When planning IT asset disposition (ITAD), most organizations focus on data security, compliance, and chain of custody. But the pricing model you choose can have just as much impact on outcomes, especially when comparing fair market value vs. consignment for ITAD.
In the ITAD market, two pricing approaches are most common: Fair Market Value (FMV) and Consignment. With FMV, the provider offers an upfront buyout based on estimated resale value. This approach is predictable but often provides limited transparency into actual sales results. With consignment, the provider sells the assets first and then shares the proceeds; typically delivering more visibility into realized value and, in many cases, a better alignment of incentives.
DMD’s Transparent Revenue Share model builds on consignment with an open-book approach. Organizations receive detailed reporting on actual sales results and revenue allocations, providing visibility into each transaction and enabling data-driven decisions that can improve financial outcomes across IT asset retirement.
Below is a practical, ITAD-specific breakdown of FMV vs. consignment, what each model is, where each can fall short, and how to choose the right approach for your organization.
FMV remains the most widely used pricing method in ITAD. Here, the provider estimates the value of assets at retirement and pays the client accordingly based on these projections.
Predictability upfront – Quoted value provided early in the process.
Administrative simplicity – Often bundled into a single line item or buyout.
Low effort – Less reporting detail required from the vendor.
Values are estimates, not actuals – FMV is typically calculated before resale occurs.
Risk buffers favor the vendor – Providers often apply undisclosed risk adjustments (sometimes 20–60%) to shield themselves from market uncertainties.
Limited visibility – Organizations rarely see actual sales prices or how values are determined.
Misaligned incentives – Once assets are purchased under FMV, only the vendor benefits from higher resale outcomes.
In summary, FMV often works to the detriment of client transparency and potential gains.
In a traditional consignment arrangement, the ITAD provider takes custody of the assets, resells them, and pays the client a net or estimated return. While this structure can produce higher returns than upfront buyouts, the most common challenge is opacity. Organizations often have limited visibility into what actually sold, where it sold, and how much margin was retained.
DMD’s Transparent Revenue Share model is best understood as a significant value-added evolution of consignment: organizations get the upside potential of resale, but with true open-book reporting that eliminates trust gaps. Instead of receiving a single net settlement, DMD clients receive transaction-level visibility into what each serialized asset sold for, how the split was calculated, and why reuse versus recycling decisions were made.
Today’s organizations must:
Internal DMD impact reporting consistently demonstrates that transparent, reuse-first ITAD programs transform ITAD from a cost center into a governed value stream. Transparent, reuse-first ITAD programs can deliver 40% more per asset on average than traditional models, turning ITAD into a source of financial and governance value.
FMV pricing may seem easier, but it can conceal value, obscure accountability, and limit upside. Consignment and transparent pricing demand more discipline, yet offer organizations higher returns, improved governance, and clearer insight into asset handling.
For organizations committed to data security, sustainability, and financial stewardship, how asset value is calculated matters when selecting a vendor to perform the work.
Share your most recent or upcoming ITAD project with us. We’ll provide a tailored estimate showing what DMD’s Transparent Revenue Share could yield, so you can make a confident fair market value vs. consignment decision based on real recovery assumptions and governance requirements.