I'm not at all sure what you are referring to here, or why.
Stock owned by a company not involved in trading stock as a part of their business would carry the stock at the acquisition cost, though. I have had several employers try to force an explanation of tax rules from me. It is a losing proposition. The rules are what they are. Certainly, a lender is going to look to the value of the assets. If it is a large loan, they may well require an appraisal. This does not, and will not affect the Balance Sheet.
If you want a rational, try this; every year, every company in the US is going to pay to have all fixed appraised. If it's higher than the previous year, they are going to pay income tax on the gain. If it is lower, they will claim the loss as a deductable expense. They will repeat the process every year, sometimes paying taxes on gain and sometimes deducting loses. Does this seem useful to you?
I think at least 2 people disagreed with the statement about using the increase in stock price for borrowing based on stock held by the company.
I don't care how many people disagree with a statement on the sun rising in the east, though someone is surely going to remind us that the sun doesn't rise; the earth rotates.
The bookkeeping on the land in question was correct, unless the value of the land was permanently
impaired. That is not an opinion.