- 16 -
together. Grossman's reports discuss the limited market for the
recycled plastic material. Grossman concluded that the Sentinel
EPE and EPS recyclers were unlikely to be successful products
because of the absence of any new technology, the absence of a
continuous source of suitable scrap, and the absence of any
established market. Grossman suggested that a reasonable
comparison of the products available in the polyethylene industry
in 1981, and in the polystyrene industry in 1982, with the
Sentinel EPE and EPS recyclers, respectively, reveals that the
Sentinel recyclers had very little commercial value and were
similar to comparable products available on the market in
component form. For these reasons, Grossman opined that the
Sentinel EPE and EPS recyclers did not justify the "one-of-a-
kind" price tag that they carried.
Specifically, Grossman reported that there were several
machines on the market as early as 1981 that were functionally
equivalent to, and significantly less expensive than, both the
Sentinel EPE and EPS recyclers. These machines included: (1) The
Japan Repro recycler, available in 1981 for $53,000; (2) the
Buss-Condux Plastcompactor, available before 1981 for $75,000;
(3) the Foremost Machine Builders' "Densilator", available from
1978-1981 for $20,000; and (4) the Midland Ross Extruder,
available in 1980 and 1981 for $120,000. Grossman added that all
of these machines were "widely available".
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011