While yield tables are limited in the way they can be applied, high expectations are put on modern forest growth simulators. Especially the ability to describe complex interactions in mixed and uneven-aged stands is attractive, as such forest structures have experienced rising popularity in recent years. Factors to be considered when applying such simulators are not only the manipulation itself, but also the quality of generated information as well as possible additional input. In order to benefit from the expected advantages of such structured forests, a transformation process of even-aged stands or at least natural regeneration is necessary. Clear cutting is usually associated with high costs for plantations. Therefore it might be interesting, how long the fact to restrain one-self from using at least parts of a real 75 years old stand can be financially attractive. To be considered are the saved costs for the plantation of the following stand, but also the possibility to establish an all-aged stand in the future. In this context, the optimal rotation period is of relevance, especially since it varies depending on harvesting technology and decision criteria. In this study, 3 different stand treatments, clear cutting and plantation, shelterwood cutting and a transformation towards a selection system are compared. Both forest simulation programs used provide guiding information, for detailed demands additional input is needed. Depending on decision criteria and freedom of choice for harvesting technology, shelterwood cutting with the least costing harvesting technology seems to be financially most attractive, although intangible assets are ignored in that calculation. Considering the complexity of information and assessment of future benefits, especially of nonmonetary aspects, it can be understood that decisions for particular stand treatments in combination with a more cost-intensive harvesting technology are based on subjective preferences.