为了帮助法庭达成尤科斯石油公司的估值正确, 原告提出 13 possible scenarios. The claims ranged from USD 30 数十亿美元 114 billions (Final Award, 为. 1701 - 1710) and the three main sets of scenarios were the following:
- 违反上述ECT造成尤科斯 - 西伯利亚石油公司合并失败,
- 尤科斯了 70% 在纽交所上市的被机会
- 税务评估是不是违反了ECT的, 但评估的后续执法是违反.
- 尽管评估的实施, 尤科斯将被赋予一定的时间来还清美元 24 billion (because of the considerable amount it represents).
Claimants’ expert reached a synthesised Enterprise value by weighing three different valuation methods (DCF 50%, 可比公司 40% 和可比交易 10% (Final Award, 为. 1717)) and proposed that the valuation date for Yukos should be the highest of either the November 2007 date (when Yukos was struck off the register) or the date of the award (which the Tribunal deems to be 30 六月 2014).
原告在两个估值日期估计尤科斯实体的价值, 加不从收到的分红假设 2004 至 2007, the lost chance of being listed in the NYSE and-pre award interest on the dividends from the valuation date to the date of the Award (LIBOR + 4%) (Final Award, 为. 1722 - 1724).
It should be noted that Claimants’ experts most likely did not disclose full soft copies of their models in the proceedings as the Tribunal expressed difficulties in following Claimants’ methodology and stated that it had to infer it from the appendices to the expert’s second report (Final Award, 为. 1728). According to Mr. McClay of BDO (London), 至关重要的是，一方披露软副本，以确保法庭了解其方法的所有步骤，并确定, 尤其是, 体系结构问题, 假设分歧和矛盾, 输入错误和模型是否全面工作.
Respondent’s approach was far more simplistic, 因为它没有提出一个积极的情况下，就赔偿问题在所有, but rather chose to point out errors and attack Claimants’ expert’s valuation (Final Award, para.1783). 例如, Respondent disagreed with Claimants regarding the valuation date but did not set out an alternative date (although it suggested that it should be before the end of 2004 at the Hearing (Final Award, para.1738)). This was a dangerous strategy to adopt, as it is always possible to chip away at damages should an opposing party win.
受访者的专家表示，索赔人的计算是“错误百出” (Final Award, 为. 1743, 1744) and corrected Claimants’ Comparable Companies valuation by excluding data with regard to Rosneft, 俄罗斯天然气工业石油公司和国际大型石油公司从分析以达到在企业价值 2007 美元 32 billions lower than Claimants’ Enterprise value (Final Award, 为. 1746). Respondent also disputed the reliability of the Comparable Companies and claimed that Comparable Transactions were indefensible from an economic perspective (Final Award, 为. 1747) but never brought forward a methodology for valuating Yukos or any valuation figures of its own.
先生. McClay of BDO (London) is of the opinion that the phrase “错误百出” is becoming a stock phrase in respondents’ expert reports and perhaps even part of a report template of some experts. 这里, Claimants’ first expert report was indeed flawed; the valuation of YNG (Yukos’ main production subsidiary sold in a forced auction to Baikal, a fake entity bought by the State-owned Rosneft shortly after) contained obvious and significant errors which Respondent pointed out. Claimants’ expert then admitted to his mistakes but compensated for them in his second expert report by inflating other numbers to reach the same final amount claimed (Final Award, 为. 1744, 1745). 这可能是索赔人的专家的错误破坏了他的信誉，导致法庭对他失去信心，对法庭说，他的“法庭有限的援助决心索赔人赔偿” was a factor to consider when fixing the costs of Claimants (Final Award, 为. 1884).
从战略的角度, 它往往是，被告没有提供为了计算不轻信原告的量子情况. 毕竟, 申请人不必负担提出索赔估值和可以决定让法庭的工作难度相当大. 然而, 受访者经常面临两难选择时，它可以合理地预期该法庭驳回索赔人“为不合理要求，甚至不考虑量子. 这将是值得招致专家的费用, including hearings when it might turn out useless?
不把量子一个积极的情况下，有时会适得其反. What is the Tribunal to do when there is even partial acceptance of the claimant’s quantum but nothing from the other side? This approach can sometimes lead to dangerous consequences as it makes it difficult for the Tribunal to adopt only part of the respondent’s case and the Tribunal has only one party’s valuation to base its award on.
虽然, 在尤科斯, 被投诉的专家成功地通过指出在索赔人的专家的计算，一些非常大的错误显著降低债权价值. 因此, some of Respondent’s criticism of Claimants’ experts (the “corrected” version of Claimants’ Comparable Companies analysis and the adjustments to the principle errors) was useful to the Tribunal. 该法庭认为，“被告的专家到来 - 在口头推进是什么”可能“ 一个 ”有用“的评价 - 在”修正“的企业价值的美元金额 67.862 和十亿, 假设 90/10 股本/债务资本结构, 的股权价值为 21 十一月 2007 美元 61 billions’ (Final Award, 为. 1783).
据到M. MacGregor of BDO (London), 专家会议将是在这种情况下有用的考虑专家之间的鸿沟很大. It is likely that the technical valuation issues could have been resolved (or at least clarified) by a meeting and, given the costs of the experts (USD 8.5 数以百万计的申请人及美元 4.5 millions for Respondent), 讨论无疑会被成本效益.
支持专家会议的更多的看法是，, 考虑到这样的法庭使用的专家提出的证据, 这是不可能的，它得到了他们的完整, 来作出决定前告知估值意见.
虽然一方应, 的范围内，有可能, 与对方的专家参与, 它成为不切实际的期望，专家们将能够在任何普通的数字一致，其中一方不量子提交案例, 这里是如此的战略目的.
- 奥利维尔Marquais, 关联, Aceris LLC