Retrospective appraisal - use of subsequent sale of subject as a comp

[CANative]

The subject as a comp for itself could be compelling. Or it could be misleading. Or it could be meaningless. It's just a single price point for itself.

I'm trying to argue the value of a closed hotel for early 2009. The other side has it at $14 million. The client has been trying to sell it for years. The only offer they have ever gotten was a lukewarm offer at $7 million in mid-2010. Can I use this information to argue the 2009 value?

 

[Stone]

The subject as a comp for itself could be compelling. Or it could be misleading. Or it could be meaningless. It's just a single price point for itself.

I'm trying to argue the value of a closed hotel for early 2009. The other side has it at $14 million. The client has been trying to sell it for years. The only offer they have ever gotten was a lukewarm offer at $7 million in mid-2010. Can I use this information to argue the 2009 value?

A single offer isn't the same thing as a closed, arms-length sale and you know it . Doesn't add anything to the discussion of using a sale of the subject as a comparable price. Also, we've already agreed about data going forward in a retrospective report so I'm not going to take that up as part of this either. Go find the duck to have this argument. :laugh:

 

[CANative]

Resistance to Wabbed Feet is futile (and exhausting.)