- 17 -
Supply. Based upon our review of State Supply's business, its
tax returns, and financial statements, we find that the above
amounts would have been sufficient to enable either Holliday or
Beaurline to compete against State Supply.
d. Potential Damage to the Buyer Posed by the Grantor's
Competition
Due to the nature of State Supply's business (buying
finished products from a small number of suppliers and reselling
them to an established group of 77 customers without adding
value), strong relationships with the four major suppliers and
the customers were crucial to the company's success. Holliday
and Beaurline had such relationships, and the buyers did not.
Von Allmen reasonably believed that Holliday and Beaurline could
have put State Supply into bankruptcy had they competed. We find
that both Holliday and Beaurline possessed the ability to take a
significant portion of State Supply's business.
e. Grantor's Contacts and Relationships with Customers,
Suppliers, and Other Business Contacts
It would be difficult to imagine grantors with stronger
contacts and relationships with suppliers and customers. Indeed,
respondent concedes that grantors had good rapport with the
suppliers and subdistributors.
f. Duration and Geographic Scope
Holliday's and Beaurline's covenant applied to competition
in the 11 States where State Supply conducted business for a
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