Last year, Forisk published a blog about the questions Forisk’s Custom Market Forecast (CMF) can answer for firms making investment and operating decisions in the timber and forest industries. After a year of delivering CMFs for clients, we developed case studies highlighting how clients have used CMFs to support their businesses. This is the second post of a series with these cases. To learn more about the Custom Market Forecast, please contact Nick DiLuzio at ndiluzio@forisk.com.

Case Study: Supporting a Large Timberland Acquisition with Local Market Insights

 

THE CHALLENGE
A timberland investment advisory firm was advancing a large timberland acquisition in the Pacific Northwest under a compressed seller timeline. They required local validation of log supply, demand, and price assumptions—far beyond what regional or macro analysis could provide.

 

THE CMF APPROACH
Forisk produced and delivered a Custom Market Forecast tailored to the relevant wood basin. The CMF provided independent, third-party insight into local market dynamics, summarized in a concise one-page view supported by a deeper data set.

 

WHAT STOOD OUT
According to the client, speed and credibility were critical. The CMF allowed the client to incorporate trusted analysis early in underwriting memos, helping the transaction advance fast enough to meet seller expectations—without relying on generic assumptions.

 

KEY VALUE

• Quick turnaround time;
• Actionable local-market intelligence tied directly to investment decisions;
• One-page snapshot linking conclusions to detailed data; and
• Flexibility to incorporate new information as underwriting evolved.

 

THE RESULT
The CMF strengthened confidence in supply, demand, and pricing assumptions, improved the quality of underwriting discussions, and supported timely, defensible investment decisions for a high-stakes acquisition.

 

CLIENT PERSPECTIVE
“Rapid access to good information was vital to the deal.”

“We find that macro analysis of regional forestry markets is often nice for discussion and client reporting but not as actionable, whereas the CMF information was very actionable and impacted decisions made in the underwriting process. The CMF helped us validate assumptions with our client and demonstrated a willingness to consider alternate viewpoints. It materially improved the underwriting process.”