Economic Expert Opinions & Financial Analysis
Independent, transparent analysis for legal disputes, transactions and complex financial questions.
An economic expert opinion should translate a disputed financial question into a transparent methodology, test the available evidence, quantify the result where the data support it, and make assumptions explicit enough to be challenged. Dr. Tiran Rothman works on valuation, damages, financial modelling and related economic questions in legal and strategic contexts.
What makes an expert opinion useful
The purpose of an expert opinion is not to produce the most aggressive number. It is to provide a method that can be understood, tested and defended. The analysis should distinguish facts from assumptions, explain why a methodology fits the question and show how the conclusion changes when material assumptions change.
Valuation disputes
Valuation questions may arise in shareholder disputes, transactions, derivative actions, class actions or disagreements over the economics of a corporate event. The work can involve reviewing an existing valuation, reconstructing a financial model, testing comparable-company assumptions, examining discount rates and terminal value, or building an independent valuation framework.
Damages and counterfactual analysis
Many damages questions require a comparison between what occurred and a credible counterfactual: what would likely have happened absent the alleged conduct or event. The quality of the result depends on the economic logic of that counterfactual, not merely on arithmetic. Where several counterfactuals are plausible, scenario analysis can make the range of outcomes transparent.
Event studies and market evidence
For publicly traded companies, an event study can help examine whether a defined event was associated with an abnormal stock-price movement after controlling for broader market effects. The design must specify the event window, estimation window, benchmark model and confounding information. Statistical significance is relevant, but economic interpretation remains essential.
Financial modelling and methodology review
Expert work can also involve reviewing models prepared by other parties. Common issues include inconsistent assumptions, circular logic, unsupported growth or margin forecasts, incorrect treatment of debt and cash, double counting, inappropriate comparables or a mismatch between the legal question and the economic measure being estimated.
Working principles
- Reproducibility: calculations should be traceable to source data and stated assumptions.
- Proportionality: the methodology should be no more complex than the question requires.
- Sensitivity: material assumptions should be stress-tested rather than hidden.
- Independence: the conclusion follows the analysis, not the preferred litigation narrative.
- Communication: technical finance must be translated into a form that lawyers, executives and courts can follow.
Assignments are considered selectively and are subject to conflict checks, scope definition and the requirements of the relevant legal process.