- 41 -
RRI, was responsible for placing many Sentinel EPS recyclers with
end-users and could not place his personal recyclers in the most
profitable locations. Thus, petitioner was unreasonable in his
estimate of the quantity of expanded polystyrene that his
recyclers could process.
Further, petitioner's assumption that he could profit
between 20 and 30 cents per pound was based on his anticipation
of rising oil prices and its effect on the price of plastic
resins. Aside from the highly speculative nature of this
assumption, respondent's expert, Grossman, testified that the
plastics industry is "remarkably independent" from the
petrochemical industry, and that a 300-percent rise in oil prices
would result in only a 30-40 percent price increase in plastic
products.
Petitioner failed to provide the Court with any details
regarding his projections, simply stating that he used the same
formula that he has always used in purchasing machinery. Thus,
it is not apparent whether petitioner's projections accounted for
expenses such as labor, transportation, and overhead.
Accordingly, we have insufficient information with respect to
petitioner's projections to conclude that they were reasonable.
Finally, several independent factors persuade us that
petitioner was not particularly concerned with earning a profit
from his recyclers. First, only 14 months after petitioner
purchased his Sentinel EPE recycler, he purchased two Sentinel
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011