- 30 -
Winery's lenders. These arrangements apparently allowed Winery
to use available resources to develop itself. Mr. Groth admitted
at trial that "perhaps" Vineyards would have been paid for its
grapes sooner had it sold to unrelated parties.
Petitioner contends that Vineyards had a legitimate business
purpose for extending such generous payment terms to Winery. At
trial, Mr. Groth, a general partner of Vineyards, testified that
he sought to establish a long-term relationship with Winery
because (1) such a relationship would provide Vineyards with a
continuing market for its grapes, and (2) the best prices for
grapes tended to be paid on long-term contracts. Mr. Groth also
testified that a vineyard would do well if it established a long-
term relationship with a successful winery.
The record indicates that grape growers offered favorable
terms to large-quantity purchasers given the prospect of
developing a long-term relationship with those buyers.
Accordingly, we would not consider it unusual if Vineyards
offered some accommodation to Winery to foster such a
relationship. The record, however, indicates that, when
unrelated parties dealt with each other, the inducement typically
offered for a long-term relationship was a lower price per ton of
grapes purchased, rather than substantial deferral of payment of
the purchase price.7 Accordingly, even if Vineyards had desired
7 In petitioner's Sur-Reply Brief, petitioner points to a
(continued...)
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011