P.D.B. Sports, Ltd., Bowlen Sports, Inc., Tax Matters Partner - Page 39

                                       - 39 -                                         
               Our analysis of the four estimates19 shows them to be                  
          cursory and terse.  No explanation is provided for the estimate             
          listed for each player.  The four estimates contain huge                    
          differences and inconsistencies when comparing particular                   
          players.  For example, John Elway's contract is estimated as high           
          as $6,350,000 by the Chicago Bears and as low as $4 million by              
          the Cleveland Browns.  With respect to Steve Busick, the Chicago            
          Bears estimated $225,000 and the Houston Oilers $1,250,000.                 
          Conversely, the Chicago Bears estimated $100,000 for Britt                  
          Freeman and the Houston Oilers $10,000.  We cannot tell whether             
          these differences reflect the needs of those teams for a                    
          particular player's skills or result from some other                        
          consideration or factor.                                                    
               The accountant for the partnership, after considering the              
          estimates respondent relies on, reached a fair market value of              
          $36,121,385.  The value used by the partnership is within the               
          range of estimates of value by the four NFL teams.  We also note            
          that the $36 million figure is a conservative amount.  Under                
          these circumstances, respondent has not carried the burden of               
          showing that the fair market value of the player contracts was              
          more than the $36,121,385 used by the partnership or that the               
          correct fair market value is the $45,695,000 relied on by                   
          respondent to show that section 732(d) would not apply.                     

               19 A summary of the four estimates was received in evidence            
          and is attached to this opinion as the appendix.                            




Page:  Previous  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011