Coordination of the final value of the value of the object of assessment. Coordination of the results of applying various approaches and methods of assessment. The approval procedure is the final stage of the assessment

Analysis of the received calculations and final conclusion

Information about sales transactions

Analogues A and C cannot be used for calculation, since the value of net operating income for the first is not comparable with this indicator for the object being evaluated, and for the second, the income is indicated for the last year.

The probable selling price of the property being valued will be equal to:

C about \u003d 50,000 rubles. : 0.08 \u003d 625,000 rubles.

The final stage of the comparative approach to real estate valuation is the reduction of the adjusted values ​​of the prices of analogous objects obtained in the course of their analysis into a single value or range of values.

Coordination (generalization) of cost indicators is a rather important stage of the comparative approach. During this stage, the evaluator analyzes the received indicators and reduces them to a range of values ​​or a single value. At this stage, the advantages and disadvantages of each indicator of value, the reliability of market data, and the methods of analysis used are considered and carefully weighed. The appraisal report should clearly state the reasoning behind the appraisal value conclusion.

During the reconciliation, it is necessary to make sure that the resulting value indicator is consistent with the purpose of the valuation and the value indicators obtained using other approaches to valuation.

To reduce several indicators to a single value, methods of analysis of weighted averages are used.

The weighted average calculated by the appraiser will be the probable sale price of the appraised object, which can be rounded within acceptable limits in each specific case.

This approach is often used and gives good results when evaluating objects for which there is reliable information about the prices of completed purchase and sale transactions or about the offer prices of such objects for sale.

7.1. Justification of the need for
appraisal agreement

International Valuation Standards recommend using three approaches to valuation - cost, comparative and income. Russian standards make these approaches mandatory. Compliance with international standards and Russian legislation causes the need to harmonize the results obtained, since these approaches are applied to the same object within the same evaluation procedure.

The purpose of summarizing the results of the methods used is to determine the advantages and disadvantages of each of them and to select a single cost estimate. Coordination of the results of the assessment is a very relevant and very difficult task to solve. First of all, let's analyze how Western appraisers propose to solve this problem.

The monograph “Real Estate Valuation” by G. S. Harrison provides the following recommendations: “When reconciling the results, the appraiser collects together the data and indicators of value obtained on the basis of three approaches, and evaluates them using the method of causal analysis, which leads to a reasonable conclusion about the value that is the purpose of the assessment. The evaluator should clearly define the nature and scope of the work commissioned and begin to weigh the relative importance and acceptability of different data and approaches to the problem.” But the author does not disclose the methodology, mechanism and procedures for such weighing.

The book by J. Friedman and N. Ordway "Analysis and valuation of income-producing real estate" says the following about the problem of reconciliation: "Reconciliation is a decision-making process, and not a process of mechanical averaging of the results obtained
using three approaches. During this process, the evaluator tests the acceptability of the evaluation principles at various stages of task identification, data collection, and analysis using each evaluation approach. The estimator may use statistical calculations to develop a probability distribution." Again, the specifics of the agreement is practically absent.

In the book "Organization of the valuation and taxation of real estate" under the general editorship of J.K. Eckert, the problem of reconciliation of the valuation results is analyzed in more detail and deeper:
and the weaknesses of each of the approaches used in relation to this type of real estate and to a specific object. In this case, the arithmetic mean of the three evaluation results is not derived at all. And it is not necessary that one of the results obtained will be final. The goal, in most cases, is to calculate approximate size market value, usually defined as most likely price when selling, and this value may not be the result obtained by one of the valuation methods at all ... The final value of the valuation will be determined somewhere between them. In other words, it is assumed that the final result of the valuation can be chosen from one of the approaches. However, given the probabilistic nature of the concept market value, this is the exception rather than the rule. The final result is still a probabilistic value, which, as a rule, is determined using probabilistic (statistical) weighing results obtained by three approaches.

S.P. Pratt's book "Business Valuation" also states that it is often useful to quote the values ​​obtained different approaches, in tabular form, give them relative weights and only then make a conclusion taking into account the standard (base) of assessment used.

A similar judgment is expressed in another book - "Guide to Business Valuation" (authors: J. Fishman, S. P. Pratt, K Griffith, K. Wilson): "To obtain an estimate of the cost, consultants (appraisers) often use two or more methods. This leads to a sequence of different potential valuations, and the consultant has to find a way to determine the best valuation within this sequence. This is usually achieved through weighting relative importance or acceptability each valuation method leading to a particular value of the desired valuation.

However, it is far from easy to determine which performance indicators should be given more weight and how the respective method can be weighted against others. There are two main approaches that can be used when weighting the different scores obtained in a particular study to arrive at an overall final measure of the desired score: the mathematical weighting approach (the mathematical approach) and the subjective weighting approach (the subjective approach). The valuation consultant is free to use each of these approaches, but he must be aware that both have their own advantages and disadvantages.

It is noted that although the direct weighting of the results is some simplified and primitive model for taking into account the influence pricing factors on the evaluation results, it has an important advantage over subjective weighting in that this approach makes it easier for the customer or other user of the evaluation to understand the logic of the evaluator's thinking, and in a quantified (quantitative) form. The authors describe this advantage as follows: “If the valuer says: “I give the most weight to the discounted cash flow method,” then the reader can ask: “Fine, how much weight do you give to this method?” The mathematical weighting approach provides this Additional information. A significant disadvantage of mathematical weighting is that, with a large spread of individual evaluation results, its application becomes problematic, and the final result becomes less correct.
In this case, the disadvantages of one approach are the advantages of the second, and vice versa.

In Russian valuation practice, the problem of harmonizing results has been given serious attention in recent years, as evidenced by the content of numerous textbooks, publications in periodicals and speeches at conferences on valuation issues.

The book by S. V. Valdaitsev “Estimation of business and innovations” refers to the need for weighting using weight coefficients, but these coefficients are purely expert, that is, they are obtained through the subjective expert judgments of a qualified appraiser. However, the mechanism or logic of the reasoning that produces these coefficients is
are not included in the manual.

In the textbook "Business Valuation" (edited by A. G. Gryaznova and M. A. Fedotova), the authors recommend weighing the results based on the methods of mathematical and subjective approaches. With mathematical weighting, it is proposed to determine the numerical values specific gravity taking into account some factors (the nature of the business, the purpose of the valuation, the type of value, the level of liquidity, etc.), and in subjective weighing, they put at the forefront professional experience and judgment of the appraiser. There is no presentation of specific procedures for such weighing in the textbook.

The textbook “Real Estate Appraisal” (edited by A. G. Gryaznova and M. A. Fedotova) provides examples of reconciling the results of an appraisal based on the hierarchy analysis method, although the method itself is not described.

A similar approach to the problem of reconciliation of results is also presented in the article by G. G. Azgaldov “Problems of reconciliation of estimates and its possible solutions”, in which, based on the tools of modern expert qualimetry, individual properties are first quantified - factors that affect the reliability of the evaluation results obtained by various , for example, by three methods, then the quantitative expression of the cost for each valuation method is calculated, on the basis of which the generalized value of the cost is determined.

The method of expert qualimetry is based on a quantitative assessment of such a qualitative indicator as the reliability of individual results obtained by three approaches - profitable, costly and market. The basis for determining the degree of reliability of each approach are:

– the reliability of the initial information used in the calculations by each method;

- the number and nature of the assumptions (explicit and implicit) used by the appraiser, which may not correspond to reality (for example, when forecasting future income or future costs, when determining the discount rate using the cumulative construction method).

To arrive at a final value based on the three valuation results, various methods are used to determine the weights needed to derive the value of a property based on a weighted average formula. In addition to the specified method of mathematical weighting, described in the monographs of S. Pratt, the mode, median, probabilistic approach and the method of analysis of hierarchies (AHP) are also used.

Various methods were used in the evaluation process. The question of the relative importance of the value indicators obtained on the basis of various methods is determined by the Appraiser's reasonable judgment, which is formalized by weighing the results of the methods used.

There are two basic weighting methods: the mathematical weighting method and the subjective weighting method. In this paper, the appraiser used the second method of determining the final value.

The advantages of each approach in assessing the property under consideration are determined by the following criteria:

The ability to reflect the actual intentions of a potential seller or buyer.

The quality of the information on which the analysis is based.

The ability of approaches to take into account market fluctuations and the value of money.

The ability to take into account the specific features of the object that affect its value, such as location, size, potential profitability.

The cost approach allows you to determine the costs of manufacturing and selling a new appraisal object, minus all forms of accumulated depreciation. The advantage of this approach is the sufficient accuracy and reliability of information on costs. The disadvantage is that it is difficult to accurately assess all forms of wear. The use of the cost approach is most attractive when typical sellers and buyers are cost oriented in their decisions. A specific area of ​​application of the cost approach is the valuation of unique objects, especially non-revenue purposes. However, it should be noted that the cost approach includes the cost land plot- the most expensive asset in large cities. The purpose of property valuation is to determine the value of collateral (credit) obligations, i.e. it is necessary to reflect the value of objects in market conditions, and the cost approach reflects only the costs of recreating real estate objects. Therefore, we decided not to take into account the results of real estate valuation obtained on the basis of the cost approach for objects that are commercially attractive, but to take into account such results for specialized real estate objects.

The income approach capitalizes the present and future benefits of using the facility. The advantage of this approach is that it directly takes into account the benefits from the use of the property and the market opportunities during the term of the proposed ownership. In addition, this approach is based on data on market rental rates, which makes the results obtained with its application more reliable. The disadvantages of this approach include the fact that it takes into account future income from property ownership, i.e. is based on forward-looking data that cannot be accurately estimated (for example, facility occupancy data, income and expense data, changes in tax legislation, etc.).

The comparative approach uses information on sales of properties comparable to the property being valued. Using the comparative approach, the market value of the property being valued is calculated by analyzing the market sales prices of similar properties. Methods of a comparative approach, with sufficient completeness and availability of information about an analogue object, make it possible to obtain by calculation the cost of a real estate object, reflecting the real state of the real estate market. In practice, information about transactions is almost completely closed, and information about objects offered for sale is not quite sufficient and complete.

When agreeing on the results, the method of expert weighted average assessment was used. With this method, each of the used in

The assessment of approaches and methods is given different weighting coefficients depending on the reliability of the information used in their application. The maximum value of the assessment is taken equal to 5, the minimum is 1. The maximum value is 5 - the approach fully meets the selected criterion; 4 - the approach meets the selected criterion, but there are minor remarks "against"; 3 - the approach meets the criterion satisfactorily, there are a sufficient number of facts "against"; 2 – the approach does not meet the criterion well; 1 - the approach meets the criterion very poorly, slightly affects its essence.

Depending on the degree of reflection of the selected comparison parameter, each approach is assigned a value.

In a developed economy, priority is usually given to a comparative approach. In the current conditions of the economic downturn, all three approaches are almost equivalent, i.e. when setting a price, the market considers an object not only from the standpoint of the average market price level for similar objects, but also from the standpoint of obtaining potential income and the costs incurred for the construction of a similar (identical) object, therefore, according to the parameter "ability to reflect the motivation of the buyer / seller" and "compliance with the calculated cost”, the three approaches are given equal weights.

The parameter “ability to take into account the structure of price-forming market factors” is assigned high values ​​to the income and comparative approaches, because their calculation is based on data obtained from the market.

The degree of reliability and sufficiency of information was assessed by the Appraisers in the process of collecting data from the market for use in their calculations. The largest amount of information obtained from public sources is used in the comparative approach; during the verification, the Appraisers had to clarify the details for various objects of analogues several times in connection with obtaining incorrect information. Concerning,

this approach was given a lower value.

To calculate the weights of the results of the methods used in the final market value of the appraised object, we will perform the following simple calculations:

A matrix (table) of factors was built, assigning four types of scores to each approach in accordance with four criteria;

The sum of points of each approach was determined;

The sum of scores of all approaches used for evaluation was calculated;

In relation to the sum of points of this approach to the sum of points of all used approaches, the estimated weight of this approach was calculated in percent;

The calculated weights of the approaches were rounded off with an accuracy of 1% in order to use these weights to summarize the results.

Rounding is necessary because unrounded weights give the reader of the report an erroneous impression of the accuracy of the result obtained, which can cause more harm to the person concerned than the seemingly purely formal error allegedly introduced by rounding into the final result.

On the basis of rounded weights, we calculate the generalized value of the property being valued by multiplying the value obtained using this approach by the rounded weight of the approach, calculated in order to generalize the results of the valuation. The data is provided in table No. 16.

Table No. 16 - Calculation of weight coefficients

Criterion	Score in points
An approach	costly	Comparative	Profitable
Application in calculation	Not	Yes	Yes
Reliability and sufficiency of information on the basis of which the analysis and calculations were carried out
The ability of the approach to take into account the structure of price-forming market factors specific to the object
The ability of the approach to reflect the motivation, actual intentions of the typical buyer/seller
Compliance of the approach with the type of calculated cost
Total score for this approach
Sum of points
Approach weight, %		0,50	0,50
Set weight rounded up to 1%		50%	50%

The results of the application of two approaches gave the following results of the assessment of the value of the object:

Table No. 17 - Coordination of the results of the assessment of the property

In the previous sections of the Report, the results of the object valuation were obtained based on the analysis of all available information related to the object in question. Applying three approaches to assessing the value of an object, the following results were obtained (excluding VAT):

In order to finally agree on the results of the assessment, it is necessary to add weights to the assessment results obtained by each of the approaches. The weighting coefficients show what proportion of the value obtained as a result of using each of the applied valuation approaches is present in the final value of the market value of the annual rental rate. The sum of the weighting factors must be 1 (100%).

When deriving the final value of the market value of the object, the Appraiser took into account the following factors:

Market value appraisal based on the cost approach reflects the cost of replacing the appraised object and its technical condition, but does not take into account the market situation as of the date the value was determined.

As a rule, in the conditions of a developed real estate market, the calculation of the comparative approach gives the closest approximation to the market value. reflects the real offer prices for the current date, which are the fulcrum in the future auctions of the seller and the buyer when making a deal. This approach most reliably reflects the state of the real estate market, since it is based on market data and takes into account the impact of external factors on the cost.

The disadvantage is that it is practically impossible to find two completely identical objects, and the differences between them cannot always be isolated and quantified with sufficient accuracy. An increase in the number of corrections increases the subjectivity of the assessment by this approach.

The income approach capitalizes the present and future benefits of using the facility. The advantage of this approach is that it directly takes into account the benefits from the use of the property and the market opportunities during the term of the proposed ownership. However, when applying the income approach, the Appraiser has adopted a number of assumptions and limitations, which somewhat limit the reliability of calculations using this approach.

Considering all of the above, the results of calculating the final market value of the appraisal object are presented in the following table.

	Matching Criteria	Comparative	costly	Profitable
	Compliance degree:
	evaluation task
	assessment objectives
	functional purpose of the object of assessment
	assessed rights
	The degree of reliability and sufficiency of the initial data used in each of the approaches
	The degree of preference for each of the approaches in terms of market characteristics and the location of the objects of assessment
	Reliability of calculations and analysis procedures carried out in the approaches used
	The share of expert assessments and judgments in each of the above approaches
Weight coefficient of each of the approaches, rel.units
Market value obtained within the framework of each of the approaches, rub.
Agreed market value, rub.

Market value:

From pH. = 11,674,218.01+8,872,198.70+10,111,245.84= 30,657,662.55 rubles

So the market value office space, located at the address: Murmansk Karl Liebknecht street house 18 on October 24, 2014, rounded off is: 30 657 663 rub.

After the appraiser has made a valuation of the business by various methods of several approaches, he must compare the values ​​obtained. In a perfect market, all three approaches should result in the same amount of value. In practice, the values ​​obtained by different approaches usually differ significantly. For example, consider a large enterprise that has a significant amount of fixed assets and other tangible assets, but produces low-margin products. Its value, obtained using the cost approach, can be several times higher than the value obtained using income approach methods. Therefore, the appraiser is required to conduct a cost reconciliation to determine the final value of the business.

Total cost- this is the value of the object of assessment, calculated using various approaches to the assessment and the agreement of the results obtained by the appraiser justified by the application of various approaches to the assessment. Approval of evaluation results is a mandatory procedure of the evaluation process and a mandatory part of the evaluation report. As indicated in FSO-3 "Requirements for the assessment report", it should contain a description of the procedure for coordinating the results of the assessment and the conclusions obtained on the basis of the calculations carried out for various approaches, as well as when using different methods within the framework of each approach, in order to determine the final value of the cost, or recognition as the final value of the cost of the result of one of the approaches. In this part of the report, the appraiser in a narrative form explains the essence of the differences in the value determined by various methods, justifies the choice of the method for reconciling the final value of the business, and makes a generalization.

When agreeing, it is necessary to take into account the significance and functionality of each approach in a particular situation. As a rule, when evaluating a business, one of the approaches is considered basic, while the other two are necessary to adjust the results obtained. Due to the specific features of the enterprise or lack of information, it happens that some of the approaches cannot be applied in practice.

The final value of the cost is never the result of mathematical averaging, i.e. it is not found by summing the values ​​of all estimated costs and then dividing the sum by the number of approaches used. This would assume that each of the approaches gives a reliable result, which is extremely rare. To determine the final cost, the appraiser's professional opinion is used, which is most optimally formalized in the weighted average method.

In general, this method determines the total cost by the following formula:

C um \u003d K d C d + K s C s + K s C s,

C IT - final business value,

C d, C s, C s - values ​​determined using income, comparative and cost approaches, respectively,

K d, K s, K z - weight coefficients selected for income, comparative and cost approaches, respectively. It should be remembered that these weights should add up to one, or 100%. Most appraisers round calculated weights to within 10%.

To determine the weighting factors for each assessment approach, it is necessary to conduct a quantitative and qualitative analysis that takes into account the following factors:

The purpose of the assessment and the engagement-specific use of its results;

Type of value to be determined (for example, market or investment value);

The nature of the ownership interest being assessed (for example, if a minority stake is being assessed, then the cost approach is given less weight);

The quality and sufficiency of the information underlying the calculations by each method;

The specifics of the business and its assets;

The degree of control and the degree of liquidity of the block of shares under consideration.

Considering all these factors, the evaluator uses several methods to determine the weights for each approach. These methods include:

Method of mathematical or subjective weighting;

Method of expert qualimetry;

Hierarchy analysis method;

Probabilistic method.

It should be noted that all these methods solve the same goal: to formalize the professional opinion of the appraiser on the degree of applicability of one or another approach in the approval procedure.

The simplest and most commonly used is the method of mathematical or subjective weighting, when the weighting coefficients are assigned by the appraiser intuitively, based on professional judgment. The method of expert qualimetry (expert assessments) implies the formulation of the same subjective judgment with the help of a more formalized sequence of actions (selection of a set of assessment criteria, grading by experts for each criterion, summarizing the results). The method of analysis of hierarchies turns the formulation of a professional opinion into a mathematical procedure. At the same time, the coordination task is structured into a hierarchical structure with several levels: goals, criteria and alternatives; a pairwise comparison of the elements of each level is made, the coefficients of the importance of the elements are calculated, and the final value of the weight of each alternative is calculated. The probabilistic method implies the use of the values ​​and patterns of the probability of the implementation of decisions for each of the approaches.

Each of the methods is heuristic in nature, not having a rigorous scientific proof. However, they found wide practical use in appraisal activities because of its simplicity and visibility.

An example of calculating the total cost by subjective weighting is shown in table.1.

Table 1. Calculation of the total cost by the subjective method

In the considered example, the difference between the assessment results for different approaches was quite significant, 75%. In our case, the least informationally reliable approach was assigned the lowest weighting factor. In practice, when agreeing on significantly different intermediate results of the assessment obtained by different approaches, the report must reflect the analysis carried out and the identified reason for the discrepancies. Such a difference is considered significant, in which the result obtained by applying one approach is outside the boundaries of the range of value specified by the appraiser obtained by applying another approach.

The total value of the business indicated in the report is the opinion of an independent appraiser. As practice shows, the real cost of selling a business always differs from the recommended one (remember the “10-50 rule”). However, the opinion of a professional, supported by calculations based on standards, is a weighty argument in negotiations between the seller and the buyer of a business.

Requirements for the assessment report and its structure

General requirements to the content of the valuation report are defined by Article 11 of the Federal Law "On valuation activities in the Russian Federation" and FSO-3 "Requirements for the valuation report", approved by order of the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia dated May 20, 2015 N 299.

Evaluation report is the final document containing information of probative value, drawn up based on the results of the procedure for determining the value of a business in accordance with the law Russian Federation on appraisal activities. It is compiled on paper and (or) in the form of an electronic document.

The appraisal report is executed in accordance with the appraisal task and contains the appraiser's reasonable professional judgment regarding the value of the appraisal object, formulated on the basis of the information collected and the calculations performed, taking into account the assumptions.

In preparing the report, the appraiser should adhere to the following principles:

The report should contain information essential for determining the value of the appraised object;

The information provided in the evaluation report must be confirmed;

The hard copy report must be page numbered, stitched, signed by the appraiser or appraisers who performed the appraisal, and also sealed with the personal seal of the appraiser or appraisers or the seal of the legal entity with which the appraiser or appraisers have entered into an employment contract.

The report, drawn up in the form of an electronic document, must be numbered page by page, signed with an enhanced qualified electronic signature in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation by the appraiser or appraisers who conducted the appraisal, as well as the signature of the head of the legal entity with which the appraiser or appraisers entered into an employment contract.

The valuation report must indicate the date of the report and its number. The evaluation report must contain the following information:

1) assignment for assessment in accordance with the requirements of federal assessment standards;

2) applicable valuation standards;

3) assumptions made during the assessment of the object of assessment;

4) information about the customer of the appraisal and about the appraiser;

5) information about all organizations and specialists involved in the assessment;

6) main facts and conclusions. The main facts and conclusions section should contain:

The basis for the assessment by the appraiser;

Information identifying the object of assessment;

The results of the assessment obtained by applying various approaches;

The final value of the value of the object of assessment;

Restrictions and limits on the application of the resulting total cost;

7) description of the appraisal object, indicating the list of documents used by the appraiser, details of the legal entity being appraised and the book value of the appraisal object;

8) analysis of the appraisal object market, pricing factors, as well as external factors affecting its value;

9) a description of the business valuation process, including the rationale for the choice of approaches and methods used, the sequence for determining the cost within each of the approaches used, as well as the corresponding calculations;

10) a description of the procedure for coordinating the results of the assessment and the conclusions obtained on the basis of the calculations.

The text of the assessment report should contain links to sources of information or copies of the materials used. Documents provided by the customer (certificates, tables, balance sheets) must be signed by an authorized person and certified in the prescribed manner. If the information when published on the website is not provided with free access or it may change in the future, copies of the relevant materials must be attached to the assessment report.

The final value of the cost can be presented as a specific number rounded according to the mathematical rounding rules or as an interval of values, if such a representation is provided for by law or the assessment task.

The structure (sequence of chapters) of the valuation report is not legally defined, however, business valuation reports, as a rule, differ little in the order of presentation. The report usually includes the following sections:

1. Introduction.

2. Summary (summary of the report, limitations and assumptions).

3. General economic analysis.

4. Industry analysis.

5. Analysis of the region where the enterprise is located.

6. Characteristics of the enterprise.

7. Reporting adjustment and financial analysis.

8. Determination of business value by various approaches.

9. Coordination of results.

10. Applications (sources of information).

The main tasks that an appraiser must perform when preparing a report are to ensure the logic of presentation, the use of only essential information and the comprehensibility of the report for unskilled users.

Review of the assessment report

Examination of the assessment report- these are the actions of SRO experts in order to verify the report signed by the appraiser for compliance with the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation and standards, as well as in order to confirm the market value of the appraisal object determined by the appraiser in the report.

The examination of evaluation reports is regulated by Article 17.1. Federal Law "On Appraisal Activities in the Russian Federation" (as amended by the Federal Law of 08.06.2015 N 145-FZ) and FSO-5 "Types of expertise, the procedure for its implementation, requirements for an expert opinion and the procedure for its approval", approved by order of the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia dated 04.07.11 No. 328.

According to the FSO, two types of expertise are distinguished depending on its subject:

Expertise for compliance with legal requirements on valuation activities, including the requirements of the Federal Law, federal valuation standards, and standards and rules for valuation activities (regulatory and methodological expertise);

Expertise for cost confirmation object of appraisal determined by the appraiser in the appraisal report, which also includes checking the appraisal report for compliance with legal requirements.

According to the basis for the examination, they are classified into three types:

Examination of the report in cases established by law RF (mandatory);

Examination of the report in accordance with internal documents self-regulatory organization appraisers;

Examination on the basis of a contract (voluntary, or initiative).

If the examination of the assessment report is carried out on the basis of an agreement, the amount of payment for the examination of the assessment report is determined by the agreement and cannot depend on the conclusion contained in the expert opinion.

cases mandatory examination of assessment reports in accordance with the law:

1. Valuation of the debtor's property in the framework of the bankruptcy procedure. According to Art. 130 of the Federal Law of October 26, 2002 No. 127-FZ "On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)", the examination of the report on the assessment of the debtor's property is carried out under the simultaneous observance of two conditions:

The debtor is a unitary enterprise or JSC, more than 25% of the voting shares of which are in state or municipal ownership;

The evaluation report was issued a negative opinion of the Federal Property Management Agency.

2. Determining the price (monetary value) of the JSC property. According to Art. 77 of the Federal Law of December 26, 1995 No. 208-FZ "On joint-stock companies» an examination of the property valuation report for JSCs with state and municipal participation is carried out in the presence of a negative opinion of the Federal Property Management Agency and the valuation is carried out for the purposes of additional placement of shares, acquisition of outstanding shares, etc.

3. Redemption by a person who has acquired more than 95% of PJSC shares of PJSC securities at the request of this person or the owners of the remaining shares. According to Art. 84.7 and 84.8 of the Federal Law of December 26, 1995 No. 208-FZ “On Joint Stock Companies”, the redemption price cannot be lower than the market value determined by an independent appraiser in the securities valuation report and confirmed by the SRO during the examination of such valuation report.

4. State cadastral valuation. According to Art. 24.11 of the Federal Law “On valuation activities in the Russian Federation”, the examination of the report on determining the cadastral value is included in the set of actions performed during the state cadastral valuation.

5. Challenging the results of the state cadastral valuation. According to Art. 24.18 of the Federal Law "On valuation activities in the Russian Federation", a positive expert opinion is attached to the application for revising the cadastral value in relation to the report on determining the market value of the property.

During the examination of the appraisal report, a study of the work performed by the appraiser is carried out. When conducting an examination of the assessment report, the expert does not conduct a re-assessment. When conducting an examination of an assessment report, it is not allowed for an expert to use information that became known after the date of assessment.

An appraisal report cannot be reviewed by an expert who signed the appraisal report in respect of which the appraisal is being carried out, or who is a founder, owner, shareholder, official or an employee of a legal entity - the customer of the examination, or the owner of the object of assessment.

Examination of the appraisal report also cannot be carried out by an expert if the expert has a property interest in the object of appraisal, or if the expert is related to the founder, owner, customer of the appraisal or the person who signed the relevant appraisal report, and also if entity- the customer of the expertise is the creditor or insurer of the expert.

The result of the examination of the assessment report is a positive or negative expert opinion.

When conducting a regulatory and methodological examination, a positive expert opinion is a conclusion containing a conclusion on the compliance of the valuation report with the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation on valuation activities, and standards and rules for valuation activities.

When conducting an examination to confirm the value of the appraisal object, a positive expert opinion is an expert opinion containing a conclusion on the confirmation of the value of the appraisal object determined by the appraiser in the appraisal report, including a conclusion on the compliance of the appraisal report with the law.

A negative expert opinion is an expert opinion containing a conclusion different from the positive ones. A negative expert opinion includes a complete list of violations identified and their justification.

Test Questions for Chapter 4

1. How and at what stage of the calculations does the degree of control affect the value of the enterprise?

2. For which organizational forms of business is it easier to determine the liquidity discount, and for which it is more difficult?

3. How is the value of non-performing assets taken into account when adjusting the value of the business?

4. What does the procedure for agreeing on the cost at the end of the settlements include?

5. What information should be included in the assessment report?

6. What are the two types of examination of assessment reports, depending on its subject matter, provided by the current legislation?

7. In what cases is an assessment report reviewed?

Literature

federal laws

1. Federal Law No. 135-FZ of July 29, 1998 “On Appraisal Activities in the Russian Federation”.

2. Federal Law No. 315-FZ of December 1, 2007 “On Self-Regulatory Organizations”.

Federal Standards estimates

one. " General concepts assessments, approaches to assessment and requirements for the assessment of FSO N 1) "of 20.05.15.

2. "The purpose of the assessment and types of value (FSO N 2)" dated 05/20/15.

3. "Requirements for the assessment report (FSO N 3)" dated 05/20/15.

4. "Determination of the cadastral value (FSO No. 4)" dated 22.10.10.

5. "Types of examination, the procedure for its conduct, requirements for an expert opinion and the procedure for its approval (FSO No. 5)" dated 04.07.11.

6. "Requirements for the level of knowledge of an expert of a self-regulatory organization of appraisers (FSO No. 6)" dated 07.11.11.

7. "Real Estate Appraisal (FSO No. 7)" dated 09/25/14.

8. "Business valuation (FSO N 8)" dated 06/01/15.

9. “Assessment for the purposes of collateral (FSO No. 9) dated 01.06.15.

10. “Assessment of the cost of machinery and equipment (FSO No. 10) dated 06/01/15.

11. "Evaluation of intangible assets and intellectual property" (FSO No. 11) dated 06/22/15.

Scientific and educational literature

1. Kasyanenko T.G., Makhovikova G.A. Valuation of business: a textbook for bachelors. Moscow: Yurait Publishing House, 2016.

2. Business valuation: textbook / Ed. A.G. Gryaznova, M.A. Fedotova. - 2nd ed. – M.: Finance and statistics, 2009.

3. Business valuation: tutorial/ V.E. Esipov and others, ed. V.E. Esipova and G.A. Makhovikova. - 3rd ed. - St. Petersburg: Publishing House Peter, 2010.

4. Varlamov A.A., Komarov S.I. Valuation of real estate objects: Textbook. – M.: FORUM, 2011.

5. Estimation of business value: textbook and workshop for undergraduate and graduate students / E. A. Spiridonova. - M. : Yurait Publishing House, 2016.

6. V. I. Busov, O. A. Zemlyansky. Estimating the value of an enterprise (business): a textbook for academic undergraduate studies - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Yurait Publishing House, 2015.

7. Business valuation: textbook / team of authors; ed. M.A. Eskindarova, M.A. Fedotova. - M. : KNORUS, 2015.

8. Business valuation: textbook / L.S. Vasiliev. - M.: KNORUS, 2016.

9. Kosorukova I. V., Sekachev S. A., Shuklina M. A. Estimation of the cost of securities and business. Textbook. - M. : Synergy, 2015.

10. Chebotarev, N. F. Valuation of an enterprise (business): Textbook for bachelors / N. F. Chebotarev. - 3rd ed. - M.: Publishing and Trade Corporation "Dashkov and K", 2014.

11. Kazakova N.A. Economic analysis in business valuation and management of the company's investment attractiveness: a study guide. - M.: Finance and statistics, 2015.

12. Ivanova E.N. Estimating the value of real estate: a study guide. - 5th ed., revised. - M.: KNORUS, 2016.

13. Kuzin N.Ya., Uchinina T.V., Tolstykh Yu.O. Valuation of intangible assets and intellectual property: a tutorial. - M.: Infra-M, 2016.

14. Kasyanenko T.G., Makhovikova G.A. Estimating the cost of machinery and equipment: A textbook and workshop for the academic undergraduate. - 2nd ed., - M .: Yurayt Publishing House, 2014.

Resources of the information and telecommunications network "Internet"

1. http://www.ncva.ru - National Council for Valuation Activities.

2. http://www.appraiser.ru - Bulletin of the appraiser.

3. http://www.estimatica.info - Portal for the appraiser.

4. http://www.ocenchik.ru - Estimated with a capital letter.

5. http://nwsa.ru - Northwestern Society of Appraisers.

6. http://sroroo.ru - Russian Society of Appraisers.

7. http://www.cpa-russia.org - Community of valuation professionals.

8. http://sroarmo.ru - Association of Russian Masters of Evaluation.

9. http://smao.ru - Self-regulating inter-regional association of appraisers.

10. http://www.sromso.ru/ - Interregional Union of Appraisers.

11. https://rosreestr.ru - Rosreestr.

12. http://www.profsro.ru - All-Russian trade union employees of audit, appraisal, expert and consulting organizations.

Chapter 1. Organization of valuation activities

1.1 Organization of valuation activities in the Russian Federation

1.2 Legal Framework valuation activities in the Russian Federation and valuation standards

1.3 Attestation of assessors

1.4 Evaluator ethics rules

1.5 Assessor's responsibility

Test questions for chapter 1

Chapter 2. Theoretical and practical foundations of business valuation

2.1 The essence of the assessment, its subjects and objects, purpose and objectives

2.2 Basis for evaluation. Mandatory evaluation.

2.3 Stages of the evaluation process

2.4 The concept of value and its types

2.5 Business as an object of evaluation

2.6 Principles of business valuation

2.7 Factors affecting the value of a business

2.8 Problems of business valuation in the Russian Federation

2.9 Information base of valuation activities

2.10 Normalization and adjustment of financial statements

Test questions for chapter 2

Chapter 3. Business Valuation Methods

3.1 Approaches and methods in valuation activities

3.2 Income approach, discounted cash flow method.

3.3 Income approach, income capitalization method.

3.4 Accounting for risks in business valuation.

3.5 Benchmarking Approach: Capital Market Method or Peer Company Method.

3.6 Comparative approach: multipliers, their types and use.

3.7 Comparative approach: method of transactions.

3.8 Comparative approach: industry coefficient method.

3.9 Cost Approach: Net Asset Value Method

3.10 Cost Approach: Salvage Value Method

3.11 Real estate valuation

3.12 Appraisal of machinery and equipment.

3.13 Valuation of intangible assets.

Test questions for chapter 3

Chapter 4 The final stage estimates

4.1 Methods for adjusting the final value of the business value.

4.2 Consolidation of assessment results

4.3 Requirements for the assessment report and its structure

4.4 Examination of the assessment report

Test Questions for Chapter 4

In an ideal market, all three approaches should lead to the same value, but in practice, the values ​​obtained by different methods can vary significantly (from 5 to 50% or even more, especially when valuing a business). For example, when analyzing a financially unstable enterprise whose profits are negligible (if any), the amount of value obtained on the basis of the income approach is very small, but the enterprise has significant tangible assets and the value obtained using the cost approach can exceed the previous value by tens and hundreds of times.

In accordance with the law, unless otherwise provided in the valuation agreement, the final value of the value of the valuation object must be expressed in rubles as a single value.

The final value of the value of the appraisal object- the value of the appraised object, obtained as a result of the appraiser's justified generalization of the results of calculating the value of the appraised object using various approaches to appraisal and appraisal methods.

To bring together disparate cost values ​​obtained by classical approaches to valuation, the results are harmonized.

Consolidation of evaluation results- this is obtaining a final assessment of the property by weighing and comparing the results obtained using various approaches to the assessment.

As a rule, one of the approaches is considered basic, the other two are necessary to correct the results obtained. This takes into account the significance and applicability of each approach in a particular situation. Due to the underdevelopment of the market, the specificity of the object or the lack of available information, it happens that some of the approaches in a particular situation cannot be applied.

To harmonize the results, it is necessary to determine the "weights", according to which the individual previously obtained values ​​will form the final market value property, taking into account all significant parameters based on the expert opinion of the appraiser.

Reconciliation of the results obtained by different assessment approaches is carried out according to the formula

S IT \u003d S ZP × K 1 + S DP × K 2 + S SP × K 3, (4.3)

where IT- the total cost of the object of assessment;

S ZP, S DP, S SP– costs determined by cost, income and comparative approaches;

K 1, K 2, K 3 are the appropriate weighting factors chosen for each estimation approach.

With respect to these coefficients, the following equality holds:

K 1 + K 2 + K 3 = 1.

The weights selected for each valuation approach are rounded to the nearest 10% (less commonly 5%) for the purpose of using these weights for reconciliation. Rounding is necessary due to the fact that unrounded weights give the reader of the report an erroneous idea of ​​the accuracy of the result. The final value is only the most probable price.

Based on the rounded weights, the agreed value of the property being valued is calculated by multiplying the result obtained using each approach by the rounded weight of the approach calculated for the purpose of matching values. The resulting value is rounded off.

The following are taken into account when agreeing:

1) completeness and reliability of information;

2) purpose fit;

3) advantages and disadvantages of approaches in a particular situation.

For example, the advantages of the method of discounting cash flows - taking into account the expectations of the administration of the enterprise regarding future profits, expenses, capital investments. But these are just forecast estimates that may change in reality. However this method shows the amount that the investor is willing to pay, focusing on expectations regarding the results of the enterprise, taking into account the required return on investment.

The comparative approach is the only one that takes into account the market situation, it represents an assessment based on real data on stock prices and sales of similar enterprises. Its main disadvantage is the need to adjust for the closed nature of the company (capital market method). In addition, everything, even small enterprises, have significant differences, which requires complex adjustments. In addition, this approach relies on retrospective information that does not take into account the prospects for the development of the enterprise.