CJ 2017 Annual Report

Enterprise value, which was used to derive reorganization value, represents the estimated fair value of an entity’s capital structure which generally consists of long term debt and stockholders’ equity. The Successor’s enterprise value was approved by the Bankruptcy Court in support of the Restructuring Plan and was not to exceed $750.0 million, which represented the mid-point of a determined range of $600.0 million to $900.0 million. The Successor's enterprise value of $750.0 million was based upon $725.9 million of New Equity and New Warrants as approved by the Bankruptcy Court and $24.1 million of other liabilities that were not eliminated or discharged under the Restructuring Plan. The Successor's enterprise value was determined with the assistance of a separate third-party valuation expert who used available comparable market data and quotations, discounted cash flow analysis and other internal financial information and projections. This enterprise value combined with the Company’s Rights Offering was the basis for deriving equity value.  The Company’s estimates of fair value are inherently subject to significant uncertainties and contingencies beyond its control. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the estimates, assumptions, valuations, appraisals and financial projections will be realized, and actual results could vary materially.  Moreover, the market value of the Company’s common stock subsequent to its emergence from bankruptcy may differ materially from the equity valuation derived for accounting purposes. Machinery and Equipment The fair value of machinery and equipment was estimated with the assistance of the third-party valuation expert, and the market approach, the cost approach, and the income approach were considered for each individual asset. The market approach and the cost approach were the primary approaches that were relied upon to value these assets. Although the income approach was not applied to value the machinery and equipment assets individually, the Company did consider the earnings of the reporting unit within which each of these assets reside. Because more than one approach was used to develop a valuation, the various approaches were reconciled to determine a final value conclusion. Under the cost approach, the valuation estimate was based upon a determination of replacement cost new ("RCN"), reproduction cost new ("CRN"), or a combination of both. Once the RCN and CRN estimates were adjusted for physical and functional conditions, they were then compared to market data and other indications of value, where available, to confirm results obtained by the cost approach. Where direct RCN estimates were not available or deemed inappropriate, the CRN for machinery and equipment was estimated using the indirect, or trending, method in which percentage changes in applicable price indices were applied to historical costs to convert them into indications of current costs. To estimate the CRN amounts, inflation indices from established external sources were then applied to historical costs to estimate the CRN for each such asset. The Company also developed a cost approach when market information was not available, or a market approach was deemed inappropriate. In doing so, an indicated value was derived by deducting physical deterioration from the RCN or CRN of each identifiable asset. Physical deterioration is the loss in value or usefulness of a property due to the using up or expiration of its useful life caused by wear and tear, deterioration, exposure to various elements, physical stresses, and similar factors. Under the market approach, the valuation estimate was based upon an analysis of recent sales transactions for comparable assets and took into account physical, functional and economic conditions. Where comparable sales transactions could not be reasonably obtained, the Company utilized the percent of cost technique under the market approach, which takes into consideration general sales, sales listings, and auction data for each major asset category. This information was then used in conjunction with each asset’s effective age to develop ratios between the sales price and RCN or CRN of similar asset types. A market-based depreciation curve was then developed and applied to asset categories where sufficient sales and auction information existed. Economic obsolescence related to machinery and equipment was also considered and was applied to stacked and underutilized assets based upon the status of the asset. Economic obsolescence was also considered in situations in which the earnings of the applicable business segment in which the assets are employed suggest economic obsolescence. When penalizing assets for economic obsolescence, an additional economic obsolescence penalty was levied, while considering scrap value to be the floor value for an asset. Land, Buildings and Leasehold Improvements The fair value estimates of the real property assets were estimated with the assistance of the third-party valuation expert, and the market approach, the cost approach, and the income approach were considered for each of the Company's significant real property assets. The Company primarily relied upon the market and cost approaches. In valuing the fee simple interest in the land, the Company utilized the sales comparison approach under the market approach. The sales comparison approach estimates value based upon the price in which other purchasers and sellers have C&J ENERGY SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 87