Brad, I'm a fan of Damodaran's work and I find his argument *on how the DCF method should be applied* flawless.

My point is related to the choice of the valuation method and comparison of different valuation methods. In David's account of Damodaran's remarks, he does refer to that, too (much as you might want to say that the modeling approach is less relevant).

I disagree that the most straightforward valuation will incorporate a DCF model. I also find that investors will often use DCF as an excuse to buy rather than a true decision-making tool, which does not mean that DCF can't be done right. It is however a reflection on how people deal with the method's shortcomings (i.e. heavy reliance on assumptions as to future developments) - by giving up on it rather than doing it right. DCF is prone to model error and can instil a false sense of confidence. It's not a fatal flaw but a flaw nonetheless. It's like a brilliant car that's difficult to drive.