The debate

Paul Morgan t2r6 at worldnet.att.net
Tue Dec 2 07:23:39 EST 1997


Jostnix wrote in message <19971202014900.UAA27942 at ladder01.news.aol.com>...

{snipped}

>Timberland is sold everyday using the comparable sales approach.  The price
of
>properties already sold is generally what you should expect to pay or
receive
>for properties in a similar condition.  I would suggest that not many
people
>buying or selling land base it on any other factor than it seems to be a
good
>price.
>
>But a forest is similar... hell, just like compounding interest.  Any
forest
>valuation MUST reflect this compounding effect.  This "time value" of money
>must be reflected as future return which should influence present value or
at
>least what you are willing to pay. Land Expectation Value (LEV) using the
>income capitalization approach IMHO is the best way to value property.
>
>LEV takes in site quality, costs, prices, rotation age, interest rate and
>formulates an optimum price you can pay to make an expected rate of return.
I
>got the formula if your interested...
>
>Steve Nix
>
>
>
>      )(
>    ))}{((
>  ))))}{((((
>))))))}{((((((
>``````) (_________John Stephen Nix
>"Everybodys ignorant 'cept on different things"  Will Rogers
>Alabama Forestry Link...http://members.aol.com/jostnix/index.htm
>http://forestry.miningco.com

I'm interested...please post it.

I recall reading somewhere about some sort of trimming certification that
could be used to boost the value of timber at harvest time of species like
pine and clapboard spruce.  Is there anything analogous for the woodlot as a
whole?

If I invest time and money to increase future wood quality and quantity and
the current market value of the land doesn't reflect this, I would think
that the root of the problem is that woodlot improvements are not valued
properly.

Paul





More information about the Ag-forst mailing list