ASSOCIATION OF MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT S Volume 1 Issue 24 Winter 2013 In This Issue: Page 1 EVENT NEWS: 2013 Appraisers Forum NEW AMEA STAFF Page 2 ECONOMIC OUTLOOK UPDATE Page 3 WEBINAR NEWS INDUSTRY TRENDS: Imaging equipment moving forward Page 4 INDUSTRY TRENDS (continued): U.S. manufacturing technology orders up 5.3% over 2011 2013 AMEA EVENTS Page 5 EQUIPMENT BASICS & VALUATION: Spring Coiler GLOSSARY OF EDM TERMS Page 6 EQUIPMENT BASICS & VALUATION (continued): Waterjet Changes Page 7 FROM THE BOARD ROOM A message about the AMEA Mentor Committee Page 8 HEARD ON THE STEET Precious metal market effects related manufacturing Cracks Developing in the Auction Market Event News Event News 2013 AMEA Appraisers Forum The Association of Machinery & Equipment Appraisers will return to Chicago to host the 2013 Appraisers Forum March 21-23 at the Westin O'Hare in Rosemont, Illinois. This three day event for machinery & equipment appraisers will provide premier speakers, excellent networking opportunities, and an unparalleled educational platform. Scheduled events include: 7 hour USPAP Update Course, industry presentations including equipment discussions, a panel discussion with auctioneers, among others. Also as part of the Forum we will be touring Mori Seiki s headquarters. The Chicago Chapter of MDNA has also extended an invitation to attend their meeting on Thursday, March 21 to unwind after a full day of classroom activity with festivities, dinner and continued networking opportunities. Earn up to 28 Continuing Education Credits during this premier AMEA Chicago event! For complete information and to register please visit the AMEA website. New AMEA Staff AMEA is proud to introduce Meghan McLellan, the new AMEA Director of Member Services. Prior to joining AMEA, Meghan worked for the Council On State Taxation and was responsible for membership recruitment, retention and maintaining member relations. She also worked for the Associated General Contractors of America where she was responsible for product sales, development and marketing. Meghan graduated from Lynchburg College in 2006 with a bachelor's degree in Marketing. She is originally from Maine and goes back to visit as much as her schedule allows. In her spare time she enjoys spending time with her dog, traveling, reading, spoiling her nieces and is currently learning to play tennis. Meghan is quickly getting up to speed with the AMEA certification requirements and is your go to person for all of your AMEA membership needs. She is here to assist you in any way she can. So please call or email her as needed. Meghan's contact information is: Meghan L. McLellan Association of Machinery and Equipment Appraisers Director of Member Services Phone: (703) 836 7900 Toll Free: 1 800 537 8629 Fax: (703) 836 9303 meghan@amea.org
ASSOCIATION OF OF MACHINERY AND AND EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT S S Industry Insight ECONOMIC OUTLOOK FOR 2013: POLICY UNCERTAINTY CONTINUES TO CONSTRAIN ECONOMIC GROWTH AMEA The AMEA Appraiser is published by the Association of Machinery and Equipment Appraisers 315 S. Patrick St. Alexandria, VA 22314-3532 USA Phone: +1 703 836 7900 or +1 800 537 8629 Fax: +1 703 836 9303 Email: amea@amea.org www.amea.org Meghan McLellan meghan@amea.org MISSION To certify and accredit the most qualified capital equipment appraisers in the appraisal industry through promotion of standards of professional practice, ethical conduct, and market-based experience. AMEA members are listed at: www.amea.org No portion of the AMEA Appraiser may be reproduced without the express permission of the AMEA. To subscribe to AMEA Appraiser, visit www.amea.org/contact/index.cfm. To view AMEA Appraiser online go to: www.amea.org/appraiser.cfm AMEA Appraiser welcomes contributions from members and others in the machinery and equipment appraisal community. For details, contact: Bob Yeoman, Editor AMEA Appraiser at yeomanmachinery@gmail.com Carlos Leitao Laurentian Bank As we approach the end of another year marked by unsatisfactory economic growth and turbulent inancial markets, four main themes emerge: 1. The global economy continues to grow, albeit at a slow and fragile pace. Signi icant risks remain namely in the euro zone and in the United States and relating primarily to public policies. The Eurozone is now in recession and progress towards a closer iscal union remains uneven. Nevertheless, the more extreme inancial risks appear better contained now given the more aggressive monetary policy adopted by the European Central Bank in September. In the United States, the real economy appears to be turning around but uncertainty relating to the iscal cliff, i.e., a possible massive iscal contraction in early 2013, is keeping investors and consumers on the sidelines. 2. In such an uncertain environment, central banks, and the Federal Reserve especially, continue to maintain highly accommodating monetary policies. Global interest rates continue to grind lower and will stay low for longer than earlier anticipated. The Fed funds rate will not change before the rate of unemployment drops below 6.5%, which is not likely to happen before 2015 at the earliest. The Bank of Canada has kept its policy rate at 1.00% since September 2010 and we now expect this long pause to last at least one more year. 3. Canada is obviously not immune from these global trends. One way this is having a concrete impact is via massive capital in lows which not only contribute to lower government bond yields but also put signi icant upward pressure on the currency. An overvalued currency, in turn, contributes to a loss of international competitiveness and a persistent current account de icit. As the vicious cycle of low interest rates for long and persistent current account de icits intensi ies, resources are misallocated resulting in overconsumption and underinvestment, trends that are unsustainable into the medium term. 4. For these reasons, we expect 2013 to be a year of transition in both the United States and Canada. In the United States, assuming that common sense prevails and that a massive iscal contraction does not take place early in the year, real GDP growth measured on a Q4 to Q4 basis is expected to accelerate to 2.7% in 2013 and 2.9% in 2014, from 1.7% in 2012; measuring real GDP on a Q4 to Q4 basis is the most appropriate way to capture in year growth. In lation as measured by the CPI should still remain safely below 2.5% throughout the period while the rate of unemployment is expected reach 7% by the end of 2014. In Canada, overall economic growth is unlikely to exceed 2.0% in both 2013 and 2014; it was 2.0% in 2012. Canadian growth in the coming two years should be held back by the need to repair household balance sheets given the very large run up in household debt of the past few years. Volume 1 Issue 24 2
Visit Our Website at www.amea.org Industry Trends How will the PPACA affect diagnostic imaging equipment moving forward? Jack Beckwith, CEA E.A.G., Inc. Some of you may have been busy this year providing valuation services for the evolving healthcare industry perpetuated by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). Since diagnostic imaging is one of the largest sectors of the healthcare industry, the reality is that the owner, the radiologist/user, and/or the health care provider are dealing with a moving target in deciding what best to do with this equipment. So what are the major assets out there to be valued? We should label them diagnostic imaging devices which include magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), nuclear medicine, positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), ultrasound, X-ray (mammography, radiography, fluoroscopy, surgical c-arm, cardiovascular labs), radiology information systems (RIS), and picture archiving and communications system (PACS). We are taught to consider all three methodologies of value: the Sales Comparison Approach, the Cost Approach and the Income Approach. But with new bundled procedure codes (CPT), each approach is being impacted by what is being reimbursed for the diagnostic procedure. So what is going on? Brian Ball, National Vice President of Health Cost Solutions in Chicago for New York based USI Insurance Services, says MRI and CT imaging once was the domain of hospitals, which needed them for trauma and emergency cases. But in recent years, physicians realized they could send revenue to themselves if they operated their own equipment. So the idea spread and some of it is logical. When doctors have imaging done in their offices, it is called self-referring. The volume of self-referred imaging has been rising dramatically with the steady rise of an aging baby boomer generation. This increase to U.S. health care is absorbed proportionately to our GDP. The results of this imaging boom has made it more convenient for patients to have their RIS imaging results read and relayed back to the patient more quickly by the physician in the clinic. But costs for the same services illogically vary. The same $700 imaging service at a clinic might be $1,700 from a hospital. One problem is the difference between Medicare and private insurance companies. Private insurers can control utilization of imaging services through prior-authorization requirements. Medicare, on the other hand, does not manage costs at the front end but is more efficient paying claims than private insurers, according to Mr. Ball. With cross-currents of processes and differences between who pays how much for what and when, cost leaks are out of control. Unsustainable is the word used by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). So their remedy will be further cost reduction for similar procedures using the same imaging equipment. Whether congress will get our fiscal responsibility in order by the end of the year, one thing is certain; the model first established with the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) in 2005 when imaging procedure reimbursement to the end user were reduced significantly will be utilized again to offset higher healthcare costs. The impact then was consolidations of OEM s and a reduction in RCN of diagnostic equipment in certain areas. 3 Continued on page 9 Webinar News: AMEA provides its members with regularly scheduled opportunities to attend webinars where either appraisal theory or specific machine types and their respective valuation considerations are discussed in detail. A typical one-hour machinery identification webinar reviews all the significant attributes and capabilities of past and presentday machinery as it is valued in today's marketplace. Presentations are rich with graphics and video to enable easy understanding of the various features and functionalities of the machinery reviewed. Webinars wrap up with a sample appraisal description and a discussion of market trends. Some of the webinar topics presented by AMEA members and other industry professionals are: - Appraisal Theory - Machinery Identification - EDM Machines - Multi Axis Turning Centers - Horizontal Machining Centers - Die Casting Contact our AMEA Offices, or visit our website, for current Webinar news, or to make suggestions of possible topics of interest, or to be a presenter at an upcoming AMEA webinar. Winter 2013
ASSOCIATION OF MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT S 2013 AMEA Events February AMEA Webinars Fair Value and Packaging Equipment for Appraisers (Feb. 25 th ) March AMEA Appraisers Forum: Chicago, Illinois, March 22-23 AMEA 7-hour USPA Course: Chicago, Illinois, March 21 AMEA Webinar Pipe & Profile March 4 AMEA Webinar Furnaces for Appraisers and Sales Comparison Approach March 25 April AMEA Committee & Board Meeting: Boston, Massachusetts April 24 MDNA Convention: Boston, Massachusetts, April 25-28 For more event information: Call the AMEA: 703-836-7900 or visit www.amea.org Industry Trends (continued) Year-to-date U.S. manufacturing technology orders up 5.3% over 2011 Ken Hurwitz, CEA, Hurwitz Machinery & Asset Valuation Services, Inc. October U.S. manufacturing technology orders totaled $459.16 million according to AMT The Association For Manufacturing Technology. This total, as reported by companies participating in the USMTO program, was down 31.3% from September and down 0.1% when compared with the total of $459.41 million reported for October 2011. With a year to date total of $4,753.68 million, 2012 is up 5.3% compared with 2011. These numbers and all data in this report are based on the totals of actual data reported by companies participating in the USMTO program. Orders continue to be on pace for a record setting year, and a monthly drop was fully expected in the month following IMTS, said Douglas K. Woods, AMT President. While manufacturing continues to play a strong role in economic recovery, our main concern heading toward the end of the year is that lawmakers do what s necessary to avoid the iscal cliff, and the implications it could have on the broader economy. The United States Manufacturing Technology Orders (USMTO) report, compiled by the trade association representing the production and distribution of manufacturing technology, provides regional and national U.S. orders data of domestic and imported machine tools and related equipment. Analysis of manufacturing technology orders provides a reliable leading economic indicator as manufacturing industries invest in capital metalworking equipment to increase capacity and improve productivity. U.S. manufacturing technology orders are also reported on a regional basis for ive geographic breakdowns of the United States. Northeast Region Manufacturing technology orders in the Northeast Region in October totaled $63.69 million, down 19.7% from September s $79.27 million and down 3.6% when compared with the October 2011 igure. At $640.83 million, 2012 year to date is down 5.7% when compared with 2011 at the same time. Southern Region Southern Region manufacturing technology orders totaled $60.69 million in October, down 41.1% from the $102.99 million total for September but 12.8% higher than the total for October 2011. The year to date total of $683.23 million is 15.3% more than the comparable igure for 2011. Midwest Region At $162.75 million, October manufacturing technology orders in the Midwest Region were down 20.0% when compared with the $203.33 million total for September but up 10.3% when compared with October a year ago. With a year to date total of $1,530.30 million, 2012 is up 4.9% when compared with 2011 at the same time. continued on page 9 Volume 1 Issue 24 4
Visit Our Website at www.amea.org Glossary of Spring Coiler Terms Segment Type Coiler: Coils by deflection, feed is controlled by reciprocating segment gear and one way clutch. Clutch Type Coiler: Coils by deflection, feed is controlled by mechanical, air, or electric clutch. Torsion Coiler: Coils around a mandrel, slide or roll type feed to start then wire is pulled in by rotation of mandrel. CNC Wire Former: Multiple CNC Axis, coils by deflection, can make a variety of spring types. CNC Coiler: Multiple CNC Axis, Coils by Deflection, not as versatile as wire former but efficient and fast on simple springs. Lathe Type Coiler: Coils around a mandrel, low volume, can be very large capacity, manual operation. Hot Coiler: Similar to lathe type, coils rods that have been heated red hot. Feed Rolls: Rollers that pushes the wire into the coiling area. Arbor: Tool that controls the ID of the spring and is used for cutoff. Coiling Point: Tool that deflects the wire as it is entering the coiling area to control the diameter. Diameter: OD, ID or Mean diameter of the spring controlled by the coiling point & arbor. Pitch: The space between successive coils of a spring (Helix). For a complete list of terms visit our website: www.amea.org Equipment Basics & Valuation Spring Coiler By Neal Hoffenberg, CEA Victory Machinery Springs have been an integral part of everyday life since 1200 B.C. when broaches began to appear. Straight pins were used prior to this time until it was discovered that the pin could be bent back upon itself and secured with a hook. The first torsion spring was made when a coil was added creating what we know as a safety pin. The spring coiler as we know it today was patented in 1918 by Frank H. Sleeper. Although it has seen a variety of technological improvements the basic concept of coiling by deflection is still in use today. Today there are several types of spring coilers being used; each excels in a particular area of spring making. The basic mechanical machine is primarily used for compression springs. These machines utilize cams to control the variation in the pitch and diameter of a spring as well as the cutoff. Torsion spring coilers utilized a central mandrel that the wire is wound around. The mandrel can be vertical or horizontal. Some larger torsion winders as well as hot coiling machines resemble large engine lathes. Over the past 25 years CNC has entered the industry and has allowed the production of very complex springs and wire forms to be manufactured without any secondary operations, eliminating labor costs and speeding up production. CNC spring coilers can have up to 10 servo axis of control and wire formers up to 16 axis. The CNC controls and programming varies from machine to machine, sometimes even within a single manufacture. This makes learning and repairing more complex and specialized than that of the chip making industry. In addition to the spring coiling machine a variety of other support equipment is required to produce a finished spring. These machines include but are not limited to, Wire Decoiler, Stress Relief Oven, Shot Peen Machine, Tumbler, Vibratory Finisher, Disc Grinder, Kick Press, and Spring Testing Equipment (QC). Companies may also utilize outside vendors for additional finishing such as Paint or Plating when required. 5 Winter 2013
ASSOCIATION OF MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT S Welcome New Members David L. Lipton, Regular AEA Williams and Lipton Co. 32316 Grand River Ave, Suite 101 Farmington, MI 48336 Lipton1987@gmail.com James Frederick, Associate CEA Tiger Valuation Services 84 State St. 4 th Floor Boston, MA 02109 jfrederick@tigerval.com 617-523-7002 Kevin Boland, Associate CEA Tiger Valuation Services 708 Third Avenue, Suite 310 New York, NY 10017 kboland@tigergroupllc.com 212-315-0764 ext. 2312 Heika Rudd, Regular CEA Miedema Auctioneering & Appraisals, Inc. 601 Gordon Industrial Ct Byron Center, MI 49315 Heika@miedemaappraisals.com 616-878-3470 John Stencel, Regular AEA Frank Bacon Machinery Sales Co. 4433 East 8 Mile Rd. Warren MI 48091 Mailing address: PO Box 886 Warren, MI 48090 jstencel@frankbacon.com 586-756-4280 Richard McClain, Regular AEA Machinery Resources International, Inc. 1650 Voyaguer Ave. Simi Valley, CA 93063 Richard@machineryresources.com 818-346-7985 David DiBenedetto, Regular CEA TDI Group, LLC 700 Blaur Ave Pittsburgh, PA 15238 Mailing address: PO Box 38657 Pittsburgh, PA 15238 drd@tdigrp.com 412-826-4950 Equipment Basics & Valuation (continued) Waterjet Changes and How They Affect the Used Market Brad Zimmerman, CEA Zimmerman-McDonald Machinery, Inc. It is said that waterjets are the fasting growing segment of the machine tool industry and why not? With a waterjet you can cut virtually any material and you are only limited to the thickness of cut as to what will fit under the nozzle. There is no heat affected zone, smoke, and you can cut very intricate geometry with few limitations on material thickness. Thanks to recent software, yes software for the most part and not hardware, accuracies have greatly improved. So, for an accurate machine, which offers some of the most versatility of any machine tool, it is no wonder the waterjets popularity has grown leaps and bounds. As with all machine tools in the new machinery sector, they eventually work their way into the used market. So what are important considerations when evaluating a used waterjet? The plus side of a used waterjet, if it has been even somewhat maintained, is that it is still marketable. The basics of a waterjet are a tank, with an X-Y motion system controlled with a computer, a high pressure pump, and a nozzle. The pump is a key component in speed at which the waterjet can cut, but it does not limit the material thickness that can be cut. Newer pumps offer greater life between pump rebuilds, but these pumps are designed to be rebuilt over and over and it would take extreme neglect to do any considerable damage. In newer machines there is a switch away from ballscrews, (X-Y motion system), as ballscrews, water, and garnet do not mix well. Linear type drive systems will dominate the market in just a few years. That does not mean you should fear ball screws as long as their protective covers, usually a rubberized expanding bellow, are kept in good condition and patched or replaced when torn. Except for very early generation machines, waterjets are controlled by personal computers. Even machines with older DOS-based PC s can be upgraded to newer systems. Again, software plays a large role in machine accuracy, and depending on geometry, part production speed. Check with manufacturers for PC requirements when upgrading. Some manufacturers allow easy upgrades to their machine controllers both in software and even with new hardware components which have been developed since the machine was originally manufactured. (Some do not allow hardware component upgrades.) Some also charge a new user transfer free to provide any factory support. As with any machine tool, do a little homework up front. Keeping these factors in mind when purchasing/reselling a used waterjet will allow you to target a certain segment of the market depending on the customer base for that vintage machine. Having offered waterjets for 15 years we have found a market from the one man shop, to the top Fortune 500 companies. As with all machinery, we are in a world economy, machines are manufactured in USA (very limited), Germany, Japan, Taiwan, China, Korea, etc. Cost and quality follow a similar pattern as the rest of the machine industry. Volume 1 Issue 24 6
Visit Our Website at www.amea.org Board of Directors President Charles J. Winternitz, CEA First Vice President James Zvonar, CEA Second Vice President Jack Mendenhall, CEA Treasurer Randy Koster, CEA Directors John Greene, CEA - Past President Randy Stevens, CEA - Past President Rick Levy, CEA - Past President Robert Yeoman, CEA David Troutman, CEA Richard Bass, CEA Jean Harris, CEA Curt Roskelley, CEA Don Bentley, CEA Kimberly Khoury, CEA Voluntary Board Members Andrew Curran CEA Lee Danhauer, CEA Mission To certify and accredit the most qualified capital equipment appraisers in the appraisal industry through promotion of standards of professional practice, ethical conduct, and market-based experience. From the Board Room A message about the AMEA Mentor Committee - Don Bentley, CEA Scott Machinery & Supply The AMEA Mentor Commi ee consists of Co Chairmen / Directors Don Bentley and Dave Troutman, with Directors Randy Koster and Richard Bass. One of the many issues addressed at the September Mee ng of the AMEA Board of Directors was the Mentor Commi ee s mission to personally contact the AMEA members. This ac on involved the efforts of every member of the AMEA Board of Directors. Previously, at the Spring AMEA Board of Directors mee ng, The Mentor Commi ee discussed problems with members risking losing accredita on or simply ge ng close to being not in compliance with con nuing educa on credits, issues with report wri ng that meets USPAP requirements, and how best to help the membership at large to deal with these difficul es. The AMEA Board of Directors were tasked with a mission to establish communica on with each AMEA member, to have a discussion regarding these issues and any other concerns a member might have with the AMEA. Each Director was given a list and contacted members to talk one on one, to address problems and to lend an ear for thoughts and ideas for improvement. The mission was a success, with the Board of Directors gaining insight to individual s concerns and the members ge ng an opportunity to go over their report card and explore the AMEA Website s Back Office to see where to use valuable assets such as recommended examples and templates for report wri ng, new opportuni es for educa onal credits such as Webinars, upcoming USPAP courses and various methods of communica ng with other AMEA members. It is the intent of the Mentor Commi ee to move toward a problem solving status, focusing on proper indoctrina on of new members and assis ng other members who are not current or compliant with the Con nuing Educa on requirements. We will also act as a final a empt to retain those members who drop out or express that they intend to drop out of our rolls, and contact them accordingly. The commi ee also reviews unemployed AMEA member s status concerning the REMIT Policy and makes recommenda ons to the Board of Directors, monitors the member s status and progress, and provides updates on this to the Board of Directors. If you have any ques ons concerning the REMIT Policy or any other func on of the AMEA Mentor Commi ee or have sugges ons to help it be er serve the members of the AMEA organiza on, please contact one of the commi ee members right away. 7 Winter 2013
ASSOCIATION OF MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT S ASSOCIATON OF MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT S Heard On The Street Precious metal market effects related manufacturing By David Gold, CEA Gold International Machinery Corp. The explosive rise in precious metals such as gold and silver in 2011/2012 has affected the manufacturers of precious metal wire, plate and tubing through finished jewelry and electronic products. The jewelry makers are forced to re-invent themselves and add non-precious metal products to their cache of product lineschains, pendants, rings, watches, earrings and so forth. All industries using the volatile basic materials have had to re-adjust pricing, inventories and orders. High end clientele such as Tiffany & Company remain active and prosperous - serving the elite 1% of the consumers. The rest of the marketplace is suffering. The global manufacturing community has shifted labor-intensive work/assembly to countries such as India, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, Uruguay, Costa Rica, Jordan, Indonesia, Africa and China. The labor savings is significant - for every 100 workers a company can pocket an extra 1 million dollars in pure labor savings over the traditional worker in the USA. Auction sales are rare during this shakeout as private complete plant sales rule the earth at this difficult time. One exception is the upcoming Domet Chain and Jewelry Manufacturing Company from the UK whose assets have been relocated to Rhode Island USA for convenience of sale. The auction sale was held in June 2012 with good success. Foreign plant sales are typically re-routed to the USA and Gold Machinery for both convenience of sale and for additional revenue realized. The global manufacturing community prefers to send their M&E assets to the USA as the results have proven much more profitable than if taken place in the Mother Country even considering the cumbersome labor and greater expenses upfront. Recent sales include complete plant asset sales from Israel and Argentina as well as the UK. Cracks Developing in the Auction Market By Mike Clark LM Publications The Book has been publishing pricing guides for over twenty years. During that time we ve seen the markets rise and seen the markets fall. For the past eighteen months, the market has been strong. Will it continue? We don t think so! We re beginning to see cracks in high pricing levels we ve all been enjoying. For the first time in well over a year, last month there were a few good machines that sold for disappointing amounts. We anticipate this will continue and result in lower prices for used machinery across the board. To confirm our suspicions, we queried some auctioneers about the market. One told me the market is still strong but the number of buyers interested in the big machines is declining. We re still seeing strong numbers for some machines but not as many are selling for the wow factor as a few months ago. It stands to reason, with declining competition for good machines the pricing levels must begin to trend down. As we see it, the market for used machinery as of early October, 2012: Strong - but softening Nothing Special Weak Metalworking Woodworking Printing Plastics Audio/Video Textiles Processing Equipment Continued on page 9 Volume 1 Issue 24
Visit Our Website at www.amea.org How will the PPACA affect diagnostic imaging equipment moving forward? Continued from page 3 With this cloud hanging over your client s head, the appraiser should be knowledgeable of the phrase Remaining Useful Life (RUL) or what is the reasonable expectation of the equipment life that you are asked to appraise. To be more succinct, how long should the technology of an asset being appraised be used before it is retired or how would you reconcile the usable life of imaging equipment versus a life table recommended by the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)? For me, it would be best to go to the market place and see what is considered old. The technician or procurement manager may be your best source as to the assets usability, safety, clinical value, and applicability to the patient population. Other factors would be recalls and safety alerts that are sent by the OEM or the FDA and are the responsibility of the user to implement. Every clinic or hospital is charged with establishing a comprehensive life cycle model. So ask them because the clock is always ticking. When the OEM has moved on from one series to a newer series of imaging equipment with newer innovations, the aftermarket for your asset begins. You may find that values on the secondary market may have significant variance for the same make and model. How you measure effectively the physical, functional, and economical factors could be features, revision levels, and refurbish replacement of components that could shorten or lengthen the Remaining Useful Life. As an example, do not be fooled if you see the original costs of a Hologic Discovery full body densitometer has secondary values ranging from 54% to 77% of the replacement cost new (RCN). Reasons could be just a basic package versus new full software package capabilities being added to the older refurbished equipment. An OEC 9900 surgical C-arm may now be offered to the radiologist new for $242,000 but they can also purchase a refurbished OEC 9800 from $99,000 to $110,000 with similar features like Computed Radiography Innovation (CR) installed. In this case, the remaining life of the C-arm has been extended and the end user is still receiving the same reimbursement as with the newer equipment. To the end user, they are attempting to decide whether to keep their existing technology, trade in the old, update the current asset, buy the new series, or replace it with a refurbished series. The end result is that you may be assisting them in making a strategic decision. If parts are still available for the asset or if maintaining the same asset is still affordable, the end user may keep it longer or even consider purchasing the equipment pre-owned during these challenging times when decreasing reimbursements and government cost reduction programs continue to be implemented. Year-to-date U.S. manufacturing technology orders up 5.3% over 2011 Continued from page 4 Central Region October manufacturing technology orders in the Central Region totaled $124.77 million, 30.2% lower than September s $178.71 million and down 8.8% when compared with the October 2011 figure. At $1,341.76 million, the 2012 year-to-date total was 6.8% more than the comparable figure for 2011. Western Region Western Region manufacturing technology orders in October stood at $47.27 million, down 54.6% from the September total of $104.07 million and 14.3% lower than the figure for October 2011. The $557.56 million year-to-date total was 5.7% above the total for the same period in 2011. Cracks Developing in the Auction Market Continued from page 8 Another change in the market worth mentioning is that more and more dealers are wearing two hats. Along with being a dealer many are becoming auctioneers. The online auctions have become a boom to the dealer/auctioneer. Through the third quarter of 2012, there were 1,150 significant auctions in North America. This 1,150 includes both on-site and online sales for the industries listed above. The number of sales this year is running at the same pace as last year. While the number of sales has remained steady for the past few years the number of items per sale has not. Six or seven years ago, you could go to a machine shop auction and expect to see 500 600 lots. Today, a good machine shop sale will have 300 400 lots with many sales having less than 200 lots. There are exceptions, but unless it s a Tier 1 or Tier 2 automotive supplier sales exceeding 1000 lots are more the exception and not the rule in today's auction market. Speakers Bureau Would your organization benefit by learning more about machinery and equipment appraisal methods and trends? AMEA appraisers are available to speak on a wide variety of topics. For More information about this program, contact our Speakers Bureau at 703.836.7900 Winter 2013
Geographical AMEA Appraiser Directory Spring 2013 ALASKA Michael Tope, CEA Anchorage, AK ALABAMA Christopher Baker, CEA Birmingham, AL Donald Bentley, CEA Helena, AL W. O'Neal, CEA Oxford, AL CALIFORNIA Robert Kroha, AEA Fremont, CA Nelson Thorpe, CEA Castro Valley, CA Michael Dieveney, AEA Costa Mesa, CA Randy Goodman, CEA Fullerton, CA Dan Wheeler, CEA Huntington Park, CA Jeff Lee, AM Los Angeles, CA Garrett Schwartz, CEA Oakland, CA Marc Rabbow, AEA Petaluma, CA Keith Rottman, CEA San Francisco, CA Donald Tyson, AM San Francisco, CA Steve Quale, CEA Sherman Oaks, CA George Spooner, CEA Valencia, CA Ryan Ashman, AEA Walnut Creek, CA Richard McClain, AEA Woodland Hills, CA Beau Savage, CEA Woodland Hills, CA Sandor "Sandy" Soos, CEA Woodland Hills, CA Marc Swirsky, CEA Chatsworth, CA Brian Testo, CEA Woodland Hills, CA COLORADO Alan Iannacito, CEA Littleton, CO Steven Beck, AEA Longmont, CO CONNECTICUT Marc Mazzalupo, CEA Branford, CT Michael Carelli, AEA Bridgeport, CT Mark Hariton, AM Bridgeport, CT Mark Katz, AEA Enfield, CT John Conroy, CEA North Branford, CT Stephen McMillan, AM North Branford, CT R. F. Mulqueen, CEA Westport, CT FLORIDA Larry Sage, CEA Orange Park,, FL GEORGIA V. Brocking, CEA Alpharetta, GA Walter Dean, CEA Alpharetta, GA William Tait, CEA Alpharetta, GA James White, CEA Alpharetta, GA Loe Anders, CEA Woodstock, GA David Dalfonso, CEA Woodstock, GA ILLINOIS Gerald Blumberg, CEA Bannockburn, IL Ryan Blumberg, CEA Bannockburn, IL Stephen Stabiner, CEA Lincolnwood, IL Michael Cohen, AEA Bensenville, IL Larry Gworek, AEA Brookfield, IL Glenn Winternitz, CEA Buffalo Grove, IL Lawrence Christian, CEA Stan Czupryna, CEA Michael Larson, CEA Kevin Miller, CEA Howard Newman, CEA Charles Winternitz, CEA Jack Boecher, AEA Des Plaines, IL Michel Goldkind, AEA Des Plaines, IL Michael Olson, AEA Elk Grove, IL John Bopp, AEA Joe Lundvick, AEA Steve Kleba, AEA David Pietig, AEA Jeffrey Rezman, AM Adam Stevenson, AEA John Frain, AM Franklin Park, IL Ryan Yerkes, CEA Franklin Park, IL Richard Goldstein, AEA Highland Park, IL Richard Worthen, CEA Lake Bluff, IL Neal Hoffenberg, CEA Lake Forest, IL Anthony Blumberg, CEA Lincolnwood, IL Michael Ackerman, CEA William Barron, CEA Joel Bersh, AEA Derek Brennan, CEA Andrew Dahlman, CEA Justin Doucette, CEA Allan Dubin, CEA William Dunn, CEA Lucas Evans, CEA Steven Feldman, CEA Paul Grzebien, CEA Joseph Herz, CEA Carey Madigan, CEA John Magnuson, CEA Brian O'Neill, CEA Rustin Ross, AEA Marco Sarti, CEA Adam Stump, CEA Peter Szafraniec, CEA Richard Tierney, CEA Glenn Gray, CEA Prospect Heights, IL Gary Belter, CEA Rockford, IL John Sorgel, CEA Riverwoods, IL Richard Wiorek, CEA Riverwoods, IL Todd Wellens, CEA Rockford, IL Scott Magnuson, AEA Schaumburg, IL John Josko, CEA Vernon Hills, IL INDIANA Robert Yeoman, CEA Elkhart, IN James Jordan, CEA Greenwood, IN Charles Miller, CEA Indianapolis, IN LOUISIANA Hugh 'Red' Freeze, CEA Metairie, LA MASSACHUSETTES William Davidson, CEA Andover, MA James Frederick, CEA Boston, MA Samuel Shapiro, AM Fall River, MA Robert Sinclair, CEA Fall River, MA Joseph D'Alton, AEA Fall River, MA Steven Finn, CEA Newton, MA Paul Finn, CEA Newton, MA Ross Finn, CEA Newton, MA Donald Green, AM Worcester, MA Nathan Smith, CEA Worcester, MA MARYLAND Edward Mazzetta, CEA Baltimore, MD Carl Miceli, CEA Baltimore, MD David Fox, AEA Owings Mills, MD Gilbert Schwartzman, AM Owings Mills, MD Stanley Smith, CEA Owings Mills, MD MICHIGAN Don Hindley, AEA Alto, MI Mark Albrecht, CEA Armada, MI Heika Rudd, CEA Bryon Center, MI John Gabalis, CEA Clawsoon, MI April Johnson, CEA Detroit, MI Chip Thornton, CEA Detroit, MI David Lipton, AEA Farmington, MI H. Lipton, AEA Farmington, MI Richard Brodie, CEA Farmington Hills, MI Daniel Brodie, CEA Farmington Hills, MI Adam Gutowski, CEA Farmington, MI Robert Levy, AM Farmington Hills, MI James Amann, CEA Fenton, MI William Levy, CEA Grand Rapids, MI William Melvin, CEA Grand Rapids, MI Michael Nyhof, CEA Hamilton, MI Craig Ward, CEA Jackson, MI Mark Krausman, AEA Livonia, MI David Reiman, AEA Roseville, MI Samuel West, CEA Shelby Township, MI James Brodie, CEA Southfied, MI Al Loewenstein, CEA Mario Mazzuca, CEA Jeffrey Miller, CEA Raymond Riberdy, CEA Taso Sofikitis, AM Kevin Welker, AM James Dockeray, AEA Troy, MI John Stencel III, AEA Warren, MI Randy Stevens, CEA Wixom, MI MINNESOTA Theron Horn, CEA Albertville, MN Johnathan Francis, AEA Dodge Center, MN Brenda Daleki, AEA Elk River, MN Jack Mendenhall, CEA Elk River, MN John Roedel, CEA Elk River, MN John Van Heuveln, AEA Hopkins, MN Dennis Hoff, CEA Minneapolis, MN John Lawton, CEA Plymouth, MN MISSOURI Bud Moore, AEA St. Louis, MO Bruce Schneider, AEA St. Louis, MO Bradley Zimmerman, CEA St. Louis, MO Stuart Millner, AEA Union, MI NORTH CAROLINA David Hodgkins, AEA Charlotte, NC Lee Danhauer, CEA Winston Salem, NC NEW JERSEY David Goodman, CEA Hainesport, NJ Richard Bass, CEA Jersey City, NJ NEW YORK John Greenberg, AEA Bronx, NY James Greenberg, AM Bronx, NY Andrea Wasserman, CEA Carle Place, NY Craig Cappalli, CEA Coram, NY Russell Koster, CEA Farmingdale, NY Randall Koster, CEA Farmingdale, NY Frank Sangiorgi, AM Farmingdale, NY Marshall Schulman, AEA Hauppauge, NY Terry Lashin, AEA Melville, NY Paul Lashin, CEA Melville, NY Joel Goldsmith, CEA New York, NY Kevin Boland, CEA New York, NY Ron Shuster, AEA Ronkonkoma, NY David Fiegel, CEA Williamsville, NY OHIO Nathan Arnold, CEA Beachwood, OH Thomas Wigglesworth, CEA Bedford, OH Joseph Luggen, AEA Jerome Luggen, AEA Jeffrey Luggen, AEA James Stern, CEA Paul Trossman, AM Charles Wood, CEA Adam Covitt, CEA Cleveland, OH Frank Petitt, AEA Cleveland, OH Carl Petitt, CEA Cleveland, OH David Winger, CEA Cleveland, OH Gary Goldsmith, CEA Columbus, OH Gregory Swary, CEA Columbus, OH Butch Selvage, CEA Grove City, OH David Troutman, CEA Marion, OH Ken Regal, CEA Ravenna, OH John Greene, CEA Solon, OH Bryan Harvey, CEA Xenia, OH Stephen Thompson, AM Xenia, OH OKLAHOMA Henry Choate, CEA Marietta, OK OREGON Daniel Pahl, CEA Portland, OR PENNSYLVANIA Kimberly Khoury, CEA Bethlehem, PA Thomas Noone, CEA Grove City, PA Brendan Noone, AEA Grove City, PA Harry Glaeser, AEA Ivyland, PA Robert Breakstone, CEA Lake City, PA David DiBenedetto, CEA Pittsburgh, PA Eric Merback, CEA Philadelphia, PA Brandt Wolf, CEA Philadelphia, PA David Hildebrand, AEA York, PA W. Hildebrand, AM York, PA RHODE ISLAND David Gold, CEA Pawtucket, RI TENNESSEE Richard Levy, CEA Nashville, TN TEXAS Gerald Hampton, CEA Allen, TX Jack Beckwith, CEA Boerne, TX Duke Coon, CEA Conroe, TX Gary Penn, CEA Dallas, TX Michael Rosen, AEA Dallas, TX William Corwin, CEA Frisco, TX Gregg Trenor, AM Ft. Worth, TX Ron Braman, CEA Houston, TX Michael Feinstein, CEA Houston, TX Marvin Gasaway, AEA Houston, TX Jean Harris, CEA Houston, TX Jean Harris, CEA Houston, TX William Cook, CEA Meridan, TX Karen Milan, CEA Rockwall, TX UTAH Curt Roskelley, CEA Salt Lake City, UT WISCONSIN Scott Buth, CEA Dousman, WI James Zvonar, CEA New Berlin, WI Joseph Kraemer, CEA Waukesha, WI Bruce Redenz, AEA Waunakee, WI AUSTRALIA Matthew Richards, CEA Hexham, NSW Australia Michael Sloan, CEA Hexham, NSW Australia Patrick Slattery, CEA Hexham, NSW Australia James Slattery, CEA Moorabbin Airport, VIC, AU CANADA Brian Batcher, CEA Toronto, Ontario, Canada Kenneth Hurwitz, CEA ON Canada Steve Bignell, CEA Brampton, ON Canada David Slimowitz, CEA Concord, ON Canada Peter Tordy, Concord, ON Canada Chris Walker, CEA Hornby, ON Canada Bernhard Voelker, CEA Keswick, ON Canada Barry Guild, AEA Kitchener, ON Canada Nick Howard, CEA Mississauga, ON Canada Nelson Martins, CEA Mississauga, ON Canada Holger Butcher, CEA Toronto, ON, Canada Jason Hayne, CEA Toronto, ON Canada Terrance Jacobs, CEA Toronto, ON Canada Peter Keeley, CEA Toronto, ON Canada John Michelini, CEA Toronto, ON Canada Raymond Brown, CEA Vaughan, ON Canada John Jones, CEA Windsor, ON Canada Gilles Moss, CEA Oakville, ONT Canada Brian Block, CEA Thornhill, ONT Canada Andrew Curran, CEA Toronto, ONT Canada JAPAN Yoshinobu Sato, AEA Nagoya - shi, Aichi-ken Japan UNITED KINGDOM Bernard Ord, AM Middlesbrough, Cleveland, UK Visit AMEA.org for Appraisers contact information Volume 1 Issue 24 8