Epstein Secrets

Planning , Inc. 1980 -1996 49 27.7% AMY (two-year holding period transactions) 1980 -1997 243 22.3% Hertzel — Smith 1980 -1987 106 20.1% Johnson 1991 - 1995 72 20.0% Our methodology for determining an appropriate adjustment for lack of marketability included the following steps: 1. Exam

ate Indicated enterprise value (minority, marketable basis) divided by: Company indication2 Implied multiple $286,500 (63,000) 223,500 203,764 EV - Enterprise Value (invested capisol less cash): Fwd - Forward Cash and cash equivalents at the Valuation Date welt based on estimates provided by management. and incl

Planning , Inc. 1980 -1996 49 27.7% AMY (two-year holding period transactions) 1980 -1997 243 22.3% Hertzel — Smith 1980 -1987 106 20.1% Johnson 1991 - 1995 72 20.0% Our methodology for determining an appropriate adjustment for lack of marketability included the following steps: 1. Exam

ate Indicated enterprise value (minority, marketable basis) divided by: Company indication2 Implied multiple $286,500 (63,000) 223,500 203,764 EV - Enterprise Value (invested capisol less cash): Fwd - Forward Cash and cash equivalents at the Valuation Date welt based on estimates provided by management. and incl

Planning , Inc. 1980 -1996 49 27.7% AMY (two-year holding period transactions) 1980 -1997 243 22.3% Hertzel — Smith 1980 -1987 106 20.1% Johnson 1991 - 1995 72 20.0% Our methodology for determining an appropriate adjustment for lack of marketability included the following steps: 1. Exam

ate Indicated enterprise value (minority, marketable basis) divided by: Company indication2 Implied multiple $286,500 (63,000) 223,500 203,764 EV - Enterprise Value (invested capisol less cash): Fwd - Forward Cash and cash equivalents at the Valuation Date welt based on estimates provided by management. and incl