- 23 -
did become somewhat involved with Elektra, he committed to
working for Elektra or the related partnerships only 10 hours per
calendar quarter. Also, the various partnerships, including
Cromwell, were obligated to pay significant additional fees under
separate contracts for Doscher's services at Burnt Hollow.
Further, as of 1979, all of Doscher's technology patents had been
assigned to Shell Oil Co. and thus would not have been available
to the partnerships. Doscher's services were not furnished under
the Elektra license. Finally, during this time period, the
services of a number of qualified thermal experts, including
Doscher, were generally available. Clearly, Cromwell's
exorbitant license fees are not justified merely because Doscher,
in 1981, became affiliated on a limited basis with the
partnerships.
(7) Petitioners' contention that during 1979 through 1982
fixed fees for licenses of technology were not unusual is not
supported by any credible evidence. Ham’s testimony is based
largely on irrelevant property transactions and drilling deals
and on incomplete information. The fluidized bed technology that
he discusses does not even constitute an oil recovery technology.
Ham refers to up-front fees charged by Carmel Energy Corp., but
he ignores the fact that those fees represented a component for
engineering services, not a license for technology. Ultimately,
Ham acknowledges that he was not aware of other transactions
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011