- 36 - during the taxable years ending in 1980 through 1989.6 He determined an R2 of 0.367. Dr. Seago explains that finding by stating, “while an accrual based solely on the historical relationship between sales and shrinkage would result in substantial errors in predictions * * *, Target personnel are able to significantly reduce the error by adjusting the accrual factor to take into account factors known to contribute to shrinkage in the particular store.” Dr. Seago asserts that the demonstrated success of Target in predicting store shrinkage suggests that Target likewise accurately predicts shrinkage at the department level. Dr. Seago also presents a sales percentage shrinkage analysis for Target at the aggregate division level. He states that, from 1979 through 1988, verified shrinkage has averaged 2.102 percent of sales, with a range of 1.90 percent to 2.30 percent. Dr. Seago states that Target's estimates of shrinkage as a percentage of sales, when compared to the verified percentage, showed that the estimates deviated from the actual figures by no more than 25 percent. 6 That analysis of the relationship between sales and shrinkage at the individual store level appears in Dr. Seago's rebuttal report and is distinct from the 10-year correlation analysis.Page: Previous 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011