach for the valuation of the subject property, choose the right method and then apply the correct mathematical model for the valuation task in hand.

This provides guidance on how valuations can be presented to the client in accordance with the International Valuation Standards.

Valuation is the process of determining Market Value. Property valuation, as with the valuation of all assets, is an estimation of price in the market. It is value in exchange. The valuer role is to determine the appropriate approach, the method and use the right model to achieve this aim as best as possible. It is a combination of analysing the market and determining the critical variables for the valuation method/model. The method is separate from the valuation process which should be followed (according to the International Valuation Standards Council Valuation Standards) regardless the valuation method chosen. There are valuation approaches, valuation methods and, as a subset of the methods, techniques or models.

This practice briefing is an overview of the Valuation Methods and Models available to the valuer and comments on the appropriateness of valuation each in assessing Market Value for specific property types.

This briefing is a review of the valuation methods and models and models that can be applied to determine market value.

The role of the valuer in practice is to identify the method of valuation and then apply the correct mathematical model for the valuation task in hand.

This provides guidance on how valuations can be presented to the client in accordance with the International Valuation Standards.

The purpose of this study is to describe and analyse the methods and standards of valuation used by Swedish professional property valuers when appraising commercial properties and factors affecting those standards. The study builds on a 2002 comparative study of valuers in four European countries by McParland et al. (2002), but focuses specifically on property valuers in Sweden.

In 2010-2011, a questionnaire was used in face-to-face interviews with about half of the authorised property valuers in Sweden. Another questionnaire was emailed to all authorised property valuers in Sweden 2015 and again about half participated.

Analysis of the results shows some new trends in used and preferred standards and methods. Although Swedish valuers still rely mainly on local guidelines, they now increasingly use international standards and company guidelines, which may indicate a growing, if indirect, form of internationalisation. Swedish valuers still use discounted cash flow as their primary method, but their use of comparative methods has increased.

The data in this comparative study of valuation standards and methods over time used were collected from a specific group of property valuers authorised through the professional Swedish organisation Samhällsbyggarna (Swedish Professionals for the Built Environment), which contributes to an insight in the presiding of the harmonisation of valuation methods and standards.

There is a continuing discussion about whether German valuation methods are inaccurate and inferior to the British standard, and the enduring efforts for a European and internationally standardised valuation method and value definitions intensify this discussion. The German valuation system is said to lead to valuations which do not reflect actual market conditions and excessive smoothing. Not surprisingly, German surveyors usually disagree and claim that the German valuation approach, with its sustainable rental value, fulfils not only its purpose but is more transparent and thus superior to the approach usually applied in UK. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the recently adjusted German valuation methods.

The paper analyses the German valuation methods and highlights the predominant differences to the British valuation standards.

The paper shows that the discussed valuation methods should lead to comparable results. The legal framework of the German valuation approaches can therefore not be blamed for any of the observed empirical phenomenon.

The paper discusses the recently adjusted German valuation methods.

The question that inevitably surfaces in practice, and certainly in lecture halls, is which equity valuation method is superior. Popular opinion holds that academia and investment practitioners may have different preferences in this regard. This article investigates which primary minority and majority equity valuation methods are advocated by academia, and how well these preferences are aligned with the equity valuation methods that investment practitioners apply in practice. The research results reveal that, contrary to popular belief, academia and practice are fairly well aligned in terms of preferred equity valuation methods, with notable differences in their respective approaches.

The purpose of this paper is to assess how technology transfer offices (TTOs) of a public university of the state of São Paulo use patent valuation methods in the process of using developed technology value and transferring technology to industry.

This study is an exploratory qualitative investigation based on a case study conducted in a public university in the state of São Paulo. The university has a TTO and an internal structure for technology transfer. In-depth interviews were conducted with the TTO manager about patent valuation and the answers given were analysed.

The results on how TTOs use patent valuation methods in the process of assigning value to technology indicate which factors facilitate and which factors hinder the valuation of patents in technologies developed at universities.

The possible lack of data disclosure due to confidentiality regarding royalties and trading fees makes further comparisons between Brazilian public universities difficult. Therefore, this study recommends that further studies on patent valuation and technology transfer process at private universities, research institutes and public and private companies should be performed.

In the practice, this study contributes to companies and TTOs by increasing their synergies in licensing negotiations, as well as by reducing the gap of information, between the business parties for assignment and transfer of technologies. With regard to theoretical contribution, this study can cite advances in the methods to measure the financial benefits arising from the valuation of technologies embedded in the patents.

Owing to the lack of research on the methods of valuation used by TTOs of Brazilian universities, the present study can be useful in serving as a theoretical source for future research and in supporting future TTO negotiations in the process of transferring technologies to productive industry.

The emerging trend in the global real estate valuation practice has led to the development of advanced valuation approaches to replace the traditional methods. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which real estate valuers practicing in Nigeria are aware and use these advanced approaches in real estate valuation practice.

Both traditional and advanced approaches were identified from the literature. An online-based questionnaire survey was administered on estate surveyors and valuers to measure their level of awareness and frequency of use of the identified valuation approaches. The feedback was collated and analyzed using descriptive statistical analysis.

The professionals are mostly aware of the traditional methods and always use the “sales comparison method” in practice. In contrast, they are not very aware of the advanced approaches and hence, only use the hedonic pricing model occasionally in practice.

The study only focuses on the Lagos metropolis, a nationwide survey will produce more comfortable generalizable findings.

This is a wake-up call for the real estate regulatory bodies and indeed all the real estate professionals in Nigeria to embrace the use of the advanced valuation approaches in practice, in order to remain relevant in the international real estate practice.

Implementation of the recommendations of this study could help position the Nigerian real estate professionals and the industry for a global exposition.

Provides a brief overview of the methods that used in real estate valuation with a particular emphasis on the valuation of specialised property. Proposes that the underlying requirement is to estimate market value and that the role of the valuer is to choose the method that is the best model to achieve this objective. Concludes that a valuer must work with the recognised techniques and, in the case of specialised property, these are methods that go back to analysing value from first principles by identifying the value of the property to the business.

Outlines the context within which the need for valuations of leisure property is developing. Arguing that the profits method, usually adopted for the valuation of leisure assets, is little understood on a research‐based theoretical level, introduces the initial findings of research into practitioner understanding of the method, in particular the capitalization rates adopted. Also suggests that the time is right to critically re‐examine the methods used in practice and sets out suggested pre‐requisites for the development of a sustainable and defensible approach to the valuation of commercial leisure property.