arrangement had been put in place. His choice of the time delay
was tied to his assessment of the time it took to conclude the original arrangement with NWCS. Needless to say, Rudson took issue
with this proposition since he was of the view that its adoption
offended the principles of basic DCF analysis.
 I do not intend to parse the discount factors used by each
of the experts or analyze the principles of “weighted cost of capi-
tal” (“WACC”) with which concept I was bogged down in my
reading of the expert reports, not made much easier during the
course of their brief testimony before me.
 As best as I understood the concepts, the higher the WACC,
the greater the risk, all of which resulted in a lower valuation.
 Suffice it to say that the largest point of departure between
the two of them is found in what each expert described as the
“company-specific risk premium” (“CSRP”).
 I was told that this last number is more than anything
infused with “professional judgment” and unlike the other criteria that goes into the mix, that premium is not based on immutable or industry specific concepts that seem to underpin the other
elements of the discount factor.
 Each expert advanced “reasonable” arguments which factored into their respective CSRP calculations, which didn’t permit
me to readily prefer one number in preference to the other. I hasten to observe that Mr. Low’s number was rooted, if not increased,
by his opinion that Aquam was insolvent and at significant risk of
liquidation, with which conclusion I was not completely in agreement. In my view, his number has to be tempered somewhat.
 That said, neither expert disagreed with my suggestion
that I would not fall into error if I chose, in the final analysis,
a discount factor that reflected the average of the high and low
figures that each had used in his reports after analyzing, in some
detail, their respective calculation of WACC. Accordingly, they
undertook to provide me with a joint position which I could then
use as a multiplicand in the final calculation of FMV.12
 The time delay employed by Mr. Low generated a deduction
from FMV that was almost as significant as the discount factor that
12 Robert Low and Wayne Rudson, Valuation of Aquam Corporation as at
April 17, 2017: Adjusted Values as Requested by Mr. Justice Gans (October
11, 2018), Appendix A, p. 1.