Fraud or Incompetence: Expert Opinion and Judicial Valuation

Anyone who has litigated a complex issue of the value of a going-concern might be excused for wondering whether one or both of the experts rendering significantly different opinions were fools or frauds. And anyone who has professed surprise when the judge picks a number to which neither of the experts opined but which, mirabile dictu, happens to be at the mid-point between the conflicting opinions reminds me of the words of Captain Renault in Casablanca.

Anyone  interested in a more temperate view of the problems of methodology and bias in valuation should read Michelle Harner's succinct post at the Credit Slips blog here. Anyone interested in more about methodological details should go to my post here and listen to the embedded podcast.